Eternal Femininity and the Greatness of Biopower
"We must not think that by saying 'yes' to sex, one says 'no' to power…"
Michel Foucault: Sex, Power, and Discipline, The History of Sexuality, Vol. 1: The Will to Knowledge
A dynastic union of militarism and femininity
The grandeur of the moment. Nothing disturbs the quiet rituality of two becoming one family. The groom, handsome in his officer’s uniform and bearing his insignia, stands tall. The bride, wrapped in a gauzy cloud of weightless wedding fabrics, is silent and sorrowful—almost like the icon-like face of the Madonna, who, with concealed grief and apprehension, presses the God-chosen child to her heart while gazing into the darkness of the future, discerning in it fleeting shadows of wars and suffering, popular upheavals and palace coups.
There is no child yet in the bride’s arms. The child is her near, inevitable future in the role of lawful wife and ideal mother. But in the bride’s eyes there is a sorrow—indelible and resigned—the kind that belongs to those who know their fate in advance. Her hands are encircled by the steel bracelets of bondage—the shackles of marriage—sealed with the solemn inevitability of ceremony, framed by the state emblem, within the sterile white walls of an institution that records the civil status of men and women in a given society.
The bride’s friends are nowhere to be seen; they belong to the past. Power—veiled and manacled—has torn her forever from the whirl of parties, dreams, and fleeting romances of youth, commanding her to grow up quickly and turn into a mother-woman, as dignified and unbending as the power vertical itself. The groom’s friends are absent as well. They will appear later, trading their dress uniforms for combat fatigues—the standard attire for military operations initiated by biopower in the name of defending the elderly and children, women and the Motherland, against an enemy no one has ever seen, but whose existence is beyond doubt.
“In most marriages, one party seeks power, the other—submission. But such balance is illusory: there is no freedom in it”¹. Jungian motifs are refashioned by biopolitics into a literal reading. The absence of freedom within marriage becomes a political idea. The will-less union of two is expected to find the solution to personal problems in the state, which will, of course, resolve their difficulties and point the way to prosperity: him—it will conscript; her—it will oblige to reproduce, covering both with the illusion of free will between two consenting adults bound by family. “Power is all the more successful the better it conceals its own mechanisms”³.
Biopolitics is the unseen witness at the wedding—of these two, of those two, of dozens, hundreds, thousands of couples, each as alike as two drops of water. The ideal dynastic union in the framework of biopolitics is the merging of femininity and militarized masculinity into a perfectly harmonized fit within the political line of the state’s design.
The blessings of family life, childbearing, and fulfilling one’s military duty are deftly combined by biopolitics in a single frame of the family photo album from an era of declining freedoms and equality. In the state of biopower, there always comes a time “to censor love and inspect debts”².
Sexuality is a biopolitical instrument of discipline
“All sexualities are the correlates of precise procedures of power”³—procedures that constantly monitor the sexual expressions of youth, carefully counting and dissecting to the atom the stories from first love to last. Biopower also fixes its gaze on families, dissecting their intimate interactions. For biopolitical regimes, sexuality and its expressions are tools—when skillfully employed—that can be used to construct an ideal society from the standpoint of digital and ideological eugenics, a society whose members are guaranteed to be informed and obedient from the very outset of their journey within the prescribed framework of correctness.
Biopolitical power does not flaunt itself. Under the guise of care, beneath the cover of sex education and the advancement of gender equality, the state penetrates the bedrooms and beds of its citizens. Under the guise of demographic programs and social reforms, society is fed—generously and with seconds—the notion that it must keep the state informed about marital status, the required number of children, and any extramarital liaisons, whose very presence frees the hands of authority to the point of complete license. The biography of a prospective politician or businessman, officer or official, must be pristine in the eyes of biopower. Any attempt to keep the personal truly personal is punished by the threat of premature career termination and subsequent demotion. And this narrative is absorbed by society almost reflexively, subconsciously. Power can choose our partners, sleep with us, bear and raise children with us.
