Foucault taught to Y12. I need some help please

[Thatsinteresting]

I have received an email from school that Y12 will be looking at Foucault's theories on Power. This in itself isn't a huge issue but the video they have been sent to watch does say that he also wrote about sex and sexuality. The teacher always signs off he/him and so I'm wondering if he is subtly trying to introduce queer theory. I know that Foucault was a child rapist who wanted to remove the age of consent but I'm wondering if I should say something to school and if so what?

Is it normal to get an email announcing the name of the writer they intend working on?

I would perhaps check out the summaries of his Power work then decide if it merited a call. Perhaps have a discussion with teen beforehand do they are primed.

On the point about Foucault being dodgy, there’s not many historical figures they study who aren’t so I don’t think that would give you a basis to complaint really.

Yes these things about Foucault are true. BUT he was absolutely on to something and a very important thinker re power. I would be delighted about my kids being taught about Foucault - he's crucial to understanding the world in which we live and although the grandfather of queer theory, its not really in the form we know it as, I don't think he would approve of how it's been imposed on us.

Y12. So 16/17 year-olds studying A-levels. Hardly impressionable adolescents.

Can you talk to your Y12 child about Foucault and his theories? I don't think I could get too worked up about this, as there are all sorts of religions and philosophies I disagree with that are interesting to study. Yes queer theory has been a foundation stone for all this gender madness, but it's important to talk about it openly and not shut the conversation down in my opinion.

I would keep an eye on what comes home in the lessons to be honest. Foucault can get weird

It seems so silly. He isn't that well-regarded a philosopher, and even to the extent that he has something worthwhile to say (which may well be zero), his style of writing (and the whole tradition in which he wrote) is so deliberately opaque, grandiose, incomprehensible to all but the initiated, that he actually teaches anti-philosophical values.
Philosophy needs to be about clarity and communication, otherwise it is itself a power game. Introducing him to children more or less tells them to shut up and agree because there will be no moderately accessible way for them to assess and reflect critically on what he wrote.

Tbh if they’re planning on studying pretty much any humanity or social science at university (and these days even things like nursing or medicine) they will come across Foucault. Yes, he engaged in problematic behaviour but his ideas are really a lynchpin for much postwar thinking in philosophy, as well as being quite far ranging-he wrote about mental illness and crime too, as well as power and sexuality. It’s a good thing that they’re being introduced to thinkers in this way and, tbh, I imagine it’ll be quite a gentle and superficial introduction at that.

his ideas are really a lynchpin for much postwar thinking in philosophy

Only in some traditions. As I understand it he is extremely marginal (at best) in the Anglo-american philosophical tradition.

Not sure I agree with this - it’s a highly impressionable age. Maybe differently to a 13 year old hearing about ideas for the first time. But with the dangerous overlay of “I’m 17 now, I know all about everything, not naive like I was a year ago”.

I would contact the school OP. Because I would want to know if and how this teacher plans to discuss power and sexuality. And while Foucault may be like 'other' historic figures, Foucault and sexuality is not something that I would think that the teacher can just approach casually. Particularly if further independent research is required by the students.

I mean, there are dodgy historic figures, but this one is actively discussing harming children and was actively involved in the direct harm of children and even significantly via the push to reduce the age of consent in France. I am not sure how any teacher can present this to a classroom of sixth formers.

He is certainly not a historic role model for consent and the power around sex, is he?

In the humanities and social sciences it's pretty much expected that you are aware of his ideas.

Year 12 is quite early to be looking at them - it's more normally at university.

@AlbertCamusflage Yes, I was about to reply pretty much that. I do firmly disagree with you, in that I find Foucault much easier to understand than pretty much any of the analytic English language postwar writers-but, then again, my background is solidly continental. The point is though that these young people don’t yet know what philosophical traditions (if any!) they will ascribe to, and I find Foucault a nice introduction to that way of thinking-plus it’s unlikely they’d interact with much of the original text anyway.

"plus it’s unlikely they’d interact with much of the original text anyway."

