Knowing the Body

2004 First Web Report

On Serendip

Bree Beery
October 3, 2004
IPGS- Anne Dalke

THE ROLE OF LANGUAGE IN UNDERSTANDING SEXUALITY

Upon my initial reading of the assigned essay topic I thought that this essay would be fairly easy to construct. It was not until I actually analyzed and outlined it that I comprehended the depth and complexity of the questions at hand. In trying to answer the first question, "What have you learned so far?" I ended up with two pages of just notes and I realized that I have learned far more than I though I knew. Despite the fact that I have gained more knowledge and understanding on a subject of extreme interest, I have more questions now than I had previously. Lastly, I had no idea as to how to even begin finding answers to my questions. If I knew than would I not have done so already? I then had to start from scratch. While reviewing my notes and outline I discovered a repeating theme, language.

I find it fascinating, as an aspiring English major, how every reading and lecture we have discussed is somehow related to language. I view language as an agency through which discourse is discussed, power is given as well as received and identities are created and then categorized. However, with such influence, comes problems and language is no exception. Language, in all of its forms, poses many problems, such as the issue of censorship, consistency of terminology as well as the importance of what is not being said. Although I find many problems with language and all of its limitations, I hope that by the time I finish writing this essay I can better understand its effects on the subject of sex and gender and hopefully build on its potential.

Throughout class, when we have discussed discourse we informally define it as a way in which individuals and societies understand sexuality and gender through language. However this loose definition is problematic for me as I think of the quote from the great mathematician Alfred Whitehead, "The notion that thought can be perfectly or even adequately expressed in verbal symbols is idiotic" For example, when discussing the term "queer" everyone had different perceptions on the meaning of the word, however this problem holds true for any and every word. Language can only say so much. Understanding sex and gender concerns more than the use of language, as demonstrated by Foucault and his writings about "the way in which sex is put into discourse." He makes the point that when examining sex one need to take notice of what is not is not being said, or being censored, rather than just listening to the obvious points at hand. Through language one is able to understand and interpret different issues, but if certain language is being censored then one is not able to interpret, or worse not understand which cause many problems for the individual and society. Foucault also goes on to state, "What is peculiar to modern societies, in fact, is not that they consigned sex to a shadow existence, but that they dedicated themselves to speaking of it ad infinitum, while exploiting it as the secret" This notion of repressed sexuality also creates problems in using language. As Voltaire once said, "The great use of words is to hide our thoughts." What worries me is that if sex is viewed as a secret and something of which not to be discussed, than no one will ever be able to have a genuinely open discourse concerning sex without feeling regret or shame.

This problem of censorship then leads us into the problem of creating and defining identities. In utilizing Diana Fuss' idea of identity as being defined by what we are not, I feel that censorship is just one way in which a society or individual can classify themselves. In relating this to the Carolyn Dinshaw lecture, Malaysia and Canada, by censoring and reprimanding certain forms of "bad" language, are able to create definitive identities separate from those considered "bad." In return to Fuss' idea that identity is relational, brings me back, once again, to our classroom discussion on the term 'queer'. The Sedgwick reading explored the idea that queer can only be identified through one's own individual actions and beliefs rather than by the general, yet limited use of language. As she states, "queer seems to hinge much more radically and explicitly on a person's undertaking particular, performative acts of experimental self- perception and affiliation." To be able to create our identity in terms of who and/or what we really are, we have to find out through individual interpretation and understanding of certain terms and connotations, rather than by conforming to what we are not defined as by language. So then the question at hand is how does language allow one to better know one or another's identity, sexual or otherwise? I would have to say that it does not help, if anything it hinders. Language seems to only define identities in relation to their similarities and or differences (i.e. straight vs. gay, sex vs. gender, etc.) rather than by portraying them as intertwined and codependent. As Delany states, "...even the similarities are finally, to the extent they are living ones, a play of differences- only specific ones, socially constituted, not transcendental ones." There is no such thing as clear cut divisions, which then leads us into another problem with language, the problem of inescapable classification.

In The Order of Things, Foucault argues that categorizing is instinctive to human beings and that there will always be some sort of basic construction of classification, despite the fact that categories are ever changing. In relation to Fuss, Foucault also states that, like speech and language, one must always be sure to look at the 'empty space' within the categories to gain a better understanding of sex and identity. Yet what I find difficult is to find the 'empty space'. There always seems to be such a distinctive split as to what something is and what it is not. The idea of distinctions in categorization is related to yet another class dialogue, the question whether language is on the outside or inside.