From this comes the primitive yet strikingly effective fixation in society of the stigma of female femininity (woman as wife, mother, and keeper of the proverbial hearth) and male masculinity (man as provider, careerist, warrior, and domestic idol). The soldier, hardened by combat’s roughness, will always protect the fragile beauty of the woman who carries new life within her. A young woman with a bloodied face, forced to her knees before a row of military boots, is clearly not performing an act of desperate gratitude for rescue and protection. Dark phantoms arise—of imagined wartime violence committed by starving men against women. Yet in the statistical ledger of biopower, it matters little exactly how new citizens come into the world. Society can always be persuaded to interpret the phenomenon of violence as a matter of pragmatic necessity.
Knowledge of a society’s sexuality and the intimate interactions of its citizens is the optimal means of control for the biopolitical machine. Population numbers, the upbringing of generations within the ideology dictated by the ruling power, loyalty testing, social filtration—and, as a result, the division of society into classes, the imposition of gender identity from above, and the inclusion, exclusion, or ultimate erasure of unwanted life from the social system⁴. In effect, biopower assumes the role of arbiter in deciding who, with whom, when, and how to form a union.
It has been watching for a long time, delicately, subtly nudging people toward forming civil unions with those utterly devoted to the state and its “traditional values.” Citizens must reproduce—steadily, frequently, efficiently.
Exploitation of Femininity in Biopolitics
Biopolitics exploits men with equal success: some, driven by the urge to climb as high as possible on the career ladder, strike bargains with their conscience, integrating themselves into the dense schedule of multidimensional propaganda broadcast through mass media, business, politics, and diplomacy; others become, quite literally, soldiers of biopolitics, sustaining the military doctrine and forming a combat-ready state army. For the first, there are social events, fashionable wardrobes, publicity, and recognition; for the second, full equipment, the right to carry—and, of course, to use—weapons: the highest function of rigidly enforcing public order.
Yet without women, the organism of the biopolitical hierarchy is so incomplete as to be unfit for existence. For biopoliticians, women are air itself—a historical counterpoint to centuries-long plans and a natural source of reproducing a compliant population.
The exploitation of women’s rights and bodies is carried out by biopower gradually and covertly, under the guise of equal access to modernity. On paper, the female part of the population is granted participation in all the benefits of the contemporary world: technology, numerous forms of self-expression (from fashion to professional achievement), social life, and education in any chosen field.
In reality, through technology, power broadcasts the allure of seeking a financially secure or, at the very least, masculine (genetically viable) partner, fostering harmonious relationships whose derivatives will be the traditional home, family, and children. Technology is also essential for the feminine segment of society to recreate and artificially sustain beauty: with doses of popular bioactive supplements and filler injections, biopower infuses the female identity with the idea of necessary conformity to the canons of the time and fashion, denying the realities of natural aging. The pharmaceutical industry forms a solid alliance with biopower in maintaining control over women⁵.
Self-expression in a biopolitical reality becomes a cycle of repetition and mass reinforcement of the image of the eternally young, eternally successful, and eternally fertile woman—one who manages to realize her “self” in every sphere of life, paying particular attention to the concept of self-worth not only as a successful unit of career elevation but also as one who fully embodies the maternal archetype¹. This pseudo-grandeur of womanhood seems to be a trend unto itself, capable of setting trends for all the rest.
Woman is the natural womb of the state
The reproductive system of both men and women, by the tacit decision of biopoliticians, is arranged in the same way—designed for male gratification. The female system of life reproduction is nothing more than a temporary holding point for new lives before their release onto the biopolitical conveyor belt as plump, rosy-cheeked infants—the pride and glory of the titular nation.
Through the instruments of politics, the womb is transplanted and embedded into the body of the state organism, which produces ideologically perfect citizens in an unceasing cycle. Once past the thresholds of maturation, these citizens will create a wondrous and “naturally” structured society of male politicians and soldiers, and women as decorative figures and birthing vessels of the regime.
