Cover not available
Part of
The Expression of Inequality in Interaction: Power, dominance, and status
Edited by Hanna Pishwa and Rainer Schulze
[Pragmatics & Beyond New Series 248] 2014
► pp. 239–264

Language, normativity and power

The discursive construction of objectophilia

ORCID logo | Goethe-University Frankfurt am Main
The present paper aims to shed light on how social actors orient to sexual normativity in their talk. It relates normativity to (Foucauldian) notions of discourse and power, arguing that local linguistic negotiations of sexuality are generally shaped by a competition between dominant and marginalized discourses. The empirical section focusses on how sexual normativity is linguistically constructed in conversations related to objectophilia, a form of sexual desire that is clearly non-normative. The data consists of telephone calls from the German radio phone-in show Domian. It is shown how speakers co-construct sexual normativity in general as well as more specific forms of it such as humano-normativity and heteronormativity. It can be seen that even the construction of non-normative desires is predominantly structured by normative sexuality discourses.
Published online: 12 June 2014
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.248.10mot
References (29)
References
Bourdieu, Pierre. 1991. Language and Symbolic Power. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Bowerman, Sean. 2006. “Norms and Correctness.” In Encyclopedia of Language & Linguistics. ( Second Edition ). Volume VIII, ed. by Edward K. Brown, 701–703. Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google Scholar
Bucholtz, Mary, and Kira Hall. 2004. “Theorizing Identity in Language and Sexuality Research.” Language in Society 33(4): 469–515. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bußmann, Hadumod, and Marlis Hellinger. 2003. “Engendering Female Visibility in German.” In Gender Across Languages: The Linguistic Representation of Women and Men. Volume III, ed. by Marlis Hellinger, and Hadumod Bußmann, 141–174. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Butler, Judith. 2004. Undoing Gender. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Cameron, Deborah, and Don Kulick. 2003. Language and Sexuality. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2005. “Identity Crisis?” Language & Communication 25(2): 107–125. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Foucault, Michel. 1972 [1969]. The Archaeology of Knowledge. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
. 1978 [1976]. The History of Sexuality. Volume 1. An Introduction. New York: Penguin.Google Scholar
Hall, Kira. 2013. “‘It’s a Hijra!’ Queer Linguistics Revisited.” Discourse & Society24(5): 634–642. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hall, Jeffrey, and Betty LaFrance. 2012. “‘That’s Gay’: Sexual Prejudice, Gender Identity, Norms, and Homophobic Communication.” Communication Quarterly60(1): 35–58. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jeffries, Lesley. 2007. Textual Construction of the Female Body: A Critical Discourse Approach. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Koller, Veronika. 2013. “Constructing (Non-) Normative Identities in Written Lesbian Discourse: A Diachronic Study.” Discourse & Society24(5): 572–589. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kulick, Don. 2005. “The Importance of What Gets Left Out.” Discourse Studies7(4/5): 615–624. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Leap, William L. 2013. “Queering Language and Normativity.” Discourse & Society24(5): 643–648. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Love, Nigel. 1994. “Correctness and Norms.” In The Encyclopedia of Language and Linguistics, ed. by R.E. Asher, 773–780. Oxford: Pergamon.Google Scholar
Married to the Eiffel Tower. 2008. [URL] (2 January 2013).
Marsh, Amy. 2010. “Love Among the Objectum Sexuals.” Electronic Journal of Human Sexuality13(1): [URL] (5 November 2013).Google Scholar
Milani, Tommaso. 2013. “Are ‘Queers’ Really ‘Queer’? Language, Identity and Same-Sex Desire in a South African Online Community.” Discourse & Society24(5): 615–633. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mills, Sara. 2003. Michel Foucault. London: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Motschenbacher, Heiko. 2009. “Speaking the Gendered Body: The Performative Construction of Commercial Femininities and Masculinities via Body-Part Vocabulary.” Language in Society38(1): 1–22. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2010. Language, Gender and Sexual Identity: Poststructuralist Perspectives. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2011. “Taking Queer Linguistics Further: Sociolinguistics and Critical Heteronormativity Research.” International Journal of the Sociology of Language212: 149–179.Google Scholar
. 2014. “Focusing on Normativity in Language and Sexuality Studies: Insights from Conversations on Objectophilia.” Critical Discourse Studies11(1): 49–70. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Motschenbacher, Heiko, and Martin Stegu. 2013. “Queer Linguistic Approaches to Discourse.” Discourse & Society24(5): 519–535. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Objectum Sexuality Internationale. 2011. [URL] (2 January 2013).
Taylor, Talbot J. 1997. Theorizing Language: Analysis, Normativity, Rhetoric, History. Amsterdam: Pergamon.Google Scholar
Thadeusz, Frank. 2007. “Drang zum Ding.” Der Spiegel 19/2007: 160.Google Scholar
Wilson, Andrew. 2012. “Using Corpora in Depth Psychology: A Trigram-Based Analysis of a Corpus of Fetish Fantasies.” Corpora7(1): 69–90. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by (3)

Cited by three other publications

Gatzia, Dimitria Electra & Sarah Arnaud
2022. Loving Objects: Can Autism Explain Objectophilia?. Archives of Sexual Behavior 51:4 ► pp. 2117 ff. DOI logo
Coimbra-Gomes, Elvis & Heiko Motschenbacher
2019. Language, normativity, and sexual orientation obsessive-compulsive disorder (SO-OCD): A corpus-assisted discourse analysis. Language in Society 48:4 ► pp. 565 ff. DOI logo
Motschenbacher, Heiko
2018. Language and Sexual Normativity. In The Oxford Handbook of Language and Sexuality, DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 27 october 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.