Things People Keep To Themselves

Are Hard To Take Back

Are Mostly Timing

Bleed

Blush

Break Silence

Depend On Timing

Depend On Timing More Than Quality

Don't Add Up

Feel Intimate Too Soon

Feel Like A Threshold

Feel Overexposed

Fit In A Pocket

Help You Sleep

Need A Signature

Need A Witness

Need An Audience

Need Witnesses

Open Slowly

Release

Require Trust

Reveal

Spill

Tremble On The Threshold

confession

cactus

dad joke

barbecue

chicken

perversion

perverse

appreciation

birthday

funeral

fetish

kinkiness

friend zone

accusation

defense mechanism

narcissism

self-loathing

is a disciplinary device, an injunction to render into language what is often culturally unspeakable: 'One confesses one's crimes, one's sins, one's thoughts and desires, one's illnesses and troubles... one goes about telling with the greatest precision, whatever is most difficult to tell.

For Foucault, confession is a disciplinary device, an injunction to render into language what is often culturally unspeakable: 'one confesses one's crimes, one's sins, one's thoughts and desires, one's illnesses and troubles... one goes about telling with the greatest precision, whatever is most difficult to tell.' The conventions of confession typically define the 'unspeakable' as sex. One feature of confessional discourse is its tendency to sexualize any transgression or aberration, to subsume any violation under the master category of sex. In Foucault's model, the deeds and desires of the flesh what Foucault also refers to as 'pleasures' constitute sin and require surveillance and punishment.'

is a token of sincerity and acknowledgment of oneself. Sincerity, frankness, and openness as the standards for judging a life.

for Rousseau it is a token of sincerity and acknowledgment of oneself. Rousseau offers sincerity, frankness, and openness as the standards forjudging a life, . . .

is a vital component of 'modern power' in which a specific technology of the body was forged.

For example, in The History of Sexuality, Foucault isolates the confession as an important ritual of power in which a specific technology of the body was forged. As this is genealogy, one is not going to find a simple unity of meaning or function nor a changeless significance. The confession, as Foucault demonstrates, did not have the same meaning in the thirteenth century, the venteenth century, or the nineteenth century as it does in the present. . . . . . .He is not trying to give us a traditional and then to pose the question: Given that history, what does confession mean to us' Rather, he is saying that confession is a vital component of modern power. . . ..transforming sex into discourse had been devised long before in an ascetic and monastic setting. The se . . . ..). Foucault is not giving us a history of the seventeenth century. He is not even claiming that this imperative was of the greatest import then. Instead he is isolating the central components of political technology today and tracing them back in time. Foucault writes the history of the confession in the seventeenth century for the purposes of writing 'a history of the present.' (Dreyfus and Rabinow 119).

is a vital component of 'modern power' or 'bio-power' which teaches that our liberation requires us to make confessions or tell the truth (to a priest or a psychoanalyst or someone in power), and that this truth-telling will somehow set us free.

An important component of bio-power. People are taught that their liberation requires them to'tell the truth,' to confess it to someone who is more powerful (a priest, a psychoanalyst), andthis truth telling will somehow set them free (Dreyfus and Rabinow, p. 141, History ofSexuality, 58-65).

is a vital component of modern power. . . ..Transforming sex into discourse had been devised long before in an ascetic and monastic setting.

For example, in The History of Sexuality, Foucault isolates the confession as an important itual of power in which a specific technology of the body was forged. As this is genealogy, one is not going to find a simple unity of meaning or function nor a changeless significance. The confession, as Foucault demonstrates, did not have the same meaning in the thirteenth century, the seventeenth century, or the nineteenth century as it does in the present. . . . . . .He is not trying to give us a traditional and then to pose the question: Given that history, what does confession mean to us' Rather, he is saying that confession is a vital component of modern power. . . ..transforming sex into discourse had been devised long before in an ascetic and monastic setting. The se . . . ..). Foucault is not giving us a history of the seventeenth century. He is not even claiming that this imperative was of the greatest import then. Instead he is isolating the central components of political technology today and tracing them back in time. Foucault writes the history of the confession in the seventeenth century for the purposes of writing 'a history of the present.' (Dreyfus and Rabinow 119).

is always an act of discipline and subjection, a discourse whose policing of sex guarantees domination, even if he is unclear about the makeup of this domination.

To Foucault, however, confession is always an act of discipline and subjection, a discourse whose policing of sex guarantees domination, even if he is unclear about the makeup of this domination.

is, as articulated knowledge of one's sexuality, a form of self-empowerment.

For Freud, confession, as articulated knowledge of one's sexuality, is a form of self-empowerment...

is easier to do when confessing crimes than confessing one's silly weaknesses. Our pride makes us more careful to conceal our weaknesses than our crimes.

Wrongs are often forgiven, but contempt never is. Our pride remembers it forever. It implies a discovery of weakness, which we are more careful to conceal than a crime. Many a man will confess his crimes to a friend... but I never knew a man that would tell his silly weaknesses to his most intimate one. Lord chesterfield

confession, n.All

confession