Embodying Japan: Cultures of Sport, Beauty, and Medicine 2017

Sexuality & The State

In order to properly conceptualize the intricate connection between sexuality and the state, it is critical to first situate the dynamic within Foucauldian notions of biopower and surveillance. The project of sexual usurpation is inextricably linked to the insidious manifestation of internalized power dynamics. As the state actively works to construct appropriate channels for sexual energy, individuals are pulled into compliance with sanctioned ways of being. In accordance with the concept of surveillance, deviation from normative sexual behavior results in social repercussions. Consequently, sexual identities are constructed around internalized notions of acceptable presentation. This peer-mandated punishment works as an attempt to draw individuals and their sexual identity under scrutiny so they internally decide to undergo correction and comply with performative constraints. As such, power operates as a creative force. Since people believe that they consciously choose to act in accordance with normative ideals, the performance of sexuality in accordance with dominant narratives appears to be an outlet through which to maximize autonomy. However, because sexual identity is constrained to socially acceptable performance, this system of power actually serves to further alienate individuals from their uninhibited desire. 

As this system of power relations works to constrain sexuality, the state reaps numerous benefits. In “Blood Talks,” anthropologist Jennifer Robertson explains, “Nation-states have always maintained a vested interest in the sexual and social reproduction of the population” (2002). The reproductive capacity of the populace is of primary interest to the state because the family-unit serves as an incubator of both physicality and ideology. Sanctioning appropriate sexual expression allows the state to control the means of biological and cultural reproduction. As people begin to enter into acceptable forms of sexual relationships, they reproduce the physical capacity of the nation, while their compliance deepens the legitimacy of state-sanctioned sexual practices. 

The prevalence of sexual monogamy provides a clear illustration of this phenomenon. The state itself actively makes its interest in sexual monogamy clear by offering married couples myriad economic benefits. Outside of modern relations, it is unlikely that monogamy would be such a pervasive sexual ideal. Even within present sociality, polyamory is increasingly common, while monogamous arrangements are marred by high failure rates. This points to monogamy’s culturally contingent nature, and suggests a deeper reason behind its present prevalence. On a physical level, monogamy advances state interests by reducing the risk of venereal disease. This is beneficial to the state because it enhances the vitality of national biopower. On an ideological level, sexual monogamy allows partners to work as a unit through which to reproduce socially sanctioned ways of being, both laterally and on their offspring. Additionally, it is thought that the practice of sexual monogamy might enhance social harmony. These factors, when taken together, point to the vested interest the state holds in constructing monogamy as a sexual ideal. Thus, by harnessing sexual desire, the state can latch onto a viscerally human emotion and channel this powerful force in ways that serve its own ideological ends.

Robertson, Jennifer. 2002. "Blood Talks: Eugenic Modernity and the Creation of New Japanese." History and Anthropology 13 (3)(September 24): 191-216.

This page has paths:

This page has tags: