Response 11: "Scientia Sexualis"

While I do agree that some Eastern countries approach sexuality as an ars erotica/erotic art, that “foregrounds pleasure and its performances”, and that in these countries, sexuality isn’t discussed more out of reverence than in an attempt to avoid discussing such matters, it is also true that in a lot of these societies there are also certain taboos against exploring sexuality, for example outside of marriage or with another person of the same gender (592).

I also do agree with the argument he makes throughout the reading that to confess to a higher power that then judges you and decides to forgive or punish you “one confesses to the person or authority who will be judging one’s actions in return” (594). He goes on to mention that confession has been a method to extract truth, in “justice, medicine, education, family relationships, and love relations, in the most ordinary affairs of everyday life, and in the most solemn rites” (595). Foucault also mentions that confession was used to extract truth and that sometimes “truth” was obtained through a confession under torture.  While one is confessing, and confessing is liberating, they are also giving up their power and letting someone else decide the consequences they themselves will have to face.

 It got me questioning the possibility of a role reversal. What about the possibility of a false confession in an attempt to gain power, and perhaps that this kind of power/advantage is even better because the authority figure they are “confessing” to is not aware that it is a false confession. This reversal of positions would have huge implications in justice, personal relationships etcetera.