Foucault, Sexuality and Reddit

(1)

Foucault, Sexuality and Reddit

By Anna Strelkova

Supervisor: Dhr.Dr. M.D. Marc Tuters

(2)

Abstract

This study explores the idea of digital phenomena having precedents in humanity’s history before the conception of the first computer. Attention is given to discourses about sexuality on the social media platform Reddit, examining their relation to Michel Foucault’s concepts from his work The

History of Sexuality: The Will to Knowledge. Such relation would show the connection between

contemporary online discussion and concepts proposed in the 1980s. Ars erotica and scientia sexualis — two formulas of the proliferation of sexual knowledge — are the two specific concepts that this paper is focused on. This paper also attends to the critique of certain arguments and ideas within the book. This study introduces a new notion of the combination of the two formulas, addressing the criticisms of previous scholars. All three systems of production of sexual truth are used to analyse discourses in subreddit r/sex to illustrate to what extent could the subreddit r/sex be regarded as ars erotica, scientia sexualis or both. The social media platform Reddit was chosen due to its particular affordances like pseudonymity and participatory culture that hosts and nourishes communities like r/sex that could be regarded as support groups about sexual questions and concerns.

Grounding the methodology in the deductive method of close reading, this study looks at posts from the subreddit r/sex through the lens of Foucault’s formulas of the proliferation of sexual knowledge. Using digital method tool 4CAT, mentions of ‘PSA’ or public service announcement were extracted from the discourse on the subreddit. This neologism was chosen for this study because of its

succinct nature and the main purpose of transmitting a valuable piece of information to the whole community. A classification scheme was devised based on the definitions from The History of

Sexuality: The Will to Knowledge to categorise each post found into three categories: ars erotica,

scientia sexualis and the symbiotic category which is the combination of both formulas. The results showed that all three formulas occur throughout the query, thus, dismantling Foucault’s argument on the eclipse of ars erotica by scientia sexualis in Western societies. They also illustrate the fact that many phenomena online could have precedents in human history with the only exception being their scale.

(4)

Introduction

Internet and social media today are considered to have made an unprecedented revolution in human communication. At least, that is how it is often portrayed in media, which is also online. New media are considered to be the future that is already here. But is it truly new?

Another aspect of our daily lives that is considered to have received a boost from the proliferation of the web and social media is sexuality (Paasonen, 3-15; Mondin, 283). With the easy and seamless access to anything and everything from your phone, sexuality is said to be changed and transformed by sheer ability to acquire information about it online (Paasonen, 3). But did our way of relating to sexuality change with these new media?

These questions are what prompted my curiosity. Moreover, from the elective Sexuality and Media, the work of the French philosopher Michel Foucault The History of Sexuality: The Will to

Knowledge came into my view. It centres around painting a historiographical overview on the

sexuality and how societies discussed, educated and utilised it in power structures. Two concepts from this book on the proliferation of sexual knowledge captured my attention — ars erotica and scientia sexualis. They are painted as opposites of each other, but from my own experience online with the topic of sexuality, it seemed to be a rather generalising statement.

Sexuality could not be discussed explicitly within every social media platform nowadays. The internet itself could be said to have considerably contributed to the development and expansion of knowledge on sexuality, be it blogging on Tumblr or the rise of pornographic video streaming websites. However, the discourse and discussions on sexuality could not fully participate in the ascent of Web 2.0. Such restrictions on adult content could mirror our offline world — one could argue the aspect of ‘new’ in media already.

Big social media conglomerates such as Facebook and Google could be rather strict, proper and formal in their terms of use when it comes to the subject of sexuality. However, it is not the case for the platform chosen for this study — Reddit — «the front page of the internet» («reddit», Google search). It permits its users to «share original or reposted content from around the web» (Massanari, 2). It is also described as discussion website, or a forum (Widman, «What is Reddit?»). It was chosen not only as a known platform for discourses on marginalised subjects, but also one that had been around approximately the same amount of time as traditional social media like Facebook. It was founded in 2005 and Facebook in 2004. Reddit’s relatively lenient rules towards adult content since its creation and its participatory culture contributed to the formation of rather fertile ground for discourses on sexuality. It is also unique because Reddit is not solely centred on sexuality: its communities or subreddits cover topics from current popular memetic expressions online to

examples of good advertisement and more («r/memes»; «r/adporn»). Reddit’s affordances make it a pertinent and remarkable platform, and would be discussed in detail in later chapters of this study.

(5)

Reddit contains a myriad of subreddits (communities or groups on Reddit) about sex and sexuality, catering to different tastes and subjects of interest. This study is particularly interested in the discussion aspect to the platform, one that could be creating and sharing knowledge on sexual practices. The subreddit r/sex would fit this criterion. Its main purpose is to be informative and educational about sexuality and sexual relationships, thus, fitting perfectly for this study. Discourses on r/sex were taken to be analysed through the prism of two formulas of production of sexual knowledge proposed by Foucault to underline: how does sexual community online relate to

Foucault’s The History of Sexuality: The Will to Knowledge? In particular focusing on the question as to what extent could r/sex be regarded as ars erotica, scientia sexualis or a combination of both?

In order to answer research questions above, concepts from Foucault’s work such as confession, ars erotica and scientia sexualis would need to be clarified, as well as situated within the study of the digital culture. Social media and Reddit in particular would be, in turn, historically situated as part of overall human communication, highlighting certain aspects, features and online occurrences. Through their examples, the paper aims to demystify the digital phenomenon as brand new in human history.

The first chapter delves into the subject of confession as a form of communication that has transcended into the online sphere. In order to portray this point, the first subsection introduces a short historical overview on several other significant online phenomena. It explores the idea that many seemingly native digital occurrences had precedents in human history before the rise of the Internet. It includes the memetic expression, the comment section and the social media as an occurrence itself, with arguments based on the works of Whitney Philips and Ryan M. Milner, Joseph M. Reagle Jr. and Tom Standage.

The second subsection underlines the biological origin of human needs that social media like Reddit and sharing information online would seem to satisfy. Both Reagle and Standage’s works refer to these needs, like our urge to talk about the self and to share and consume the information about others. We as social animals developed extensive modes of communication to survive, and one of which is ‘gossiping’, or the sharing and consuming information about others. It helped humanity to survive and thrive. Another important neurological aspect that drives human interaction is the fact that our brain could be considered to be hardwired to talk about the self. It was found to be

pleasurable and rewarding on a neurological level. These two aspects could be deemed to be at the origin of the practice of confessing itself, as well as provide one possible explanation for our quick adoption of social media as a means of communication.

