Click here to download

La maternità surrogata: una prospettiva critica dell’addio al corpo del post-umanesimo
Journal Title: SALUTE E SOCIETÀ 
Author/s:  Giorgio Porcelli 
Year:  2019 Issue: Language: Italian 
Pages:  22 Pg. 60-81 FullText PDF:  228 KB
DOI:  10.3280/SES2019-001005
(DOI is like a bar code for intellectual property: to have more infomation:  clicca qui   and here 


Human beings have their existence through the corporeal forms that beget them. Every modification of these forms implies a different definition of humanity. If its limits are written through the flesh which shapes men and women, both subtracting and adding other components transform their personal identity and landmarks which concern them in the eyes of the others. In a word, if the body is a symbol of society, as Mary Douglas suggested, all that is done on its form concerns the social bond. Thinking the body is another way of thinking about the world and the social bond. In the light of the reflections of the sociology of the body of David the Breton, this article seeks to analyze how the disgust of maternity and more in general of the body which is currently widespread in many currents of post-humanism, leads to the thought that soon or later children will born with no mother and father, assembled into a test tube, run by the machines even before being born, covered by a guarantee by their gametes donors. Maternal and gestational surrogacy as well as an augmented or refused body are therefore the expressions of that dismissal of the body that characterizes post-humanism and cyberculture. Then some extreme implications of the posthuman thought will be analyzed, in the light of Le Breton’s and Giddens’ recent reflections. On the one hand, Le Breton discusses the theories of the augmented body, in which the body’s limits are overcome through technological prosthesis and the support of the machine at all stages of human existence starting with ectogenesis which stands as the logical assumption of maternal surrogacy. On the other hand there is Giddens’ theory of Reflexive Modernity. According to Giddens, we live in a time when the body and its natural dynamics are subtracted to the human beings and subjected to the domain of genetics and medicine and to the power of experts. It is then fundamental to cope with these issues within a public debate about their ethical and social consequences.
Keywords: Sociology; body; posthuman; cyberculture; gestational; maternal surrogacy.