Delany, Dinshaw and Fuss all recognize the problem of inside/outside language and the fact that there is not a clear and distinct line between the outside and inside, particularly in relation to sexuality. Delany views the sexuality as "always occurring partly inside language and partly outside of it." In fact, what make Delany and Dinshaw so progressive as authors is there attempts to blend the inside of language with that of the outside. By adding a 'Q' for 'queer' on the cover of her literary journal, Dinshaw is able to speak to both the inside and outside spheres of language. She refers to the 'Q' as "both legitimate and disruptive". By calling the "Q" legitimate she is bringing it into the inside world of language, yet by calling it disruptive she is still admitting to its current place outside language. Delany also uses a similar method in his writing, Aversion/Perversion/Diversion. By using the language of the inside, he talks of his sexual experiences as though they are just common everyday occurrences, yet because his acts are socially taboo they are still left on the outside. In the Fuss reading she asked a question that I found interesting, ""Does one compromise oneself by working on the inside, or does one shortchange oneself by holding tenaciously to the outside" Dinshaw and Delany have demonstrated that one does not need to compromise nor shortchange oneself when working with the language of the inside as well as the language of the outside. All of these examples establish the importance of language, not only for our interpretations and understandings of sexuality, but also to the exclusions and inclusions of individuals and societies.

Language, no matter how many problems it has nor how many solutions it brings is inevitably important in understanding sex and gender. Language, with all its complexities and different avenues of meaning, will forever be an important reality and necessity. As Fuss states, "the dream of either a common language or no language at all is just that- a dream, a fantasy..." Without language the discourse of sexuality would not even be considered for discussion, power relations would be distorted and identities would be neither created nor categorized.

Tyron Edwards, The New Dictionary of Thoughts (United States: Standard Book Company), 1961, 339

Michel Foucault. "We 'Other Victorians'" and "The Repressive Hypothesis."The History of Sexuality, Volume I: An Introduction.Trans. Robert Hurley. New York: Vintage, 1980. 3-13, 17-49.

Michel Foucault. "We 'Other Victorians'" and "The Repressive Hypothesis."The History of Sexuality, Volume I: An Introduction.Trans. Robert Hurley. New York: Vintage, 1980. 3-13, 17-49.

Tyron Edwards, The New Dictionary of Thoughts (United States: Standard Book Company), 1961, 340

Diana Fuss. "Inside/Out." Critical Encounters: Reference and Responsibility in Deconstructive Writing. New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press, 1995. 233-240.

Guest Lecture by Carolyn Dinshaw, BMC '78, Professor of English and Director of Center for Gender and Sexuality, NYU, "LGBT Studies in a Transnational Frame"

Eve Sedgwick's essay "Queer and Now"

Eve Sedgwick's essay "Queer and Now"

Samuel Delany. "Aversion/Perversion/Diversion." Longer Views: Extended Essays. Hanover, New Hampshire: University Press of New England, 1996. 119-143

Michel Foucault. Preface and Forward. The Order of Things: An Archaeology of the Human Sciences. 1966; rpt. and trans.New York: Vintage, 1973. ix-xxiv

Michel Foucault. Preface and Forward. The Order of Things: An Archaeology of the Human Sciences. 1966; rpt. and trans.New York: Vintage, 1973. ix-xxiv

Samuel Delany. "Aversion/Perversion/Diversion." Longer Views: Extended Essays. Hanover, New Hampshire: University Press of New England, 1996. 119-143

Guest Lecture by Carolyn Dinshaw, BMC '78, Professor of English and Director of Center for Gender and Sexuality, NYU, "LGBT Studies in a Transnational Frame"

Diana Fuss. "Inside/Out." Critical Encounters: Reference and Responsibility in Deconstructive Writing. New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press, 1995. 233-240.

Diana Fuss. "Inside/Out." Critical Encounters: Reference and Responsibility in Deconstructive Writing. New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press, 1995. 233-240.


| Course Home Page |Course Syllabus | Feminist and Gender Studies Program
| Other Undergraduate Courses on Serendip |Serendip Home |