(6)

Foucault’s definition of the confessional practice, as well as some aspects of the latter’s adoption into the online realm, is discussed in the third and the fourth subsections of the Confession as

Communication chapter. It describes what confession meant for Foucault, as well as setting the

stage for the following explanation of two main procedures of production of the truth of sex, where it plays a significant role. It also explores how biological urges from the previous section could be seen throughout the confession and how the confessional form of those needs found its place online. The subsection on Confessions Online brings together the definition given by Foucault and the effect social media had on the practice: how did the power dynamic in the confession change online, as well as how certain affordances of social media would promulgate confessional practices by facilitating them and creating a ‘safe space’?

As much as social media would create a welcoming space for everyone, it is not a universally accepting and encouraging place everywhere online. Some affordances such as anonymity and pseudonymity could be said to create uncertainty in the identity of the user, as a side effect of the protection of a person’s identity. Thus, it is the choice of the platform whether to offer its users such a feature in the first place. The next and the final subsection in the first chapter discusses social media platforms as deliberate creations of a person or a group of people. Zadie Smith, an American novelist, writes that a creation would contain, represent and convey philosophies and/or beliefs of its creator. In this way, social media are shaping the way humans communicate (Smith, 9). Whereas our biological impulses mentioned above could be creating the need to communicate, social media platforms as a medium could be responsible for the ‘how’ we communicate. It also poses the fact that social media like Facebook could be said to have chosen not to endorse discussions on particular topics that the philosophy of the creator could have deemed ‘inappropriate’ for the

platform, discouraging users’ behaviours through affordances. Furthermore, due to the scale and the undeniable importance of social media in the daily lives of millions of people, such choices would take on a significance that may pose problems, since they are taken by powerful people or groups for other users of the platform that were not given ‘a choice’ in the matter.

The second chapter introduces and examines the social media platform chosen for the exploration of contemporary online discourse on sexuality — Reddit — and how choices made by this platform and its creator affected the participatory culture it fostered, building on the last section of the first chapter. This chapter delves into what particular affordances make Reddit a fertile and welcoming space for the discussion on a topic that would not necessarily be welcomed in other social media platforms. One of those affordances is pseudonymity, for example. The chapter also discusses the participatory culture of Reddit and how it might aid the promulgation of a human’s initial biological urge to talk about the self and to gossip.

(7)

Foucault and his concepts of the promulgation of sexual knowledge are delved into in the third chapter in this study. It situates his work The History of Sexuality: The Will to Knowledge in

different fields and as a body of prominent academic work. Confession and its role in the creation of knowledge on sexuality is also reiterated in this chapter, and placed within the context of its role in the scientific formula of Western societies’ promulgation of sexual truth. Two formulas of

production of the truth of sex— ars erotica and scientia sexualis — could be said to represent different techniques and practices of sexual education, as well as according to Foucault, being geographically situated in two different cultures — Eastern and Western. However, such dichotomy in the formulas and the geographical separatism are critiqued by scholars of different fields. The critique is also represented within this chapter.

In order to highlight how these concepts from Foucault could be found within the contemporary online discourses on sexuality, empirical research was conducted querying the subreddit r/sex. This subreddit was chosen for its overall popularity, general appeal to the public and its long history (created in 2008). It was analysed by a particular query /PSA/ (public service announcement) within the body and subject of posts. This particular neologism was chosen due to its intended meaning of merit for the whole community, as well as succinct nature in the transmission of sexual knowledge. The data yielded a large volume of the commentary containing the expression /PSA/ within them. The original posts or the posts that are a starting point of a thread were accounted for 154 out of over a thousand mentions. The sample data of solely over a thousand entries were chosen due to the time limitations on this paper and the fact that classification is done manually. A classification scheme was also described within this fourth chapter to portray how does r/sex as a sexual community relate to Foucault’s The History of Sexuality: The Will to Knowledge? In particular, it had attempted to answer the question to what extent could r/sex be regarded as ars erotica, scientia sexualis or the combination of both these formulas? The scheme is based upon the definition of the two formulas of the proliferation of sexual knowledge, as well as featuring a symbiotic category of both formulas devised within this paper on the basis of Foucault’s definitions. The classification also contained a category that included entries that could not be part of the discussion about sexuality or did not include enough information to be able to determine their position. Upon the start, this classification was further expanded to include the category that catered to the meaning of PSA as an abbreviation for the name of an enzyme (prostate-specific antigen).

The fifth chapter examines the results produced by the queries mentioned above. It illustrates several overarching themes found within the them like the question of safety. This chapter also explains some particularities that could be found in the data, as well as analysing the categorisation of results. Classification of PSA posts on r/sex could be considered to have yielded complementary results. Original posts show prevalence towards entries of the ars erotica category, it prevails over

(8)

the others by a considerable margin. Whereas, the extended classification of PSA in the body of posts shows that the most prevailed category is ‘Other’ since it includes a large volume of entries that could not be placed within other categories due to their unclear nature. However, classification of remaining posts show that two formulas — ars erotica and scientia sexualis — are almost equally represented within the data set, with scientia sexualis prevailing over ars erotica by a small margin. The symbiotic category proposed by this paper also yields significant results in the overall

classification, coming very close to the other two categories. In the categorisation of original posts, it even prevailed over scientia sexualis. All in all, this chapter empirically explores to what extent could r/sex be regarded as a reiteration of formulas of proliferation of sexual knowledge from Foucault, thus, providing an example of how sexual communities online relate to The History of

Sexuality: The Will to Knowledge.

I conclude by connecting findings described above and what they mean for the studies of digital cultures and of sexuality. The conclusion also reiterates how discourses online follow formulas that existed significantly before the invention of the digital sphere, thus dismantling the preconception of ‘new media’ as novel and never-seen-before phenomena.

(9)

I. Confession as Communication

The social media platform Reddit, in particular on the subreddit r/sex — arguably the biggest subreddit (with over a million members) on sex and sexuality discourse online — would be looked at through the work of Michel Foucault The History of Sexuality: The Will to Knowledge in order to highlight how concepts proposed before the age of the web relate to the contemporary discourses online.

In order to asses the concept from Foucault pertaining to promulgation of sexual knowledge, an important practice of confession would need to be further examined in order to situate it within the contemporary online communities.

Roots of the Digital

Confession as a practice existed long before the contemporary digital and digitised world, and it is chiefly associated with religious penance or the legal system. So, how can one talk of confessional practices on social media platforms, that have seemingly nothing in common with religious and legal institutions?

