Probably the only time you'll see Foucalt and David Suzuki together in writing.

Foucault’s theory of the institutionalization of sex lends itself to the thought that the institutions control the taboos of sex as well. One such case of the medical community taking advantage of the paranoia of the judiciary (in terms of sex) was detailed in Foucault’s The History of Sexuality (on pages 31-32 (49-50 of the numbered pages)). In it, Foucault tells the story of a village man-child who would receive sexual favors from the young girls in the village, as he had seen countless other village urchins do before him. After being pointed out to the authorities by the girls’ parents he was whisked away to a medical asylum where he was studied (in a very draconic way) in order to determine what motivated such a man. They even took measurements of facial structures and brainpans as if they would yield the secrets as to why he resorted to such hedonism (“Of course. His low-hanging brow, and pineapple shaped head clearly make this miscreant stand out as a defiler, and a deviant!”).

This act of locking a man up in a hospital for the rest of his life only proliferated the discourses on sexuality, after all the doctors who studied the poor man published their findings. This is in line with Foucault’s claims of institutions taking control of sexuality. By publishing these superstitious and biased findings they helped mold sexuality into how they think the common person should see it: as a danger that must be controlled within oneself, lest you become a slave to your own compulsions. Without having read any of the findings I can only assume what they might have stirred up in the mainstream western world: a paranoia of sexual predators lurking within ones own village; a further proliferation of the thought of sex, as disturbing, and rigid; the possibilities are almost endless.

David Suzuki once wrote an essay on how our society’s perception of what is ‘dirty’ and how we inform our children of such was preventing our society’s enjoyment of nature. The common vocal concern of parents in regards to children is an aversion to the child playing with dirt, or soil, when in reality the soil is relatively clean, and harmless. This thought gets ingrained in the child’s head that all of nature is hazardous, or filthy, and must be avoided thus creating an overly sterile society. I imagine the same thing happened/is happening with sexuality through these various institutions, and their disdain for us ‘playing in the dirt’.