Concepts of Masculine and Feminine Sexuality

C at oncepts of Masculine and Feminine SexualityThe Issue of The Unspeakable In The Theoretical and Fictive old-hat of SexualityKhalil JethaThe odious in the theoretical and sham handstal representation of get offuality traditionally refers to the weakening of masculinity and the em antecedentment of feminine sexual practice. From a theoretical standpoint, the unspeakable is the bending of gender lines, the empowerment of women and the abatement of male dominance. The unspeakable in the fictive representation of sex is the destabilization of masculine sexuality and the introduction of cleaning womanhood in a male psyche. This includes literary methods such as the metaphorical connection of male psyches with the Oedipal Complex, homosexual inclinations and subservience to female characters. Books such as Michel Foucaults The History of Sexuality examine the theoretical representation of male and female heterosexualitys innate connection to homosexuality as the unspeakable. The fictive representation of sexuality demonstrates the unspeakable as the switching of traditional gender roles and the application of sexual foils to personalities as present in Nella Larsens Quicksand. Aspects of the unspeakable alike translate to racial representation as shown in Toni Morrisons The Bluest Eye in order to understand the difference in sexualitys representation in both theoretical and fictive media, one cannot dismiss tend as inherently connected to sexuality.Michel Foucault (1926-1984) widely criticized the traditional, Judeo-Christian perception of sexuality as outdated and inaccurate, widely neglecting several aspects of sexuality. The greatest unspeakable in European indian lodge was the notion that sexuality existed outside of a procreative dimension. As golf club evolved, Foucault argued, it was not the proletariat, lower class traditionally viewed as immoral that wrought the several facets of sexuality on the world. Rather, it was societys bourgeois or grim families who disc everywhereed the sexuality of children and adolescents was first problematized sic, and feminine sexuality medicalized sic (Foucault 1978, p. 120). The changing perception of sexuality in Europes upper echelons revealed an unspeakable aspect namely, that women and children exuded sexual identities independent of the accepted norm of domestication and procreation. The presence of sexuality in women and children lessened the degree of male dominance, hence the unspeakable attribute. The male fear of a loss of influence in society was most pronounced in the upper class, the primary reason high societys families were the first to be alerted to the potential pathology of sex, the urgent need to keep it under close watch and to devise a rational technology of correction it was this family that first became a locus for the psychiatrization sic of sex (Foucault 1978, p. 120). Patriarchal societys destabilization was the reason sexualitys existence in anyone than adu lt males was so widely reviled. The bourgeois considered sex to be frail, something that ought to be relegated within their society. The bourgeois fear of sexuality outside the male persona branched out, giving way to every unspeakable more than specifically, the unspeakable aspects of sexuality represented theoretically and fictively were based on any big(a) idea that would compromise tradition. In what appeared to be a struggle against sexuality, society evolved a strategy to take advantage of the sexualities of women, children, and men by gearing them toward the familial unit most accepted. Female sexuality, though disturbing the procreative process, was prone(p) a voice that aimed sexuality and desire for men to coincide with the nuclear family unit. Juvenile sexuality was exploited, encouraged to blossom because its final realization would be the familial, gray household unit (Foucault 1978, p. 105).In History of Sexuality, Foucault asserts that sexuality must not be thoug ht of as a kind of natural given which power tries to hold in check, or as an obscure domain which knowledge tries gradually to uncover (Foucault 1978, p. 105). Sexuality develops independent of society, and each individuals sexuality will evolve differently. Sexuality, Foucault argues, is the name that can be given to an historical construct not a furtive reality that is difficult to grasp, but a great surface ne dickensrk in which the stimulation of bodies, the intensification of pleasures, the incitement to discourse, the formation of special knowledge, the streng henceing of controls and resistances, are linked to one another, in accordance with a few major strategies of knowledge and power (Foucault 1978, p. 105-106). From a modern theoretical standpoint such as that of Foucault, sexuality is represented primarily as a revolutionary social entity. The traditions of a Judeo-Christian ethic system would view sexuality as a divisive manifestation, an animal instinct that should be controlled in men and eliminated from women and children. The unspeakable, from a theoretical standpoint, was its mere existence in women and children any deviance from accepted models resulted in a compromise of male superiority. There were two primary threats one was the existence of sexuality that deviated from traditional male sexuality, and the second was the existence of empowering sexuality outside of the male contingent of society. Precedence was al shipway given to procreation sex was meant only to create life, not to be used for pleasure. The threats to male dominance were clear, even in the queering of sexuality. Change is the most prevalent in the realm of the unspeakable, represented in theoretical sexuality as anything deviant from tradition.Despite the spectre caused by multiple future changes to society, Foucault noted that it was worth recollect that the first figure to be invested by the deployment of sexuality, one of the first to be sexualized was the idle woma n (Foucault 1978, p. 121). The idle woman was one given precedence and save over her counterparts. She retained the domestic role of her predecessors, and was the accepted female figure within society. In her foil emerged the nervous woman, the woman afflicted with vapours in this figure, the hysterization of woman found its anchorage point (Foucault 1978, p. 121). Theoretically, the unspeakable in female sexuality was that which strayed from the accepted patriarchal model. The nervous woman was actually the sexually authorise phenomenon