As previous work on vernacular creativity — «everyday creative expressions of everyday cultural participants» (20) — by Philips and Milner positioned memes as a continuation of previous folkloric expressions, this study highlights how concepts from pre-Internet found their place in discourses online (Philips and Milner, 44). Internet memes could be defined as «evolving tapestries of self-referential texts collectively created, circulated, and transformed by participants

online» (30). They often also take multimodal forms (mixing text, audio, video and image),

recombining previous cultural material and playfully resonating with the current collective zeitgeist. Due to this nature, memes are regarded as a folkloric expression, or as a digital scholar, Limor Shifman described them a «(post)modern folklore» (Shifman, 15; Philips and Milner, 31). Philips and Milner also highlighted how memetic expressions existed before the proliferation of social media through the example of Xeroxlore (Philips and Milner, 31-32). Where images and texts of satirical and farcical nature circulated offices through photocopiers (with Xerox being a popular brand of photocopiers). They note how these memetic expressions are reflective of their time, since they capture the zeitgeist, resonating with the public. The scholars also underline many structural, contextual and linguistic techniques and logistics behind the creation and proliferation of Xeroxlore memetic expressions that could still be true for online memes (34-37). The resonating and reflective nature with precedents before the social media highlighted the fact that such seemingly digitally native occurrence as memes, as it happens, had previous iterations and forms prior to their online proliferation. This study would focus also on seemingly originally digital occurrence as discourses online, in particular on Reddit and focusing on sexuality, highlighting how discussions in sexual

(10)

communities relate to the work of Michel Foucault The History of Sexuality: The Will to Knowledge that was published before the proliferation of online forum culture.

As Philips and Milner’s work on memetic expressions above, discourses online is also not the novel phenomenon we tend to associate it with. Reagle, an American academic and author focusing on technology, particularly Wikipedia, mentioned this «myopic tendency» (55) in his book Reading the

Comments: Likers, Haters and Manipulators at the Bottom of the Web. In this work, he is

particularly focused on the concept of the comment as a phenomenon online, in particular highlighting the fact that comment’s proliferation across social media originates in the human psyche (Reagle, 17-38). Reagle also considered ‘a comment’ to include a non-textual interaction online, such as ‘like button’. While a majority of his work is centred on the comments section, the insights on the human behaviour in creation of textual content are a pertinent viewpoint into why would people be so invested and interested in writing and responding online, be it in a blog or a Reddit thread. He positions the comment as short, reactive and asynchronous that is there to inform (Reagle, 54). Such definition could be rendered partially true also in regards to the discourses online since they could also be considered to be reactive to experience and informing others about it for preventive or advisory purposes. Whether they are short or asynchronous, it could remain to be on a case per case basis. He also posed when one platform gains popularity and their user count

augments significantly, the comment section would be overwhelmed and descend into incoherent chaos, or as Reagle puts it: «Many social platforms move from intimate serendipity towards filtered sludge» (39). Filtered sludge in the case would be referring to moderation and filtering content on the platform as it expands.

Reagle cites another work written by Tom Standage Writing on the Wall: Social Media - the First

Two Thousand Years, where he argues that the rising of discourses in the form that they take online

could be traced back in a particular form to Ancient Rome and even before (Reagle, 55-56). He also mentions the «behavioural and historical roots» (19) to the popularity of compelling and enjoyable social media environments. Standage highlights how social media as a concept and a practice existed significantly prior to the social media we know today. He gives an example of the Roman Empire whose political system relied heavily on personal and social ties of the elite. To be informed of the latest news, alliances and developments could constitute a matter of life or death (Standage, 52). Furthermore, the empire spread across the whole Mediterranean and the vast social network was mostly concentrated in the exchanges of written personal messages, official documents and administrative notes. It could be even considered to be the first instance when written

correspondence gained such prevalence and power, as well as being circulated across such vast territory relatively fast, by ancient world’s standards (Standage, 53-58). Thus, the phenomenon of social media could be seen as a part of human life back in Ancient Rome, at least for the ruling class

(11)

at the time. Both scholars, Reagle and Standage, write about the psychological, behavioural

reasonings behind the recent promulgation and popularisation of social media, showing how digital phenomena have precedents in the human offline history.

With an enormous amount of data and information at our fingertips, we tend to think that phenomena online are brand new in every aspect. However, as Philips and Milner showed with memes, Reagle with the comment section and Standage with the phenomenon of social media itself, some online occurrences and practices predate the digital by conceivably a millennium. This study aims to highlight a similar aspect in an online discussion on sexuality relating it to concepts proposed by Foucault in The History of Sexuality: The Will to Knowledge.

Gossiping and Talking about Ourselves

In order to focus on Reddit’s discourses, it should be established as to why discourses online gained prevalence and stay relevant in the age of constant change, as well as how the practice of sharing information online could have its potential roots in Sundays’ masses.

This first section would present argumentation from works of Reagle and Standage mentioned above, as well as several others, that highlight and explain human behaviour online, in particular the sharing of personal information and consumption of information about others. It would attempt to answer the question: why would users generate personal information online and be interested in the same type of content generated by others, even in such an intimate social issue as sexuality.

The question as to why people like — for the lack of a better word — sharing experiences and opinions online plagued new media researchers, one could argue, since the creation of the web. Sharing information about ourselves online, as well as consuming the content shared by others could be humanity’s favourite pastime nowadays. However, contemporary prevalence and

borderline addiction to social media could not be considered as an entirely new phenomenon. Being interested in thy neighbour and ‘long monologues’ could not be regarded to be intrinsically digital creation, they existed long before the world wide web that interconnected us. One needs to look no further than the popularity of tabloid magazines and an extensive bibliography of autobiographies. Even the creator of Facebook in his New Yorker profile said: «It is like hardwired into us in a deeper way: you really want to know what is going on with the people around you» (Vargas). The internet often is compared to a mirror of our lives and, since sharing and consuming information about others and the self could be intrinsic to human interactions and communication, it would be true to these same interactions online, the only difference with the ‘offline’ being that all those

(12)

human interactions could be also used as an exploration ground that highlights sociopolitical issues, societal preconceptions and contemporary concerns (Creece, «The Internet as a Mirror»).

To examine the social aspect of social media or the consumption of information about others, the question of why would someone even share information in the first place should be discussed. Why would we even divulge knowledge of often personal nature online and free of charge? «People like talking about themselves» (37) — Reagle puts it as simply as that. In his book, he further cites a Harvard University study by neuroscientists that revealed that on a biological or neurological level «disclosing information about the self is intrinsically rewarding» (Tamir & Mitchell; Reagle, 37). Even when such endeavour was taxed, participants were still willing to pay the price and talk about themselves. Sharing extensive information about the self, online or otherwise, could be

scientifically explained on a neurological level, since, according to this study, it affects regions of the brain that are associated with the «mesolimbic dopamine reward system» (37). This reward pathway also was found to play a role in the subjective recognition of pleasure (Berridge and Kringelbach, 646-664). Thus, one could simply put it as talking about the self feels pleasurable and rewarding to us. It also could be a contributive factor to the popularity of social media platforms, since they are often based upon user-generated content. Without such hardwired, pleasurable and rewarding activity as sharing information about the self, the social media arguably would not be even possible. Since it is a biological need, such divulgence of personal information could not be considered to be a digitally native occurrence, although, the dangers of oversharing online is much more often evoked (Kaspersky).

