Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Foucaults power theory disciplinary power
Power in foucault
Foucaults power theory disciplinary power
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Foucaults power theory disciplinary power
The writings of Foucault, Bartky, Butler, and Bordo are significantly separate from each other in the issues that they grapple with within the body of their texts but their also overlap on major points, as is to be expected when many people write on the same subject. Each of these writers is concerned with different aspects of power and how that power is used and how it operates within our society. Most of these writers are feminist theorists and concerned with the ways that the female body is affected by power used against her while Foucault is less concerned with how power affects female bodies specifically but that can be seen as a result of his lack of connection to feminist thought. If Foucault mentions women and how they are affected …show more content…
More easily understood Foucault is presenting forth the idea of hegemony, or the thought that power structures exist because everyone buys into them. For example, women’s dress in business situations. For the most part, women are expected to dress in nigh uncomfortable clothes in the work place: skirts, heels, makeup (to a degree). Women accept this, men accept this, and everyone in society accepts this as a norm. Because it is seen as “normal” rather than something forced upon women by a group, other women will police their peers: sharp looks, snide comments, etc. This norm is policed by those who are trapped by it and they never think about why it is they are required to dress as they …show more content…
Bartky says that “femininity is artifice…a mode of enacting and reenacting…gender norms” (Bartky, 313) while Butler’s near famous statement concerns the idea that “gender is performative [and] it constitutes as an effect the very subject it appears to express” (Butler, 319). Going back to the example of women’s business formal, and even in some cases business casual, attire we can see both of these statements within the same issue. Women dress in these particular and uncomfortable ways because it is a social and gender norm for them to do so while it is also a costume that they are putting on in order to perform a certain role. Few women truly enjoy some of the material trappings forced upon us: heels are uncomfortable for long hours standing, most skirts offer low mobility, etc. Women are required to put on this costume though because they are required to perform to an adequate degree to the expectations around their gender, they must perform their gender for those around them in order to be considered effective at their
The author explains that men have the freedom to wear what they want without much meaning being read from their clothes, but for a woman every style has a meaning. In the article Deborah Tannen says “There is no woman's hair style that can be called standard, that says nothing about her” further supporting her point. The author uses the different clothing styles of three ladies in her conference meeting as examples when she tries to attribute them? to their respective personalities. However, she noticed that the men were all dressed alike because they had the freedom to. In my opinion, the author’s evaluation is restricted. Tannen did not consider the formal setting of her case study so to say.In such settings, men are often restricted to corporate outfits and a plain haircut just like the ones she observed in her male colleagues in the article (page #) . For instance, it is inappropriate for a man to go job hunting or for an interview in a pair of shorts and plain T shirt, but in a casual place like a bar he has more freedom in his choice of outfits. This example shows that men are only unmarked in certain situations and settings.
Foucault capitalizes that power and knowledge contribute to the discourse of sex; he discusses how people in power controlled this discourse to repress sex entirely. Foucault talks about the repressive hypothesis in his book. The repressive hypothesis states that whoever holds the power, also controls the discourse on sexuality. Specifically, those in power, according to the repressive hypothesis, exercise to repress the discussion of sex. In addition, Foucault comments that knowledge represents power. Whoever has the power can dictate the language of the population, thus this causes powerful people to also regulate the knowledge of the population. Although Foucault does not agree with every aspect that the repressive hypothesis exclaims, he agrees about the timing of when people started to repress sex. With rise of the bourgeoisie in the 17th century, a rise in tighter control about sex also took place. Foucault stated that the discourse of sex remained
Shearing and Stenning's analysis in "From Panopticon to Disneyland” demonstrates Foucault's ideas concerning the disciplinary society. Foucault defined a disciplinary society as “A society characterized by increasing surveillance wherein citizens learn to constantly monitor themselves because they are being monitored. A society in which control over people is pervasive”. Shearing and Stenning’s article does this by illustrating to us how Disney goes about its day to day operations. An example is when exiting the parking lot to get on the monorail to go to the park the people on the train tell all guests to stay with their family for safety. However, this is really done to accomplish two things, one maintain family unity, and two to keep children with their parents so that if a child misbehaves the parents can discipline them instead of the park. “Thus, for example, the batching that keeps families together provides for family unity while at the same time ensuring that parents will be able to control their children” (Shearing and Stenning pg. 298). Foucault’s definition also states that control over people is pervasive or spread throughout. Disney’s way of controlling people is also pervasive, because every garden and fountain are not
Foucault starts out the first chapter, The body of the condemned, by contrasting Damiens gruesome public torture with a detailed schedule of a prison that took place just eighty years later. Foucault is bringing the reader’s attention to the distinct change in punishment put in place in less than a century. It gets the reader to start thinking about the differences between how society used to punish people and the way that we do today. Foucault states that earlier in time the right to punish was directly connected to the authority of the King. Crimes committed during this time were not crimes against the public good, but a personal disrespect to the King himself. The public displays of torture and execution were public affirmations of the King’s authority to rule and to punish. It was after many years when the people subjected to torture suddenly became sympathized, especially if the punishment was too excessive for the crime committed.
