Structuralist thought influenced Foucault's early career. He developed an approach to intellectual history that he called the "archaeology of knowledge." This approach dismissed the importance of individual thinkers or motives, emphasizing instead the inescapable mind-sets that characterize different ages.

In his later career, during which he wrote The History of Sexuality, Foucault complemented this archaeological approach with a genealogical approach that he borrowed from Nietzsche. Nietzsche argues that the concepts we use are rarely fixed, but that they evolve to suit the changing needs of different ages. Nietzsche shows how our concepts of "good" and "evil" have ch

In questioning the repressive hypothesis, Foucault is not primarily interested in contradicting it, and he certainly does not want to deny the fact that, for instance, sex has been a taboo subject in Western culture. His interest is primarily the "discursive fact" of sexuality: he wants to know how and why sexuality is made an object of discussion. Ultimately, his interest is not in sexuality itself, but in our drive for a certain kind of knowledge, a certain perspective, and the kind of power we find in that knowledge.

Foucault uses the word "discourse" frequently, and has a very specific meaning in mind. When we talk about a "discussion," we are talking only about what has been said. When we talk about a "discourse," we are talking also about who has done the speaking, how they have done it, in what context, in reaction to what, and so on. The term "discourse" takes in the wider context in which words are uttered.

The repressive hypothesis gives a clear account of how sex has been regarded since the 18th century: it explains how discourse on sexuality has been controlled and confined, and how that has been in the interests of the bourgeoisie. Foucault, however, is not satisfied with this hypothesis, and this book stands as a compelling attack on it. However, his attack does not simply consist of saying the hypothesis is wrong and taking a contrary position. Rather, it consists of taking a step back, and seeing where this hypothesis comes from, and why.

The 20th century is no different, according to the repressive hypothesis. Freud may seem to have made open and frank discussions of sexuality possible, but this discourse is still confined to the academic and confessional realm of psychiatry. We cannot free ourselves from this repression simply by means of theory: we must learn to be more open about our sexuality, to talk about it, to enjoy it. Discourse on sexuality, seen as a revolt against a repressive system, becomes a matter of political liberation rather than intellectual analysis.

Foucault disagrees with the claim that sex has been repressed and silenced. He argues that Discourse about sex has only intensified and proliferated since the eighteenth century. Priests expected confessions to divulge the smallest temptation or desire, and sexual behavior became an important object of study for demographic and statistical analysis. With this intensification and proliferation of discourse, the emphasis moved from married couples to cases of sexual "perversion": child sexuality, homosexuality, etc. One's sexuality was also thought to explain a great deal about one's character.

Some topics in this essay:
Plot Overview, According Foucault, Victorians Victorians, Summary Foucault, , History Sexuality, Discourse Foucault, Sexuality Foucault, Commentary Foucault, repressive hypothesis, Nietzsche Nietzsche, discourse sexuality, history sexuality, rise bourgeoisie, power knowledge, control discourse, sexual repression, history sexuality foucault, married couples, sex object, calls repressive hypothesis, object knowledge, sex discourse sexuality, sex object knowledge, foucault language knowledge,