According to Reagle, Dunbar and Tamir and Mitchell, sharing information about the self and discussing one about others is arguably hardwired into our brains. However, what about the social aspect of this sharing? For the information to be shared, there need to be willing recipients or it could not be considered sharing.

Online modes of communication as its predecessors could be said to have the same major driving force behind them — the human need to gossip. This is one of the reasons rooted in the human psyche that Reagle and Standage also mention as one of the driving forces behind the promulgation of social media and the comment (Reagle, 18-23). «Our brains were literally made for social

networking» (Standage, 29). As a humanity, we seemed to be constantly interested in what is happening with others in our circle of acquittances and the immediate world around us, at the least. It could be argued that only recently we started to be interested in what is happening in the world at large, but that could be the consequence of technological progress. Standage also writes about gossiping as an «extraordinary rich source of social intelligence» (33) simultaneously about the speaker and the person discussed and as a «social glue» (34). Facebook founder, Mark Zuckerberg,

(13)

could be argued to have mentioned in the quote above referring to it as the «want to know what is going on with the people around you». As such gossiping was also posed as an explanation and major driving force behind the immense popularity of social media websites (Reagle, 19).

Gossip was also posed as an inherent mechanism and an essential element that ensured human survival and prosperity at large. It is also credited by some as a major force behind the apparition of language as a human mode of communication. The main uses of gossip were and still arguably are warning of danger and cooperation for survival and/or prosperity (Harari, 49-57). These functions of gossip transcended into social media today. Although, it might be not at the same scale as it was before — not just for bare essential survival — that users consume information about others today. Nonetheless, information about others and in general could be said to have been regarded as an important asset in arguably all human societies. The utter need for gossip could also serve as an explanation to the particular addictive nature of social platforms because humanity genuinely and since the dawn of its existence enjoy knowing what is happening with people that they ‘follow'. The ‘following’ is rather important since the human capability of effectively ‘keeping up with’

acquittances rests on around 150 relationships (Dunbar; Harari, 57; Reagle, 21-23). Reagle supposes that the case of gossip has been the main mechanism behind the launch and initial promulgation of social media. Or as Standage described it social media is «gossiping at a distance» (35). The case of Facebook being used only by university students at one point could constitute a clear example of the gossiping culture at the root of social platforms. However, social media since then long outgrew the boundaries of efficient gossiping and are now in the category of «filtered sludge» (Reagle, 39). Where the content is filtered and moderated to keep the platforms from descending into incoherent chaos.

Filtering in this instance could be different; however, a rather prevalent one within the social media is «fortifying» (28), meaning-making the system of communication more robust to the abuses of content. Such filtering for Reagle in his book Reading the Comments: Likers, Haters and

Manipulators at the Bottom of the Web refers to the comment, but such fortification of filtering

could be true for various forms of user-generated content. Analysis of the comment as it was previously mentioned serves as a pertinent insight into human behaviour online, especially in textual form. This study focuses on the social media platform Reddit that is considered to be a forum of forums with the concept of comment constituting a significant affordance of the platform and the main generator of content on it, alongside ‘original posting’. The latter could be considered to be a form of a comment, as well. The idea of comment and its analysis by Reagle combined with Massanari book on Reddit Participatory Culture, Community and Play: Learning from Reddit provides a pertinent viewpoint into the discourses on Reddit highlighting their significance and place and, thus, their importance in political and social issues today. These two works also aid in

(14)

situating discourses on Reddit within the larger historical framework. This study primarily would focus on the discussion of a particular social issue — sexuality — and how does it related to Foucault’s concepts from The History of Sexuality: The Will to Knowledge.

Foucault and Confessional practice

To contextualise Foucault’s concepts and extrapolate them into the contemporary social media space, one important aspect would need to be clarified. In The History of Sexuality, the practice of confession could be said to have been extensively deconstructed and conceptualised. This practice is considered to be one of the most significant instruments that aided in structuring how we talk about sexuality today (Foucault, 61).

To highlight how confessional practices transcended into the discourses on Reddit, the main features of confessions according to Foucault should be first clarified. Confession for Foucault constituted the main instrument of the production of the truth of sex (Foucault, 58-65). The following section would focus on the confession as means of communication in more general definition, its important role in the creation of knowledge on sexuality, in particular, would be addressed the third chapter Foucault, Sexuality and the Internet.

Confessional practice got its start and initial launch into the social sphere with Christianity (Foucault, 58). In Christianity confession is regarded as «the main ritual of production of truth« (58), with (sex)uality being one of the most popular topics. So, with the proliferation of Christianity, came also the proliferation of the confession, thus, establishing it as one of (if not the) main procedures in virtually every aspect of social life. Since the Middle Ages, confession as a practice was codified, developed, and multiplied in use within different aspects of people's lives that Christianity touched (Foucault, 58). For the medieval period, it could be said that it was all life. Till this day, confession is still present in our legal, administrative, social and personal lives.

The practice of confessions is focused on the production of ultimate truth (at least, on an individual level), for example, confessing in legal systems is associated with admitting one’s truth about a crime. It became so entrenched into social subconsciousness that it came to be associated primarily with production of truth while forgetting the fact that it is a part of a constraining power. The truth, according to Foucault, «shares an original affinity with freedom». «Confession frees» (60). While being a production of truth, confession is supposed to bring a sense of freedom to the confessor. Such sense of liberation could also be explained by the neurological «reward pathway» mentioned previously, since confession’s topics by definition and design concern the individual. As it was aforementioned, talking about ourselves is pleasurable and rewarding to us because of our

(15)

The Care of Self, linking even further the practice of confession and the self. While initially for

Foucault confessional popularity was explained by the practice’s association with the truth and a positive affinity of freedom, it could now be clarified by the humans’ neurological need to talk about the self. The freeing sensation could also be due to the neurological aspect since it is in «reward pathway» that is considered to be associated with pleasure (Berridge and Kringelbach, 646-664). Such association between confessing and liberation as a reward also could explain

practice's popularity that persisted beyond its religious origin, and its relative ease of transformation and adoption into other power structures.

