Morality is not an institution but rather institutionalized

To preface my analysis of Foucault’s theory on modern behavior regulation and morality, I would like to establish my own clarifying assumptions of his theory in order to adequately and accurately critique it. The "institutionalized" morality and threats in question here are a cycle in society in which equal parts reinforce one another to regulate behavior rather than that of a lone institution in some cases. In the case of sixth street, a prison is nothing without the police, a warrant nothing without the prison. My critique of Foucault's theory is that moral standards are in fact reinforced in a way that is not physical in the modern age, but to attribute that enforcement to one structure alone would be naive and invalidate the analysis of institutionalized prejudice in each of these communities. I claim that while the regulation in New Hope rejects Foucault’s philosophy most, his theory supports those moralities present to the French Muslim schoolgirls. Furthermore, I modify and dispute the assumption that the process of behavior regulation through moral policing is equal and can be compared as such in the three communities of New Hope, Sixth Street, and French Muslim Schoolgirls and I modify the implication that the sole form of behavior regulation in the pre-modern era was threat of physical harm and not a premature version of the moral policing we see today, and that those threats are not useful and present in their own right.

The institutionalized prejudice in this community is against homosexuality but the institutionalized mindset is within that of a closed society that the men have forced upon themselves as a result of the moral policing present in Christianity of that time. Unlike the men and women experiencing moral conflict in sixth street in which there exists a clear “us” and “them,” residents of New Hope contribute to their own behavior regulation. Their admittance into the program as well as the program itself both act as cogs in the wheel that is moral regulation and it is individual in the way that men play a role in their own dictation. The institution of New Hope itself would not solely police behavior if the factor of men’s individual value systems were taken out of the equation, nor would those values be enough to change the men’s behavior. This is proven by multiple accounts of men believing in God’s word over their own desires not being enough to keep them from following their urges and, in turn, lead the faithful life they covet. For example, “Paul felt that New Hope was his last hope, and he refused to quit. ‘I have nowhere else to go. This is it. If I don’t survive here, I’ll be dead in a year’” (Erzen, Chapter 3, “A Refuge from the World,” page 87). Additionally, New Hope raises an interesting question on the morality of moral policing since in this particular community, it is deemed a good thing for these men to have their behavior regulated, as they choose this lifestyle, but in the other two communities I mention, policing is disliked. This is from the perspective of religious ex-gay supporters and participants. One ex-gay man stated, “‘There was no little niche where I belonged.’ Describing his feeling after his arrival five years prior, Drew told me, ‘I belonged’” (Erzen, Chapter 3, “A Refuge from the World,” page 88). The cycle here - if referring to my modification of Foucault’s theory - is composed of behavior, society, religion, mindset, program, and men. To break this down, the behavior these men experience is homosexual action which renders the moral regulation of religion and society, or Christianity and anti-gay America, useful. It reinforces these two things and thus reinforces the institutionalized societal rights and wrongs, which, in turn, drives the mindset that God is more important than desire, leading men to find the program, which reinforces all aspects prior by utilizing a panoptical theory of regulation within by residents. Then it all starts over again once the men leave the program and take part in the behavior once more or find a new “higher power” to draw moral guidance from. For example, Carl disagreed with the contention “that by choosing to live as a gay man, he could no longer have a relationship with God, and the face that New Hope often dissociates itself from men who have left the program” (Erzen, Chapter 2, “A Pro-Gay Theology”). This is why, particularly in this community, I find that there exist multiple cyclical systems of institutionalized thinking that are more accurate in describing the moral pressures that regulate subject’s behavior than an attribution to just the one center. Individual men are influenced by New Hope, but also by the men around them and by God, and this variety of moral sources makes it possible for behavior regulation to come from wherever an individual chooses. This also emphasizes the power of lone institutions and somewhat agrees with Foucault’s theory to the degree that the religious institution, in this case, as depicted in this ethnography, is at the root of moral policing.

