01.12.2012 Views

Untitled

Untitled

Untitled

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

Cosmopolitan, which places an emphasis on ‘finding yourself through sex’,<br />

achieving satisfaction through communication by telling your partner what<br />

you want (Winship, 1987; McMahon, 1990). Steamy casual sexual encounters<br />

continue to provide titillation on prime-time television or in the cinema:<br />

for example, Madonna’s book of soft-porn photographs featuring her own<br />

body was a best-seller in 1992. Yet the same popular media routinely report<br />

on the dangers of sexuality, providing the latest statistics on HIV/AIDS,<br />

publish features on the ‘new’ joys of monogamous marriage and techniques<br />

on making love with the same person for the rest of one’s life, or<br />

depict people who engage in casual sex as being punished by unhappiness<br />

or even death for their actions (for example, the high-grossing films Basic<br />

Instinct and Indecent Proposal). Thus, at the beginning of the twenty-first century,<br />

the sexual body must struggle with a tension between the discourses<br />

privileging self-expression and satisfaction through sexual encounters and<br />

those emphasizing the fearful and potentially fatal consequences of the<br />

mingling of body fluids during sexual abandonment.<br />

Public health and the disciplined body<br />

The Body in Medicine 33<br />

In public health discourse the body is regarded as dangerous, problematic,<br />

ever threatening to run out of control, to attract disease, to pose<br />

imminent danger to the rest of society (Lupton, 1995; Petersen and<br />

Lupton, 1997). For centuries and up to the present day, concerns about the<br />

spread of infectious diseases such as cholera, smallpox, yellow fever and<br />

the plague have resulted in measures being taken by the state to confine<br />

bodies and control their movements. This control over bodies in the name<br />

of public health has often been coercive and discriminatory. For example,<br />

from the sixteenth to the early twentieth centuries, whole households of<br />

people were confined to their houses if public health officials designated<br />

one member as infectious, or people were removed to quarantine stations<br />

or lazarettos, sometimes by the police (Tesh, 1988: 12).<br />

Those of foreign nationality, the poor and the working class have<br />

historically been singled out for attention by public health authorities as<br />

agents of disease, requiring forcible ‘hygiene’ programmes sometimes<br />

involving the destruction of their homes and isolation from the rest of<br />

society (Lupton, 1995). In the early twentieth century, for example, immigrants<br />

to Canada were especially targeted by quarantine regulations and<br />

subjected to medical examinations upon arrival, thus marking them as the<br />

dangerous, potentially contaminating Other (Sears, 1992: 70). Even in contemporary<br />

western societies, public health acts devised decades ago are<br />

used to constrain the movement of bodies in the name of health. One<br />

instance of this occurred in 1989 in Australia, when a section of the New<br />

South Wales Public Health Act of 1902 was instituted to detain for a time<br />

a sex worker who had publicly admitted to being HIV positive but not<br />

willing to enforce condom use among her clients.

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!