Confession as a communication practice is also by definition and by its nature unequal, there is a power dynamic involved. The one who speaks, transmitting the knowledge, is in a weaker position compared to the one listening. It is a unique system of relation in itself. Knowledge is usually largely regarded as an asset, and therefore, transmitting it should put the person in a more powerful position; however, confession functions the opposite way (Foucault, 59-61). The power in

communication lies with the receiver who was bestowed with an affordance to «listen[s] and say[s] nothing» and to question as in interrogation (Foucault, 62). The one listening is also imbued with affordances «to forgive, console, and direct» (66). Such power dynamic evolved from Christian penance but essentially remained the same in the sciences. In religious practices, it revolved around admitting 'sinful' acts, thoughts and desires. As it was previously stated, confession is largely regarded as a 'freeing' experience for the one speaking, since the truth « «demands» only to

surface»(60). In a way, Foucault, unbeknownst to himself, is referencing a neurological human need to talk about the self, since it feels pleasurable and rewarding for the speaker that he equated with a feeling of freedom.

Essentially, confession as a practice and a form of communication follows closely the sharing of information about the self outlined above and could be said to have been fuelled by this need since the beginning. However, the aspect of ‘gossiping’ is largely associated with a civil or secular activity that promulgated within social circles, rather than religious ones.

Much of what a practice of confession consisted of in its Christian beginnings remains to this day. Humans are still confessing animals, to paraphrase Foucault. As it would later be underlined in

Foucault, Sexuality and the Internet, the confession is regarded as the main procedure of production

of the truth of sexuality, thus, playing a significant role in how we speak about sexuality. However, as it was mentioned previously, there is a new player on the stage — the Internet, notably social media.

Online Confessions

The power dynamic in confession online changed slightly. The one ‘speaking’ or more typing still remains in a weaker position; however, the one listening became a collective — as Reagle puts it a

(16)

«wisdom of the crowd» or «collective intelligence» (14). Compared to Christian confession or scientific one where two individuals were usually involved — a priest and a member of his

congregation, a psychiatrist and a patient. Whereas now the confessor is essentially speaking his or her truths to a collective listener, a community online. This includes sexual truths as well. The collective factor of such communal confession could be seen as a similar practice to Christian pastoral support since it offers an emotional aid to the confessor, rather than an opinion of an expert (although, some pose as such). This support is usually provided solely by the pastor and not the whole community at large. Online confessions could still be regarded to take the same form of a user admitting a truth about themselves with the difference: the truth is heard by sometimes millions of people. The support system created this way, would have a gossiping factor to it, with the

community collectively aiding an individual. Such a support system approach could be considered to be the main form that the sexual confession online takes.

Confessions to the collective, as it was aforementioned, could be essentially regarded as the act of sharing personal information online — be it the review on Amazon, a selfie or a re-tweet of an article. All of these actions carry some knowledge about the individual within them with the only difference being the kind and the extent of it. Moreover, the support system could be represented by ‘the comment section’, in this instance.

Another factor of the Internet is the fact that it is a large melting pot. Conversations online may centre on a particular theme, however, subtopics could be large and varied, and when it comes to discussions and debates on sexuality, there are far and wide. The variety of topics and themes could be also considered as a contributing factor to the online support system. Anyone could find a community with similar interests and proclivities with relative ease. However, its downside is the fact that such a mix of everything could be said to further contribute to overall ‘filtered sludge’ of social media.

The confession to a collective and the melting pot of those 'confessionals' would not reach the popularity it has today without another particular affordance of certain social platforms — anonymity and pseudonymity. These afforded factors could not be overlooked, especially in the case of a marginalised and/or controversial topics. Contemporary ability and levels of anonymity and pseudonymity arguably could not have been reached to the extent they have done today without the Internet. It could be even contended as unprecedented in the public sphere in human history. For average users, such ambivalence in identity could constitute a powerful tool of protection; it could afford complete anonymity with much less effort than any other medium of communication before. The practice of confession with such an affordance facilitates the discourse by creating a safe space through distance both physical and personal. So, people are more prompt to talk freely about their experiences, practices, desires and fantasies. In the majority of cases, as it was said before, people also find others with similar interests that they would not have necessarily found without the Internet.

(17)

The practice of confession could be said to have largely retained its form transcending into the social media platforms. Users generated content about themselves, largely sharing their life and experiences online. The adoption of the confessions, although, had some changes and additions with the gossiping aspect of confessing to a collaborative intelligence and the affordance of anonymity and pseudonymity for the speaker and the collective listener. These online affordances to the confessional practice could have contributed to the production of truth on sexuality, since they facilitated the discussion and discourse, thus, driving the creation of knowledge forward.

Nonetheless, it should be mentioned that online communities and social media do not always and unconditionally present a welcoming space to everyone and everywhere online. As a medium of communication, social media platforms could not be considered to be entirely neutral in their decisions on what topics and content could be discussed within the platform. Moreover, the

affordance of anonymity and pseudonymity would include a side effect of uncertainty and virtually impossibility to verify certain information given by the poster (Philips and Milner, 50-51). When it comes to sexuality, personal knowledge and information confessed by posters prove to be extremely difficult to verify. It may be more truthful since it is anonymous, but onlooker would have no way of knowing due to the same reason — thus, knowledge produced by posters would be considered for its value in the discourse, regardless whether it is true or not.

The downside of the uncertainty of anonymity and pseudonymity could constitute one of the reasons why popular social media such as Facebook promote a symbiotic model of identity, joining the online and the offline.

Social Platforms as Creations

Social media platforms are still conceived by a person or a group of people, whose decisions in the format and shape of the platform affect directly how users interact within and with the software. The biological needs of gossiping and talking about the self could be the hardware that induces the desire to participate in us. Whereas, the software is the medium or the ‘how’ we chose to

participate. And as McLuhan said back in the 1960s «The medium is the message» (McLuhan, 7). Social media platforms as an object themselves could be said to represent or convey different kinds of philosophies, shaping the culture that brews on it (Smith, 9). Zadie Smith, an acclaimed English novelist, in her article Generation Why, points out that these philosophies often follow the same principles as those of the founder of the platform. Quoting Lanier, she writes «Different media design stimulate different potentials in human nature» (Smith, 9).

In these different designs the role of the founder is augmented to the point of The Architect of human communication, at least, in confines of his platform (most likely a «he»). It should not come as a surprise since he is the creator. Our communication is becoming increasingly shaped by a few

(18)

companies with their corporate designs that give structure to the way we share information. For example, one will find it at least odd nowadays, if a person says they do not have Facebook.

In this sense, the medium could be said to directly participate in the promulgation or even creation of topics, discussion and cultures it deems appropriate for the platform. It may be invisible to users on a daily basis, as it, some consider to be in the category of ‘meta’ questions. We may be

neurologically ‘wired’ to share information about ourselves and gossip about others, but the format that it takes could significantly facilitate one type of discussion over the other. As Zadie Smith wrote about Facebook: it asks you what movies, books and television you like, but not what architecture, philosophical movements or plants.