The men of Sixth street and their experience with morality and the law came to mind first when pondering Foucault’s theory, perhaps because it is in this community that the cycle I believe regulates behavior is most explicit. Interestingly, it not only regulates the behavior of the Sixth Street men and women, but also the police force. The cyclical institution present here is fortified through behavior, police, threat, women, courts, prison, repeat. I would argue that behavior, police, and threat play a larger role in moral regulation than the institution of a prison does. “The legal issues that Chuck and his friends on 6th street struggled with seemed immense to me.... Between the ages of twenty-two and twenty-seven, Mike spent about three and a half years in jail or prison” (Goffman, Chapter 1, section “Anthony”). Police themselves reinforce the reinforcement that is women; The women reinforce the validity and power of threats in the form of warrants. “The reliance on intimates as informants is not the dirty dealing of a few rogue cops or the purview of a few specialized officers,” which is why it is an accepted and explicit form of behavior regulation at a surface level (Goffman, Chapter 3, section “When the Police Knock your Door in”). While at first glance it may be perceived that police use tactics of threat and persuasion through the immersion into criminal’s peer groups to turn black men into lawful citizens, deeper down there is a mutually beneficial relationship between the law and the unlawful. The criminality of the United States reinforces moral behavior practices by the police and the law, in turn, reinforces the strong “outlaw” bonding practices that exists in communities like Sixth Street. This is why the behavior regulation and moral pressures in communities like sixth street remains cyclical and it is so rare for low income black Americans to “make it out” of poverty.

The Muslim schoolgirls of France depicted in the film Young, Muslim, and French are most explicitly influenced by conformity and pressures by “moral leaders,” in support of Foucault’s philosophy. Due to the system of moral policing present in this documentary, which relies on public schools and principles to enforce a national law, I argue an agreement to Foucault’s theory that the school acts as an institution of moral policing, but only in the case of Muslim schoolgirls. I presume a difference in moral regulation of Muslim men or those belonging to other religions that does not rely on the school as institution. In all of France, there is a fear and discomfort surrounding the Muslim population. Conformity - or the pressures to conform - to the moral standards of powerful people is made clear in this film. The moral standards present here are of secularism and go deep into the heart of the majority values of French society. The narrator stated, “It’s the French, whether it’s the state or the school who say that it’s the minorities who should bend to the majority, not the reverse” (Young, Muslim, and French). This concept of conformity is ingrained in French society, a topic the narrator mentions in stating, “Manal and girls like her are challenging a pillar of the french republic, a separation of church and state dating back to the French revolution... In 1905 the principle of secularism was codified into law” (Young, Muslim, and French). While I believe this case is supported by Foucault’s theory on conformity, I also believe that the pre-modern system of threat of physical violence has not entirely been eradicated. The narrator mentions the beheading of rulers during the French Revolution leading to a republic “governed not by god but by the laws of the people,” (Young, Muslim, and French) which exemplifies the power of the moral majority, but, in a way, this concept of “overthrowing” is present in every hate crime or attack that French Muslims are subject to. This provides evidence for my theory that pre-modern physical policing tactics were not simply replaced with moral pressures, but instead were integrated into a more impactful and persuasive large scale moral regulation system.

While Foucault’s philosophy that behavior in the modern age is regulated by moral pressures by a leading majority in institutions rather than the pre-modern system of physical threats holds true in some aspects for certain societies, like those of the Muslim schoolgirls in France shown in Young, Muslim, and French, I modify it to the claim that the institution is not the sole dictator of moral right. Furthermore, the men of New Hope, as depicted in Straight To Jesus by Tanya Erzen, and those present in On the Run by Alice Goffman support my theory that a cyclical and mutually beneficial form of moral policing is more accurate in describing behavior regulation in broader societies. Behavioral pressure takes on many forms in a number of communities depending on which will foster a greater beneficially moral outcome, as present in New Hope, Sixth Street, and for Muslim Schoolgirls.