Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
The Body, Discourses and Media Institutions, The Panopticon (Foucault) -…
The Body, Discourses and Media Institutions
Medicalisation
-
With Industrial Revolution and rationalisation, dissection of the human body was more common, thus more information available about it
Power and Surveillance plays an important role in order to understand the dominance of medicalisation
Howerever, is it biological differences that make someone disabled ot is it social environments? stairs disable people in wheelchairs, not the paralysis
but individuals are made responsible for their bodies according to expert classifications of ‘normal’. Given that what is ‘normal’ has typically been defined in relation to the white, male, straight, able body, others have been disempowered by medicalization
Social Contexts
-
Sex and Gender Model
17th century: One sex model - women's bodies were considered as a less developed version of the male body - genitals folded inside them
-
-
work can sometimes struggle to rep- resent embodied complexity because of its constant drift toward the social level for explanations.
Experiencing bodies
we feel think see according to our embodied position in the world - embodiment is fundamentally social
tehcniques of using the body are learnt, not natural. eg. accent, way of walking etc. It depends on habits and tastes typical to their class
Good taste is defined by upper middle class and higher class, whereas bad taste is associated with the lower classes
-
Under western ideals, the mind was considered superior and a separate entity from the body
Both, medicalisation as well as social factors result in something being considered "normal", thus marginalising all the other types
Medicalisation categorises everything, out of which one is considered normal, rest abnormal
Consumerism
Bodies are made marketable for which to meet needs, goods and services are purchased
-
consider how embodiment is felt, not just via sight, sound, smell and touch, but via emotions.
Questions remain about whether society does ‘say no’ to bodies, or increasingly classifies them.
different embodied lives, not as ‘natural’ outcomes related to bio- logical ‘facts’, but as products of a social world which human beings have cre- ated. The advantages of recognizing the social shaping of bodies is that change can be both understood and enabled.
-