Merritt Rehn-Debraal

For many feminists working on sexual violence, Michel Foucault is not one of the most obvious allies, to say the least. While I agree that Foucault’s treatment of sexual violence is troublesome and at times deeply problematic, I argue that Foucault’s critique of sexuality does not require betraying our convictions about the damages caused by sexual violence. In fact, in challenging normative discourses of sex and sexuality, Foucault actually offers a promising framework for theorizing sexual trauma survival. To draw out the possibilities of this framework, I suggest a rereading of Foucault’s telling of the Jouy-Adam case in History of Sexuality, Volume I. Where the focus of Foucault’s account is on the institutional treatment of the perpetrator, a farmhand named Charles-Joseph Jouy, my retelling aims to situate the child, Sophie Adam, within Foucault’s critique. In doing so, I suggest two ways in which survivors are affected by normative discourses of sexuality. First, the knotting together of sex and identity raises the stakes of naming acts of sexual violence by increasing the weight of identifying a perpetrator as a deviant and oneself as a victim or survivor. Second, I consider Foucault’s critique of our concept of sex and suggest that the view of sex as a teleological event with a clear starting and ending point limits our ability to conceptualize sexual violence and survival as sometimes exceeding the language of events or disrupting linear notions of time. I suggest that situating survivors within Foucault’s critical philosophy will allow us to more readily imagine the place of survivors within Foucault’s positive philosophy (particularly as taken up in queer theory) and will help us to open up alternative modes and narratives of survival.