Aforementioned confessions could also be regarded as a kind of medium that our neurological need to share information about the self took, only in the time where the Internet was not even conceived as a prospect. The practice of confession, although, some considered, retained the conceptual base and transcend into the online medium. However, the obscure topic of sexuality could not have flourished in the very public space, like Facebook. For some, ‘traditional’ social media (Facebook, Instagram and others) could be too personal and too public, meaning the ‘offline’ identity is highly closed tied with the ‘online’ one. It could be equated to publicly confessing in a small town square where everyone knows each other. The consequences of communal scrutiny of the action could not be predicted, and such risk for many people is enough to detour from speaking about topics

considered shameful by society.

However, when one is afforded an option to remain anonymous or put on a mask by a particular medium of communication, the range of topics that could be discussed are significantly expanded. Simply, due to the fact, that discussion on the obscure topic like sexuality could not be traced back to the poster’s identity in the ‘real world’. To continue the previous metaphor of a small town, a medium like that could be equated with a masked ball, where masks and costumes distort the identity of a person, to the point where it is not possible to know who that person is, only the mask. Confession to the collective, a large melting pot of communities and anonymity/pseudonymity one could argue all come together in the social media platform Reddit. All these aspects could be considered to be an integral part of its culture and functioning.

(19)

II. Why Reddit?

Sharing information about ourselves and consuming information about others — effectively, confessing and gossiping — as a combination is considered to be an integral aspect of the concept of participatory culture, notably online (Jenkins, Purushotma, Weigel, Clinton & Robinson, 2009). It got a significant boost with the creation and proliferation of devices that could be connected to the Internet and their increased mobility. It is also an overarching prosuming (from prosumers) culture of Web 2.0. Its themes could be seen throughout different social media platforms but in various forms. For this study, Reddit’s participatory culture would be examined in order to portray as to why this platform is a particularly welcoming place for the discourse on subjects that would be considered to be excessively explicit for other social media platforms.

Reddit represents an interesting case of a social platform, a self-described «front page of the internet» (reddit.com). It is a popular website (no.18 worldwide), especially among English-speaking internet communities with 43% of users coming from the United States and the UK, with Canada following closely after (alexa.com). Such statistics make Reddit predominantly English-speaking website, thus, discourses and topics discussed centre significantly on English-English-speaking world and its related news, be it in a political point of view (with an abundance of news concerning US politics and entertainment) or concerning sexuality. It could be one of the successors to the widely popular forum culture of 1990s internet. Since its structure, features and affordances closely resemble those of forums with a continuous thread of posts, which could be in turn expanded to view the full content, as well as the comments of other users. However, Reddit comprises multiple such forums (subreddits), hence making it «a massive collection of forums» (Widman, «What is Reddit?»).

It also largely an aggregation platform, meaning it links to other content on the internet rather than hosting it. Moreover, a substantial part of Reddit overall posts would constitute visual content, and a lot of them are of memetic nature. Previously mentioned features constitute one of the aspects that differentiate Reddit significantly from other ‘traditional’ social media platforms.

Members of the website participating on the platform are called 'Redditors' and users who are just reading through posts and threads are given the name 'lurkers'. This study will look at 'redditors', since they are the ones who actively participate in discussions and debates in communities, and 'lurkers' are fully anonymous. Redditors also follow or become members of subreddits, which could be part of the ‘keeping up with’ topics that are of particular interest to a user. Like other social platforms, Reddit has a metric system for its posts — upvotes and downvotes that could be

compared to, essentially, in Facebook terms to 'likes' and 'dislikes'. However, an important feature and, subsequently, an affordance of Reddit’s metric system is the fact that it is not public — a user cannot see who upvoted or downvoted her content. Such anonymity in the evaluation of content

(20)

would allow users to express themselves candidly and without social reservations, which influence behaviours on Web 2.0 platforms nowadays. The system also has karma points for active users, which is calculated by subtracting the number of downvotes from the number of upvotes an entry (a post or a comment) received. Apart from the different metric system, what substantially differs Reddit from other Web 2.0 social media platforms is a myriad of interconnected affordances that networking site provides its users to facilitate and promulgate discussions that might not necessarily take place in other similar websites due to subjects' controversy and/or sensitivity.

Participatory culture on Reddit continued to carry the traditional of 1990s forum culture, albeit now in much different form. Such a transformation could be the result of the promulgation and utter eclipse of desktop computers by smartphones.

Massanari in Participatory Culture, Community and Play: Learning from Reddit also remarks of Reddit’s «naive altruism and optimism regarding its communities» (31), that exist along with redditors’ inherent distrust and cynicism towards institutions and hierarchies. She remarks on how this dichotomy accompanies users in all communities and shaping how they view others on the platforms, be it individuals or different communities.

Participatory culture or «gift economies» constitute the majority, if not all, economies of Web 2.0, Reddit being no exception as it was previously stated. Subreddits by interest could be said to constitute the large part of participatory culture for Reddit. Massanari also justly mentioned the labour of moderators of these communities, as being a perfect example of the altruistic nature of the platform.

A large element of this altruism is also the various and numerous support groups of Reddit (Massanari, 33). These subreddits act as psychological and more often than not practical support where members share personal ‘tips and tricks’ in dealing with certain situations in life. The melting pot of Reddit is filtered by subreddits, meaning that subreddits, one could say, specialise and offer help with different issues. This study would particularly focus on this side of Reddit’s altruism with specialisation in subreddits offering support and discourse on (sex)uality. Massanari writes that this kind of altruism is in line with the «gift economy» theory as it can be used «metaphorically to suggest that individuals offer affective or other immaterial goods in a community» (33). Although, Reddit’s altruism transcends boundaries of solely affectional support with redditors raising

thousands of dollars. Massanari gives an example of Reddit raising almost $24,000 for a security guard and a manager at a mall in an Atlanta mall who was regarded by the community as a folk hero (superhero) ‘getting justice’ for ‘ordinary people’. However, the reality was not so clearcut as it would appear for redditors, with the man subsequently being fired from his job and being arrested for allegedly tacking someone without a cause (Carmichael, Massanari, 35). This case could serve

(21)

as an example of Reddit’s «judge first, ask questions later» feature of participatory culture. This study focuses on the support groups of Reddit that do not usually participate in offline and material support for their members, such passing of judgement could be seen in the discourses within the community. It could also be considered to be a part of ‘gossiping’ discourses online with the only exception being that it is not done 'behind the user’s back’, but directly to the OP (original poster) within the comment section. Although, it should be noted that the ‘judgement’ which could also be considered a critique within the subreddit analysed would often be passed upon the content of the post itself, and rarely include commentary alongside «why did you even post this» category. In short, confessing by itself within especially support groups could be often regarded even as a brave act, depending on the degree of embarrassment and severity of the situation and experience

reiterated by the author.

