Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-vdxz6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T14:26:43.708Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Disciplinary Relations/Sexual Relations: Feminist and Foucauldian Reflections on Professor–Student Sex

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  25 March 2020

Abstract

Drawing on Michel Foucault's writings as well as the writings of feminist scholars bell hooks and Jane Gallop, this paper examines faculty–student sexual relations and the discourses and policies that surround them. It argues that the dominant discourses on professor–student sex and the policies that follow from them misunderstand the form of power that is at work within pedagogical institutions, and it examines some of the consequences that result from this misunderstanding. In Foucault's terms, we tend to theorize faculty–student relations using a model of sovereign power in which people have or lack power and in which power operates in a static, stable, and exclusively top-down manner. We should, however, recognize the ways in which individuals in pedagogical institutions are situated within disciplinary and thus dynamic, reciprocal, and complex networks of power, as well as the ways in which the pedagogical relation may be a technique of the self and not only of domination. If we reconsider these relations in terms of Foucault's accounts of discipline and technologies of the self, we can recognize that prohibitions on faculty—student sexual relations within institutions such as the university are productive rather than repressive of desire, and that such relations can be opportunities for development and not only for abuse. Moreover, this paper suggests that the dominant discourses on professor—student relations today contribute to a construction of professors as dangerous and students as vulnerable, which denies the agency of (mostly female) students and obscures the multiplicity of forms of sexual abuse that occur within the university context.

Type
CLUSTER: SEXUAL EXPRESSIONS
Copyright
Copyright © 2011 by Hypatia, Inc.

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Abramson, Paul R. 2007. Romance in the ivory tower: The rights and liberty of conscience. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.10.7551/mitpress/7509.001.0001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brewis, Joanna. 2001. Foucault, politics and organizations: (Re)‐constructing sexual harassment. Gender, work, and organization 8 (1): 3760.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dank, Barry M. 2009. Out of the campus closet: Student professor consensual sexual relationships. Sexuality & Culture 12 (3): 61–7.Google Scholar
Dzeich, Billie Wright, and Weiner, Linda. 1990. The lecherous professor: Sexual harassment on campus. Chicago: University of Illinois Press.Google Scholar
Foucault, Michel. 1977. Discipline and punish: The birth of the prison. New York: Random House.Google Scholar
Foucault, Michel. 1978. The history of sexuality: vol. 1. An introduction. New York: Random House.Google Scholar
Foucault, Michel. 1983. On the genealogy of ethics: An overview of work in progress. In Michel Foucault: Beyond structuralism and hermeneutics, ed. Dreyfus, Hubert L. and Rabinow, Paul. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Foucault, Michel. 1988a. On power. In Politics, philosophy, culture: Interviews and other writings, 1977–1984, ed. Kritzman, Lawrence D.New York and London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Foucault, Michel. 1988b. Sexual morality and the law. In Politics, philosophy, culture: Interviews and other writings, 1977–1984, ed. Kritzman., Lawrence D.New York and London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Foucault, Michel. 2003. Abnormal: Lectures at the Collège de France: 1974–1975. New York: Picador.Google Scholar
Foucault, Michel. 2005. Hermeneutics of the subject: Lectures at the Collège de France: 1981–1982. New York: Picador.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Foucault, Michel. 2006. Psychiatric power: Lectures at the Collège de France: 1973–1974. New York: Picador.Google Scholar
Gallop, Jane. 1997. Feminist accused of sexual harassment. Durham, N.C., and London: Duke University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
hooks, bell. 1996. Passionate pedagogy: Erotic student/faculty relationships,”Z MAGAZINE (March): 45–51.Google Scholar
Levenson, Jill S. 2006. Sexual harassment or consensual sexual relations? Implications for social work education. Journal of Social Work Values and Ethics 3 (2). http://www.socialworker.com/jswve/content/view/35/46/ (accessed July 30, 2010).Google Scholar
MacKinnon, Catharine A. 1979. Sexual harassment of working women: A case of sex discrimination. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Paludi, Michele A. 1996. Editor's notes to “Abuse of the power of the professoriate: Faculty who harass and ‘consensual relationships.’” In Part II of sexual harassment on college campuses: Abusing the ivory power, ed. Paludi, Michele A.Albany: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
Stites, M. Cynara. 1996. What's wrong with faculty–student consensual sexual relationships? In Sexual harassment on college campuses: Abusing the ivory power, ed. Paludi, Michele A.Albany: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
Zalk, Sue Rosenberg. 1996. Men in the academy: A psychological profile of harassers. In Sexual harassment on college campuses: Abusing the ivory power, ed. Paludi, Michele A.Albany: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar