The Straight Street
Dickinson constructed a physiology of homosexuality. A locus, a disease caused by deviant sexual practices, was found in female genitalia. This allowed him to uncover homosexual practices without the same need for a confessional dialogue between himself and his patient. This set him apart from his sexological precursors. Dickinson's sexological investigations were, as he stated it, "always proceeding from the body to the mind".97 Ellis and Krafft-Ebing talked about the body in a way that firmly bound it to sexuality, but did not observe the interstices of the flesh with the precision that Dickinson did. This allowed for new sexological perspectives on same-sex desire.
A new homosexual body emerged in this discourse that could be visually identified. By producing this type of knowledge, Dickinson could better see the contours of sexuality. Dickinson found pathology in genital morphology. He used this information to specify individuals as members of sexological categories. Dickinson claimed he could learn the history of a women's sex life by looking at her vulva. The shape of the vulva constituted who women were in his sexology.
The comparison of "homosexual" or "autoerotic" genitals with "heterosexual" genitals allowed for the delineation of normalcy and deviance. This aesthetic judgment was used to support his vision that heterosexual intercourse was healthy. Petite genitals signified feminine sexual purity in Dickinson's work. Dickinson's discriminatory vision was used to show that physically same-sex desire was a threat to health. Dickinson somehow saw that "misshapen" genitals belonged to pathological women. Dickinson began to see more clearly how to avoid this "threat".
Women who loved women were not studied for their own sake; they were not examined by Dickinson to be healed. The desire these women felt was explored only to eliminated. Reading genital love in this fashion reduced women who experienced same-sex eroticism to symbols of pathology. The otherness of these women permeated Dickinson's text. This difference served as a boundary between the norm and the limit. Furthermore, they existed in his work to warn the medical reader to prevent homosexuality at nearly any cost. The female homosexual became a sexual outlaw in Dickinson's work. The goal was to prevent future transgression against what Dickinson thought was sacred, marriage and maternity.
His discussion of homosexuality and how to recognize and subsequently avoid it, inevitably led to what he was trying to promote, that is, marital sexuality. He wanted to bring about the (hetero)sexual utopia Ellis dreamed of by ensuring the sexual happiness of married couple through medical intervention. Dickinson sought to sanctify bourgeois marriage through science. By his investigations into sexual pathology, he became increasingly aware of how to proscribe a normal sexuality. Dickinson would construct a role for the physician that would make him or her become increasingly central to preserving the integrity of the family. Dickinson wanted physicians to keep sex within bounds of matrimony. He wanted to save people from their unpredictable desires through sex instruction.
A new homosexual body emerged in this discourse that could be visually identified. By producing this type of knowledge, Dickinson could better see the contours of sexuality. Dickinson found pathology in genital morphology. He used this information to specify individuals as members of sexological categories. Dickinson claimed he could learn the history of a women's sex life by looking at her vulva. The shape of the vulva constituted who women were in his sexology.
The comparison of "homosexual" or "autoerotic" genitals with "heterosexual" genitals allowed for the delineation of normalcy and deviance. This aesthetic judgment was used to support his vision that heterosexual intercourse was healthy. Petite genitals signified feminine sexual purity in Dickinson's work. Dickinson's discriminatory vision was used to show that physically same-sex desire was a threat to health. Dickinson somehow saw that "misshapen" genitals belonged to pathological women. Dickinson began to see more clearly how to avoid this "threat".
Women who loved women were not studied for their own sake; they were not examined by Dickinson to be healed. The desire these women felt was explored only to eliminated. Reading genital love in this fashion reduced women who experienced same-sex eroticism to symbols of pathology. The otherness of these women permeated Dickinson's text. This difference served as a boundary between the norm and the limit. Furthermore, they existed in his work to warn the medical reader to prevent homosexuality at nearly any cost. The female homosexual became a sexual outlaw in Dickinson's work. The goal was to prevent future transgression against what Dickinson thought was sacred, marriage and maternity.
His discussion of homosexuality and how to recognize and subsequently avoid it, inevitably led to what he was trying to promote, that is, marital sexuality. He wanted to bring about the (hetero)sexual utopia Ellis dreamed of by ensuring the sexual happiness of married couple through medical intervention. Dickinson sought to sanctify bourgeois marriage through science. By his investigations into sexual pathology, he became increasingly aware of how to proscribe a normal sexuality. Dickinson would construct a role for the physician that would make him or her become increasingly central to preserving the integrity of the family. Dickinson wanted physicians to keep sex within bounds of matrimony. He wanted to save people from their unpredictable desires through sex instruction.
posted by Matthew at 7:10 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home