The model of the living, physiological womb of the state in the world of hybrid truths will serve as the prototype for the creation of the artificial womb. Technological polyclinical complexes will house rows of beautiful, almost miraculous, next-generation wombs, within which, under precisely calibrated and simulated environmental conditions, sturdy infants will grow. Technologies of the hybrid world will see their small bodies through to puberty. Their young heads will be chipped in the image and likeness of the political design. When the bright light of the first world they see blinds their innocent eyes, they will quickly blink it away and learn to live in full accordance with the factory settings of their creators.
In transplanting the womb into the body of the regime, biopolitics will resort to the maneuvers of necropolitics and, with the aid of the most advanced technologies, will determine who will live and how, when and for how much they will die⁷.
Through the implementation of conveyor-belt reproduction, the biopolitical regime will confidently and unhesitatingly divide the society under its control into classes according to financial and economic viability, professional classification, and legal origin—separating the “necessary” from the “dispensable.” At the core of this division will be someone’s exceptional life; beyond it, later revealed, will lie someone’s excluded, unnoticed, unwanted life.
Femininity is the ideal space for exploitation
The female body and femininity are ideal spaces for manipulation and for playing upon public consciousness. Biopower enacts its political fetishes through female corporeality. The womb is a source of control for power—its solid foundation—upon which entire eras of surveillance and open dictatorship will be built.
Images of women have been an inexhaustible source of inspiration for biopoliticians since the dawn of time: goddesses of fertility, goddesses of justice in the pre-Christian era; the image of the belle dame in the courtly tradition; the Immaculately Conceived Virgin in Christian religion; the Motherland figure at the core of totalitarian ideology; the image of the comrade-in-arms in wars “for the conscience of the nation”; the self-made woman, the successful mother, and the eternally young lover versed in the arts of biohacking. The use of female imagery is a constant in the ideological heritage of every era. The exaltation of femininity is a convergent manipulation of biopower in which, on the one hand—theoretical—woman is an invaluable gift, and on the other—practical—she is a renewable resource, treated by the system with utilitarian calculation.
“The state has invaded our bed. In this country and in all these countries. The state sought, found, and conquered”².
The bed is the regime’s last refuge. Cautiously infiltrating the zone of personal intimacy, seizing the sensual and the sacred, power alters the duet of two. It replaces the score of their sensual étude with the mechanistic part of a dictatorial narrative. Into the melody of the improvisation—the miracle of creating new life—the marching tempo of state demographic programs bursts shamelessly.
We are taken from ourselves: through our partners, through our children—born and yet unborn, those who have never seen the light. The delicate, intricately woven cambric of lives, with its lace of interlaced fates, rises and falls, only to be replaced by coarse, almost military-grade cloth, which crowds of believers in the regime will receive in equal lengths—standing in numbered lines for the “benefits” of the biostate’s social program to “improve the quality of life” for a population permanently encoded by biopower.
References
Jung, C. G. Visions: Notes of the Seminar Given in 1930–1934. Transcribed by Mary Foote. Zürich: Spring Publications, 1976.
Hybrid Collapse. Biopolitics [album]. Released March 7, 2025.
Foucault, Michel. The History of Sexuality, Vol. 1: The Will to Know. 1976.
Agamben, Giorgio. Homo Sacer: Sovereign Power and Bare Life. 2000 (orig. Italian Homo sacer, 1995; English transl. 1998).
Preciado, Paul B. Testo Junkie: Sex, Drugs, and Biopolitics in the Pharmacopornographic Era. 2013 (orig. Spanish Testo Junkie, 2008).
Rowling, J. K. Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban. 1999.
Mbembe, Achille. Necropolitics. 2019 (orig. essay Necropolitique, 2003).
14.08.2025
Designed for thinkers.