The History of Sexuality is a four-volume work by French historian and philosopher Michel Foucault that explores the concept of sexuality in Western society. In this study, Foucault investigates how “sexuality” emerged as a distinct discursive object and became a separate sphere of human life.
Foucault challenged the idea that sexuality was repressed during the Victorian era and that liberation was necessary. This belief, known as the Repressive Hypothesis, suggests that while sex was openly discussed during the Renaissance, the Victorian era confined and controlled sexuality to the private sphere of the home. Society imposed strict rules about when, where, and how sex could be discussed, leading to the rise of censorship around sexuality.
Foucault argued that this shift was driven by the rise of capitalism, which prioritized productivity. Under capitalism, every activity had to contribute to economic growth. Unproductive acts, like sexual expression that did not result in reproduction, were seen as wasteful and needed to be controlled. Science also gained influence during this time, further reinforcing the need for productivity. For instance, madness, once integrated into society, was increasingly treated as a problem that harmed economic efficiency, leading to the institutionalization of many individuals in asylums.
Similarly, sexualities that did not contribute to reproduction, such as adultery or homosexuality, were labeled as “useless” or problematic. Homosexuality, in particular, was categorized as an issue because it did not support the goal of population growth. These controls were enforced in institutions like prisons, hospitals, and schools, turning sexuality into a regulated domain aligned with the demands of society.
Foucault argued that the repression of sexuality began even before the rise of capitalism, with the Church playing a central role. Christianity established strict rules about sexual behavior, allowing only heterosexual relations within marriage and labeling all other forms of sexuality as sinful or criminal. Foucault was particularly interested in understanding how and why society created such rules about sex, noting that these regulations reflected the needs and values of the time.
For example, in the 17th century, the Church required individuals to confess their sins regularly, including their thoughts and fantasies. This practice turned sexuality into a subject of discussion and control, as people were forced to examine and disclose their desires.
In modern times, repression persists but has expanded beyond the Church. Discourses about sexuality now occur in fields like psychoanalysis, where patients discuss their desires in therapy. Foucault argued that this transformation no longer centers on religious authority but has become ingrained in various aspects of society.
The Repressive Hypothesis supports Foucault’s claim that sexuality is shaped by societal structures, contrasting with Freud’s focus on biological drives. From the 17th century onward, society began to study human sexuality in a systematic way, labeling behaviors that were previously unproblematic as abnormal or deviant. Foucault uses the Repressive Hypothesis to demonstrate how societal perceptions of sex have evolved over time.
During the Victorian era, attitudes toward sex shifted significantly, as sexuality became a private and repressed matter, hidden from public view. This was a stark contrast to earlier periods when attitudes toward sex and nudity were more open and accepting. For instance, a naked body in the past might simply have been regarded as flesh, but from the Victorian era onward, nudity began to evoke feelings of shame and discomfort. Foucault critiques this shift, questioning why societies that claim to be rational and free often impose restrictive and hypocritical norms. Western societies, for example, frequently discuss sexual liberation yet continue to enforce laws and norms that regulate sexuality. Foucault argues that authority figures—whether political, religious, or social—decide what is considered acceptable or unacceptable in matters of sexuality. These decisions, often rooted in power structures, frequently contradict human nature and the diverse expressions of sexuality.