  1. Bakhtin M. (1970). L’Oeuvre de François Rabelais et la Culture Populaire au Moyen Age et sous la Renaissance. Paris: Gallimard.
  2. Adelman M., Ruggi L.O. (2012). Contemporary sociology and the body. Sociopedia.isa: 1-13., 10.1177/20568460128DOI: 10.1177/20568460128
  3. Adelman M., Ruggi L.O. (2016), The Sociology of the Body. Current Sociology, 64(6): 907-30., 10.1177/0011392115596561DOI: 10.1177/0011392115596561
  4. Arendt H. (1998). The Human Condition. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
  5. Atkinson P. (2010). Responses to Carol Thomas’s paper on narrative methods: The contested terrain of narrative analysis – an appreciative response. Sociology of Health and Illness, 32(4): 661-62.
  6. Aydin C. (2017). The posthuman as hollow idol: A Nitzschean critique of human enhancement. The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy, 42: 304-27.
  7. Le Breton D. (2013). L’Adieu au Corps. Paris: Métailié.
  8. Le Breton D. (2015). Du silence. Paris: Métaillié.
  9. Bochner A.P. (2010). Responses to Carol Thomas’s paper on narrative methods: Resisting the Mystification of narrative inquiry: Unmasking the real conflict between story analysts and storytellers. Sociology of Health and Illness 32(4): 662-65.
  10. Bordo S. (1987). The Flight to Objectivity: Essays on Cartesianism and Culture. Albany: State University of New York Press.
  11. Le Breton D., Marcelli D., Ollivier B. (2012). Marcher pour s’en sortir. Un travail social créatif pour les jeunes en grande difficulté. Toulouse: Érès.
  12. Bostrom N. (2010). Letter from Utopia (Version 1.9). Studies in Ethics, Law, and Technology, 2: 1-7.
  13. Martin E. (1996). The egg and the sperm: How science has constructed a romance based on stereotypical male-female roles. In: Keller E.F., Longino H.E., a cura di, Feminism and Science. New York: Oxford University Press.
  14. Martin E. (2001). The Woman in the Body: a Cultural Analysis of Reproduction. Boston: Beacon Press.
  15. Martin L.J. (2010). Anticipating infertility: Egg freezing, genetic preservation, and risk. Gender and Society, 24(4): 526-45., 10.1177/089124321037717DOI: 10.1177/089124321037717
  16. Bostrom N. (2014). Superintelligence: Paths, Dangers, Strategies. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  17. Bourdieu P. (1982). Ce que Parler Veut Dire. L’Economie des Echanges Linguistiques. Paris: Fayard.
  18. O’Reilly J., Cahn S. (2007). Women and Sports in the United States: A Documentary Reader. Boston: Northeastern University Press.
  19. Parsons T. (1951). The Social System. Glencoe, IL: The Free Press.
  20. Bourdieu P. (1991). Language and Symbolic Power. New Haven, CT. Harvard University Press.
  21. Pitts V.I. (2003). In the Flesh: the Cultural Politics of Body Modification. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
  22. Braun J., Langman I. (2011). Carnivalization and Alienation. New York: Routledge.
  23. Connell R. (2007). Suther Theory. The Global Dynamics of Knowledge in the Social Sciences. Sidney: Allen and Unwin.
  24. Porcelli G. (2005). Identità in frammenti. Prospettive globali di sociologia della conoscenza. Milano: FrancoAngeli.
  25. Porcelli G. (2006). Comunicare il dolore con il corpo: Identità e corporeità. Salute e Società, 3: 38-50., 10.1400/68166DOI: 10.1400/68166
  26. Copeman J. (2009). Introduction: Blood donation, bioeconomy, culture. Body and Society, 15(2): 1-28., 10.1177/1357034X0910343DOI: 10.1177/1357034X0910343
  27. Porter A. (2017). Bioethics and Transhumanism. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy, 42: 237-60.
  28. Preciado B. (2008). Testo Yonqui. Madrid: Espasa.
  29. De Lauretis T. (1987). Technologies of Gender: Essays on Theory, Film and Fiction. Bloomington and Indianapolis: Indiana University Press.
  30. Robert E.F.S., Scheper-Hughes N. (2011). Introduction: Medical migrations. Body and Society 17(2-3): 1-30., 10.1177/1357034X1140092DOI: 10.1177/1357034X1140092
  31. Said E. (1978). Orientalism. New York: Viking.
  32. Scheper-Hughes N. (1993). Death without Weeping: The Violence of Everyday Life in Brazil. Berkeley: University of California Press.
  33. Doyle J., Roen k. (2008). Introduction to surgery and embodiment: Carving out subjects. Body and Society, 4(1): 1-7., 10.1177/1357034X0708752DOI: 10.1177/1357034X0708752
  34. Tamanini M. (2009). Reproduçao Assistida e Gènero: o Olhar das Cièncias Humanas. Florianopolis: Editora da UFSC.
  35. Dumont L. (1986). Essays on Individualism. Modern Ideology in Anthropological Perspective. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
  36. Terenzi P. (2006). Identità e dolore nella sociologia del corpo di David Le Breton. Salute e Società, 3: 82-98., 10.1400/6817DOI: 10.1400/6817
  37. Ehrenreich B., English D. (1976). Witches, Midwives and Nurses: A History of Women Healers, Writers and Readers. New York: The Feminist Press.
  38. Elias N. (1991). The Society of Individuals. Oxford: Blackwell.
  39. TranshumanistFAQ(2016)TranshumanistFAQ(online). -- Available: http://humanityplus.org/%20philosophy/transhumanist-faq/
  40. Frank A.W. (2010). Response to Carol Thomas’s paper on narrative methods: In defence of narrative exceptionalism. Sociology of Health and Illness, 32(4): 665-67.
  41. Turner B. (2008). The Body and Society. London: Sage.
  42. Gavarini L. (1990). Experts et legislateurs de la normalité de l’ètre humain: vers un eugénisme discret. In: Testart J., a cura di, La magasin des enfants. Paris: Folio.
  43. Giddens A. (1990). The Consequences of Modernity. Cambridge: Polity Press.
  44. Giddens A. (1991). Modernity and Self-Identity: Self and Society in the Late Modern Age. Cambridge: Polity Press.
  45. Wacquant I. (2004). Body and Soul: Ethnographic Notebooks of an Apprentice-Boxer. New York: Oxford University Press.
  46. Giddens A. (1992). The Transformation of Intimacy: Sexuality, Love and Eroticism in Modern Societies. Cambridge: Polity Press.
  47. Wilson R.R. (1995). Cyber(body) parts: Prosthetic consciousness. Body and Society, 1: 238-59., 10.1177/1357034X9500100301DOI: 10.1177/1357034X9500100301
  48. Haraway D. (1991). A cyborg manifesto: Science, technology and socialist-feminism in the late twentieth century. Simiams, Cyborgs and Women: The Reinvention of Nature. New York: Routledge.
  49. Hughes J. (2015). Transhumanist position on human germline genetic modification. Institute for Ethics and Emerging Technologies (online). Available: http://ieet.org/index.php/IEET/more/hughes20150320
  50. Kimmel M. (2008). Guyland: The Perilous World Where Boys Become Men. New York: Harper Collins.
  51. Langman I. (2008). Punk, porn and resistance: Carnivalization and the body in popular culture. Current Sociology, 56(4): 657-77., 10.1177/0011392108090947DOI: 10.1177/0011392108090947
  52. Le Breton D. (1990). Anthropologie du Corps et Modernité. Paris: Puf.
  53. Le Breton D. (2006). La Saveur du monde.Une anthropologie des sens. Paris: Métailié.
  54. Le Breton D. (2012). Marcher. Éloge des chemins et de la lenteur. Paris: Métailié.

Giorgio Porcelli, in "SALUTE E SOCIETÀ" 1/2019, pp. 60-81, DOI:10.3280/SES2019-001005

   

FrancoAngeli is a member of Publishers International Linking Association a not for profit orgasnization wich runs the CrossRef service, enabing links to and from online scholarly content