of the alpha female. The problem with a sexually empowered female was the psychological impotence of a man who would fall under her influence. This psychological rendering is or so equivalent to the metaphoric neutering of man and society.Contrary to the traditional view previously stated, Foucault agrees that the neutering of the genders is potentially dangerous. However, Foucault recognizes the presence of sex in both genders, and too does not hesitate to divide the two into a gender-based dichotomy. He claims that if society failed to recognize the difference in gendered sexualities, it would create sexuality without sex, which effectively amounted to castration once again (Foucault 1978, p. 151). He aims to show how deployments of power are directly connected to the bodyto bodies, functions, physiological processes, sensations, and pleasures (Foucault 1978, p.152). The representation of the unspeakable here is countered by Foucaults argument that the unspeakable is a necessary part of society. In response to the historical construct of sexuality detailing the hysterization sic of women, Foucault defines the unspeakable of sexuality in three waysas that which belongs, par excellence, to men, and hence is lacking in womenbut at the same time, as that which by itself constitutes a womans body, orderingit entirely in terms of the functions of reproduction and keeping it in constantagitation through the effects of that ve ry function (Foucault 1978, p. 153).Representations of the unspeakable in fictive sexuality can likewise be attributed to race and gender, as evidenced by Toni Morrisons The Bluest Eye as well as Nella Larsens Quicksand. The Bluest Eyes protagonists encounter with Maureen Peal, a let down-skinned disgraceful girl whose birth defects were ignored in favour of her fair complexion, demonstrates the phenomena of social racial aesthetics (Morrison 63). Most unpatterned is Maureens denigration of the girls Claudia, Frieda and Pecola Maureen subconsciously defends her birth defects as beauty because she is cute and they are black and ugly (Morrison 73). The unspeakable component here is the empowerment of white over black, but upon closer inspection it becomes the sexually empowered girl versus the sexually unwanted others. Maureens birth defects would erstwhile render her unwanted by men and therefore a member of the weaker contingent of society. However, the social standard merits fa ir complexion over dark, empowering Maureen over Claudia, Frieda, and Pecola. Despite the fact that Maureen is technically a black girl, her proximity to the white race earns her the contempt of girls whose deep desires to be wanted by society represent the unspeakable. Maureen, though vilified in The Bluest Eye, is the least sexually threatening and exudes the least unspeakable characteristics. It is Claudia, Frieda, and Pecola, who in their desire to be pale and possess the bluest eye aspire to have the power that Maureen flouts in front of them. The white race equates with power and masculinity, while the black race is the powerless neuter in the world Toni Morrison portrays. Similarly, Nella Larsens Quicksand presents the unspeakable in sexuality with the racial and sexual predicament of Helga Crane. A despised mulatto reviled because she could not be confined to a comfortable social norm, Helga embodies the unspeakable ambiguity traditional society feared (Larsen 1994, p. 5). Helga represents the same power standard as the white and black races portrayed by Morrison. If power can be ascribed to sexuality and the standard of male strength over female weakness, then Helga therefore presents to society not just a mulatto, but also a woman on the verge of becoming powerful. Larsen establishes this standard, describing such instances as awful Helga. Helga, for example, shudders a little as she recalled some of the statements made by that holy white man of God to the black folk sitting respectfully before him (Larsen 1994, p. 2).Helgas description in Quicksand is sexually favourable, suggesting the duality of a black woman becoming sexually desirable, crossing the borders established by society. Helgas attractiveness is describe in several colour references, the first description made by the narrator evoking the sentiment that an observer would have thought her well fitted to that framing of light and shade (Larsen 1994, p. 2). Helga is a manifestation of the disconcertment of a woman in a patriarchal society, as she could neither conform, nor be happy in her unconformity (Larsen 1994, p. 7). non only is Helga unable to accept any stance on her race, she is also hard pressed to find acceptance for her sexual power. The same parts of her that she couldnt be proud of ironically visualized the discomfort of James Vayle in her maladjustment she had a faint notion that it was behind his ready assent to her suggestion anent a longer engagement than, originally, they had planned (Larsen 1994, p. 7). Despite Vayles family and their intolerance of Helgas familial and racial ambiguity, Helgas fianc represents Helgas exertion of power over a man. With such odds mounted against his union to Helga, the logical assumption would be his abandonment of a relationship. However, Helgas identity as a black woman with white features empowers her to be desired by him James cannot let go as he is dominated and has little choice in the matter. Larsen shows Ja mes powerlessness, describing him as liked and approved of in the town of Naxos, but loathing the idea that the girl he was to marry couldnt manage to win liking and approval also (Larsen 1994, p. 7). Even Helga is cognizant of James helplessness, as she knew that a something held James, a something against which he was powerless (Larsen 1994, pp. 7-8).The unspeakable factor in sexuality is multi-faceted. While all types of sexuality are different, they are all unspeakable in their common root as threats to heterosexual, male dominance. Theoretical presentation of the unspeakable is largely based on the existence of non-conventional sexualities, while fictive presentations manifest themselves in different media as shown in Morrison and Larsens works. Though the scope of so-called sexual deviance is large, the oecumenic premise remains the same.BIBLIOGRAPHYFoucault, Michel. (1978) The History of Sexuality An Introduction. New York RandomHouse Books.Larsen, Nella and Deborah E. McDow ell (ed). (1994) Quicksand and Passing. NewBrunswick Rutgers U P.Morrison, Toni. The Bluest Eye. New York Alfred A. Knopf, 2000.