That depends on the student. My teen did a great deal of independent research for their subjects reading above and beyond the recommendations so that they felt they had a better grasp of the topic at hand. Usually going to original source material.

Foucault was a creepy paedophile and, yes, remains the darling of the left. Does he count as historical, he only kicked the bucket in the mid eighties? "Problematic behaviour" 🙄 - he raped children.

But, yes, his ideas are really important and form the launch pad for lots of other works. He did write a book on sex and sexuality and I do think it is a red flag parade but he also wrote on subjects which are devoid of anything you would find troubling. All of them would come under the heading of theories on power.

I think starting with Foucault and tracing your way through to queer theory would be weighty work for a-levels though. They'll probably stick with the power/discourse/knowledge production and demonstrate it in comparison to linear/top-down theories of how power moves through society.

I was certainly still very impressionable in sixth form and I don't think I was particularly rare in that respect.

I would say that 16 and 17 year olds are very impressionable.

Studying Foucault is fine if it is done critically with opposite points of view/ theories. If done badly, it’s just indoctrination by a teacher cum “fan boy.”

@Helleofabore Surely a safe sixth form classroom is a gentler introduction to difficult ideas, especially if suitably scaffolded, rather than having Discipline and Punish chucked at them 18 months later and expected to get on with it? Sounds extreme, but that’s pretty much what happened to me, and is a fairly universal experience for philosophy/sociology undergraduates. Sixth form can help make that transition much less jarring.

I think year 12 is old enough to deal with his controversies. I also think a year 12 student armed with knowledge about his horrific views trying to legitimise child sex abuse would be a good strategy to challenge any Queer Theory nonsense themselves, rather than through you and the school channels. Challenging a he/him teacher in a philosophy setting about Foucault is a legitimate way to draw attention to how awful Queer Theory is (even if the intent is to discuss his other philosophies). Arm and educate your child to do it. I wouldn’t do it for my year 12 DD, but I know she has the ability to speak up. And if you can’t argue about philosophers and their philosophies in a philosophical setting, when can you?

I mean I wouldn’t call the school on behalf of my DD, I would fill her in on Foucault’s views and crimes and let her challenge her teacher about it. Then wait to hear the story of much he squirmed, hoping no one would bring it up🤣

Well, pretty much every classical Greek philosopher had sex with teenage boys, and the whole European culture is built upon the classical Greek philosophy.
I guess we just have to destroy European culture completely now as its foundation was laid down by paedophiles.

I think there are at least a couple of issues.

One is any of those teenagers could be a victim of sex abuse already. How will this be treated if it comes up? They ARE still teenagers trying to cope with everything that we throw at teenagers to deal with these days. Did these teenagers understand that Philosophy might mean that they have to be dealing with these particular issues?

Another is the specific teacher and whether that teacher is going to provide balance and neutrality or is going to try to lionise Foucault. Having a very clear discussion about it with the school will help the OP to understand just what is the extent of the context and how it will be dealt with.

'If Foucault were alive today, he'd be cancelled. Discuss' seems like a good starting-point essay to me.

To be fair, at least his crimes are unequivocal and clear - and so allows for open discussion.

My daughter would be mortified if I contacted a teacher regarding her a level curriculum, but we have had lots of discussions at home about what she's learning and different perspectives, and the A-level teaching is geared a critical thinking way too.

The problem does come up if you have a "fanboy" teacher espousing the virtues of individuals, and this age IS impressionable, but we've had 17 years to get our teens to understand not every adult is 100% correct about everything all the time, and that they need to engage their own brains and be challenged constructively - and they do need opportunities to do this.

He did a lot that was not on sex and sexuality.

The concept of total institutions, the changing nature of government in the nineteenth century and his work on mental illness and its categorisation are important.

I presume this is either in politics or sociology.

In history, plenty of nasty people are studied - most gcse history is Nazi germany and few people say that we shouldn't study nazi germany because hitler was a bad person.

Many academics are bad people. Learning about their ideas and how they influenced society is still important.