Untitled

The Body in Medicine 31
the physical examination. The act of confession was reformulated as a
therapeutic exercise rather than penance, as was the case with the secular
confession; the truths of the confession were categorized as normal or
pathological. Sexuality was deemed to have an effect upon all aspects of
behaviour, to intrude into all spheres of life. Sex was deemed elusive,
needful of patient drawing out on the part of the doctor or therapist, the
truth of which was hidden from the confessor until skilful questioning
brought it to light; the expert became ‘the master of truth’ by deciphering
the meaning of the confession (Foucault, 1979: 65–7). Thus, the sexual
body became viewed as emblematic of the whole body, influencing all
aspects of people’s lives.
From the Foucauldian perspective, then, the obsession of researchers
working within science, medicine and the social sciences in documenting
the sexual body over the past century (for example, Krafft-Ebing, Freud,
Havelock Ellis, Kinsey, Masters and Johnson and the ‘AIDS industry’ of sex
research) serves to cast an ever-wider net of disciplinary control over citizens.
Sexology is viewed as an ideology, a combination of discourses legitimized
under the rubric of science which seek to control and confine certain
forms of sexual expression (Weeks, 1987; Seidman, 1991; Clark, 1993).
Another issue of scholarly interest in which debates concerning the
relative importance of biological destiny and enculturation have received
attention is that of the determination of sexual preference. While biologists
and psychologists have sought to locate the physiological basis for
sexual preference in the structures of the brain, the hormones or the
genetic code, arguing that homosexuality can be located as a ‘deviance’
from the norm, cultural theorists perceive heterosexuality and homosexuality
as socially constructed, and therefore arbitrary and contingent,
categories. They observe that homosexuality has been defined differently
over various historical and cultural contexts, noting that it was not until
the late nineteenth century that the category ‘homosexual identity’
emerged in western societies. Before that time, people may have engaged
in homosexual activities, but not viewed themselves as homosexual (see
Foucault, 1979; Plummer, 1981; Weeks, 1991, for expositions of this position).
The word ‘homosexuality’ itself was not invented until 1869, and
it was not until the 1880s or 1890s that the word was used in the English
language (Weeks, 1991: 16).
Over the past century and a half, the homosexual body has been subjected
to intense medical scrutiny. As part of the quest to categorize, label
and define human bodily functions and behaviours, medico-scientific discourses
have constructed ‘the homosexual’ as a distinct human type. The
homosexual body was subjected to documentation, via photography, as
scientists and sexologists sought to establish a ‘norm’ of sexuality by
categorizing physical types. Homosexuality was believed to be expressed
in individuals’ body shapes and facial features (Marshall, 1990). Psychology
researchers devoted themselves to explaining the cause of the homosexual
‘condition’ (Weeks, 1991: 17).