More often than not in these support groups, redditors confess in a much similar way to that of their ancestors might have done every Sunday. They tell the community their experience, concern or ask for help and advice from the collective intelligence, appealing to the wisdom of the crowd. As Reagle writes «An essential function of a comment is to inform: we express our thoughts for the benefit of others, and others seek them out to understand and make decisions» (54). The

information shared is often also of personal nature, be it opinion or experience. The only difference from our predecessors being that users online are afforded, one could argue, the ‘ultimate’ privacy — anonymity or its close second pseudonymity.

Reddit, in fact, has several particular affordances that make it a pertinent and significant platform to access and assess current discourses on a subject such as sexuality among general

(English-speaking) public. First of all, as it was aforementioned, it affords pseudonymity, a token from forum culture— users create their accounts without the necessity of providing crucial personal

information, and data provided is not visible to other users (i.e email). It is rather reminiscent of forum culture of the 1990s and shows the lasting cultural memory it holds for the community. Such pseudonymity is part of what makes Reddit different from other 'traditional' social media, or their «reputation of the singular model of identity» that is incrusted into Web 2.0 (Massanari, 23). Most popular social networking sites demand rather full administrative personal disclosure with an insistence on the use of the real name, photo and information in order 'to stay connected with your friends'. Reddit does not pose itself as a 'connector' between people, it is an aggregation platform as in gathering news from different outlets, making it a news source platform rather than a social media one. The fact that it is a discussion board plays one of the major roles in the way users interact with the platform and within it. It could not be even considered as a 'social' media in a conventional sense of the word since connections on this platform are not necessarily (if not at all)

(22)

publicly admitted. (Massanari, 6). But for the sake of simplicity and linguistic variety, Reddit would be referred to as social media.

Due to pseudonymity, users are more at ease writing, discussing and debating about more explicit and sensitive topics which sexuality is largely a part of. Whereas, it is not the case for more traditional social media for reasons of exposure and public scrutiny (Massanari, 33). However, redditors could still see postings of others on their profile page as it is a default setting. Thus, there is a possibility through posts and comments to determine in general terms who is this redditor and what are their interests (Massanari, 51). Such visibility of identity was countered by the 'throwaway' accounts tactic, where a user creates another profile to discuss particularly sensitive information that they would like to keep from their primary Reddit account. This tactic represents a symbiosis of a technical affordance of the platform (the ease of account creation) and a social affordance resulting from it. Redditors are usually explicit in the employment of it with either explicitly stating that they are using a throwaway account, or having a telling name such as «Throwaway5043» (Massanari, 51). Such a tactic could also be largely considered to be understood by redditors and is not in general frown upon by communities.

With anonymity and pseudonymity being one of the most crucial affordances that helped flourish the discourses on Reddit, another significant technical affordance of the platform that contributed as much is Reddit’s rather lenient terms of use regarding adult content. This affordance could

constitute yet another significant departure of Reddit from ‘traditional’ social media rather formal rules. As an aggregation platform not only for content, but also for communities, it features a myriad of subreddits dedicated to various topics (and, in some cases, practices) that are regarded as controversial, sensitive and frequently obscene. As a special feature/affordance, Reddit has an NSFW (Not Safe For Work) tag for content that contains «nudity, pornography, or profanity» (5), which users might not want to view in a public setting (Reddit Content Policy). It is more often than not used with the visual posts, and less so often with textual content. This tag is also flexible, as in it could be used for the individual posts or whole communities. Hence, making Reddit a welcoming space when it comes to content on a discussion about sexuality and all aspects relating to it. Although, it should be noted that some subreddits of NSFW category could be rather misogynistic spaces. Like Massanari notes about NSFW content «The most obvious demonstration of the reddit male gaze» (132). Reddit is considered to be a rather male-dominated culture with NSFW content being one of the most prominent playgrounds for the male gaze. However, this study centres around the subreddit r/sex that feature to the largest part only textual posts from redditors on sexuality, which one could argue, would be making this subreddit less of a male gaze stimulation exercise. Terms of policy about NSFW content could be said to go along with communal rules. A set of behaviours that are agreed upon by the community/subreddit itself for their members. These rules

(23)

often differ from between communities. Massanari refers to them as reddiquette (10,16). Unlike etiquette, reddiquette could often explicitly articulated set of rules and behaviours within the community applied to all its members. As such it could also be considered an additional layer of ‘filtering’ (alongside, general terms of use), personalised for each subreddit. Reddiquette constitutes an additional affordance of the platform that lets the myriad of subreddits exist without spiralling into as Reagle had put it «the sludge».

Anonymity/pseudonymity, leniency towards NSFW content, as well as reddiquette could account for the ease with which users share their rather sensitive and often socially considered obscene information about themselves. One could argue, affordances of Reddit facilitate discussion about sexuality since it combats the feeling of shame with what discussion on this topic is particularly associated with. These affordances are the additional boosters to the initial ‘gossiping’ urge and neurological pleasure of disclosing information about the self, coupled with centuries of

confessional practice ‘offline’.

Disclosing information about the self as in confessional practice often include the production of the truth about the topic that was often obscured from ‘public’ discourses — the sexuality. It is the topic that could be argued received from the Internet the most, as humanity found a space to freely

express their sexuality and, importantly, with some degree of identity protection. Next chapter would clarify Michel Foucault’s concepts about the production of knowledge about sexuality and how it was viewed by the public eye. In particular, concepts of ars erotica and scientia sexualis would be discussed as two formulas of transmission and promulgation of sexual knowledge. These ideas would, later on, be called upon in the methodology section to classify posts and comments within subreddits to portray how historical concepts about sexuality relate to contemporary online discourses.

(24)

III. Foucault, Sexuality and the Internet

As the previous chapter highlighted, many digital phenomena that we would associate today with the online sphere have existed considerably way before the Internet and Web 2.0. Nonetheless, with the creation and promulgation of the world wide web that interconnected the planet, various

discourses found fertile ground for settlement and growth. Before we tended to search for answers to our questions in the library, or in lectures at university or in scientific publications and journals, as well as simply asking around, but today, any question we could think of has been probably already posed and answered by people online.

In particular, this study will focus on an aspect of our lives that is usually deemed improper for the public eye and, thus, remained rather obscure — sexuality. Before the Internet, discourses on sexuality remained largely in the medical, educational and familial landscape, rarely exiting into the public sphere with snippets, suggestions and omissions in media. However, with the proliferation of social media among the general public, discourse on various marginalised subjects is now being produced by users, and not solely by 'experts'. Although, one French philosopher disagreed with the idea of «sexuality being a repressed subject» — Michel Foucault.

Michel Foucault wrote the first volume of The History of Sexuality, The Will to Knowledge in the 1970s with publication in 1976. Since then, it has been close to half a century; however, many concepts and ideas proposed in this book are still used by academics in various fields to this day. This paper would focus on how concepts and ideas from Foucault relate to discourses about sexuality within sex-related communities on Reddit.