Judith Butler’s concept of gender being performative focuses on how it creates a sequence of effect or impression. Human have a consistent way of talking about their gender as if it were something that is simply a fact. People go about their lives following patterns that are interconnected with their male or female appearance. They get very settled in the expected behaviors and common attributes of male or female, without recognizing that gender is a social construction. It is difficult to wrap your head around the idea that gender is always changing and being reproduced because it is conversation that often goes unnoticed. Butler realizes that it will be a struggle to get people to grasp the idea that nobody actually is their gender and that
(Flynn 1996, 28) One important aspect of his analysis that distinguishes him from the predecessors is about power. According to Foucault, power is not one-centered, and one-sided which refers to a top to bottom imposition caused by political hierarchy. On the contrary, power is diffusive, which is assumed to be operate in micro-physics, should not be taken as a pejorative sense; contrarily it is a positive one as ‘every exercise of power is accompanied by or gives rise to resistance opens a space for possibility and freedom in any content’. (Flynn 1996, 35) Moreover, Foucault does not describe the power relation as one between the oppressor or the oppressed, rather he says that these power relations are interchangeable in different discourses. These power relations are infinite; therefore we cannot claim that there is an absolute oppressor or an absolute oppressed in these power relations.
...easily controls and manipulates the way individuals behave. Although there are no true discourses about what is normal or abnormal to do in society, people understand and believe these discourses to be true or false, and that way they are manipulated by powers. This sexual science is a form of disciplinary control that imprisons and keeps society under surveillance. It makes people feel someone is looking at them and internally become subjective to the rules and power of society. This is really the problem of living in modern society. In conclusion, people live in a society, which has created fear on people of society, that makes people feel and be responsible for their acts. Discourses are really a form in which power is exercised to discipline societies. Foucault’s argument claims discourses are a form of subjection, but this occurs externally not internally.
Golder, B. 2009. Foucault, anti-humanism and human rights. Published online by the Hawke Research Institute, University of South Australia, Underdale, SA, 2009.
Bordo, S. 1993. "Feminism, Foucault, and the Politics of the Body." In C. Ramazanoglu, (Ed.): Up Against Foucault. Explorations of some Tensions between Foucault and Feminism. London and New York: Routledge.181 -202.
Problems with Foucault: Historical accuracy (empiricism vs. Structuralism)-- Thought and discourse as reality? Can we derive intentions from the consequences of behavior? Is a society without social control possible?
Theory: Michel Foucault argues a number of points in relation to power and offers definitions that are directly opposed to more traditional liberal and Marxist theories of power. Foucault believed that power is never in any one person's hands, it does not show itself in any obvious manner but rather as something that works its way into our imaginations and serves to constrain how we act.... ... middle of paper ... ... Giddons, A. (2007). The 'Standard' of the 'Standard'.
Sarah Snyder Professor Feola Gov’t 416: Critical Theory Assignment #2 On Foucault, “Truth and Juridical Forms” Michel Foucault may be regarded as the most influential twentieth-century philosopher on the history of systems of thought. His theories focus on the relationship between power and knowledge, and how such may be used as a form of social control through institutions in society. In “Truth and Juridical Forms,” Foucault addresses the development of the nineteenth-century penal regime, which completely transformed the operation of the traditional penal justice system.
Butler states that “gender...is an identity tenuously constituted in time--an identity instituted through a stylized repetition of acts,” and she makes specific reference to these
To begin this paper, I want to explain a little bit about Feminist Criticism. This category of criticism scrutinizes the means in which texts have been molded in accordance with matters of gender. It concentrates on social and financial disparities in a “male-controlled” culture that continues to impede women from grasping their true potentials. There are several perceptions and theories universally shared by feminist critics. One such belief is that our society is undeniably regulated by men. Another belief is that the concept of “gender” is mostly, if not wholly, a social standard that has curtailed from the never ending masculine biases that engulf our world. This male dominated philosophy is excessively abundant in most of the writings that are deemed exceptional literature. In addition, many feminist consider females, in literature, to be represented as destructive or docile objects, while most males are portrayed as being brave and resilient leaders.
When a person hears words like feminist or feminism, notions of what it means to be feminine, or consequently unfeminine, begin to dimly form in our mind’s eye. Although we cannot definitively answer the question of what is feminine, we are able to recognize it when we see it or its absence. This conception, however, is arbitrary at best. What is it about an evening gown that seems to define and dress the feminine aura while a woman spitting would be denounced as inherently unfeminine?