Michel Foucault is regarded as one of the great thinkers and philosophers of the last century. He is known for his remarkable ability to synthesise large volumes of knowledge on various subjects that humanity gathered up to that point of 1980s (Blackburn, 144). With such ability, he was also able to theorise from a historical vantage point onto our current situations, events and occurrences applying to them a historical perspective and looking at them from a birds' eye view. One of the topics that Foucault was interested in and treated from this perspective, was sexuality.

Foucault's work History of Sexuality: The Will to Knowledge is largely regarded as a milestone in philosophy and theory in gender studies, sexuality studies and philosophy in general, to name a few (Soble, 118). Foucault and his arguments on sex and sexuality explore what role it plays in everyday lives of people, how this role came to be this way and how our sexual side is 'deployed' by power structures. He dismantles the hypothesis of the sexuality as a taboo subject and highlights how in the past two-three centuries it was talked about, classified, debated and analysed more than in other previous centuries, if not the whole history of humanity. This fascination with classification and exploration of human sexuality could be said to have coincided with the industrialisation of the West, the emergence of the bourgeoisie and the world's newfound unshakable faith in science.

(25)

The Will to Knowledge received mixed reviews since its publication in 1976 and continues to be

critiqued today, with many scholars pointing out the generalisations in the book (Scruton, 34 and 362; Murray, 623-624; Caplan, 165; Gay, 468-469). Some of them critiqued Foucault's

generalisation of the concept of power (Caplan, 165) and his subsequent contradiction of the theory of said power in his later work, notably the one on Herculine Barbin (Butler, 127-128, 131).

Moreover, Romana Byrne in her book Aesthetic Sexuality: A Literary History of Sadomasochism disagreed with Foucault's argument on the concept of scientia sexualis exclusively predominating Western societies, while ars erotica played a part in Ancient and Eastern societies, arguing that there was a form of ars erotica in Western societies dating back at least to eighteenth-century (Byrne, 1-4). Foucault was also criticised for his assumption of ars erotica as a phenomenon of exclusively Eastern societies with its rather idealistic portrayal of practices, especially in China (Rocha, 328). Foucault himself later noted on this assumption about erotic practices in the East in the first volume, as well as his juxtaposition with Western societies, mentioning the fact that the comparison would have worked better if he mentioned rather ancient Greek and Roman practice of care of the self (techne tou biou) (Taylor 22; Foucault, «On the Genealogy of Ethics», 234-235). The notion of the distinction (or non-distinction) between scientia sexualis and ars erotica would be revisited in this work not only from the theoretical point of view but also from an empirical one, focusing on a discursive analysis of discussion proliferating in online sex community on Reddit.

As the previous chapter highlighted, one of the crucial aspects in order to understand the distinction between ars erotica and scientia sexualis is the practice of confession. For Foucault, it plays an integral part in discourses on sexuality as one of the founding practice of the analysis of the latter. The section Foucault and Confessional practice underlines the mechanisms of power dynamics within the confession as a form of communication, as well as highlighting the practice’s potential neurological origin.

Foucault in his book also explains the history of this practice, as well as its subsequent integration into sciences on sexuality as we know it today. As it was stated in the previous section Online

Confessions, the practice could be still quite prevalent in online communications. Moreover, it is

considered to be the most promulgated form of communication on sexual matters to this day, since members of a sex-related online community that would be presented and discussed in detail later on, convey their sexual experiences, practices and notions in largely in the same confessional manner.

When it comes to the origin of the practice, Christianity could be regarded as the main inventor and proliferator of confessions, at least in the same sense of the word that we regard it today. The scientific endeavour and exploration into sexuality stemmed from and based itself on these

confessional practices since they were adopted and integrated into the scientific-analytical tool kit. For Foucault, the practice of confession plays an essential role in the notion of discourse on

sexuality that we have today (Foucault, The History of Sexuality 58-73). Without it, sexual discourses in all their forms and variations would not be structured, proliferated and debated the

(26)

same way that they are today. The practice of speaking to someone truthfully about one's desires, inclinations, experiences and practices in the sexual realm had gained so much prevalence and weight in, especially scientific practices, that it is close to impossible to imagine a different framework for the proliferation of knowledge about sexuality.

In order to gain such popularity and overall importance, confession would have needed to be proliferated by a powerful (in political, economical and social way) entity — Christianity. Foucault paints confessional practices as a «procedure for telling the truth of sex»(58). In Christianity, it is «the main ritual of production of truth» (58) in general, with sex being one of the most popular topics. So, with the proliferation of Christianity, came also the proliferation of the confession, thus, establishing it as one of (if not the) main procedures in virtually every aspect of social life. Since the Middle Ages, confession as a practice was codified, developed and multiplied in use within different aspects of people's lives that Christianity touched (Foucault, 58). And for the medieval period, it could be said that it was all life. Till this day, confession is still present in our legal, administrative, social and personal lives. So, what this immense popularity meant for human

sexuality, as one of the favourite topics of confession? Foucault writes that the enclosure of sex into a strict, constant and rigid program of confession is what could have made it into such «a secret» in the first place. The aspect of confession as the production of ultimate truth (at least, on an individual level), it turned from being associated as an instrument of constraining power, to being linked with freedom. Moreover, as the previous chapter reiterated confession could be associated with the neurological human need to share information about the self, which some consider to be a

pleasurable experience, in itself. The latter could serve as an explanation for the liberating feeling confessor experiences, as well as the practice’s popularity and its subsequent transformation and adoption into other power structures. Bringing in the fact that sex is a favoured topic, the liberating practice of confession becomes this quest for the truth of sex or how Foucault puts it «in the

confession […] truth and sex are joined, thorough the obligatory and exhaustive expression of an individual secret» (61). Such symbiosis of liberating truth-seeking and sex is what transformed it into discourse, subsequently giving it the name «sexuality».

This issue of confession that Foucault just outlines in The Will to Knowledge was supposed to be further expanded upon in subsequent volumes of the historical series. However, the study of confessional practices led Foucault from Medieval Christianity further back in history to Latin and Greek texts in late antiquity. Going further back in time criticises Foucault's argument on how long confession played such a substantial role in sexuality in particular. At first, he posed that it

proliferated with Christianity, with placing a lot of importance on the Lateran Council in 1215 and codification of the sacrament of penance with emphasis on sexuality (Elden, 38). However,

Foucault later realised that key concerns of the medieval period are in the moral conduct of self in general, to which Foucault returned, especially in The Care of Self. The connection between the self and production of truth could be resting on the fact that this creation is not necessarily an objective endeavour. Since the confession, as Foucault puts it, is «the heart of the procedure of

Foucault, Sexuality and Reddit