Weak (or flaccid) theory and the geographies of sexuopharmaceuticals

A weak theory of economy does not presume relationships between distinct sites of the diverse economy are structured in predictable ways, but observes the ways they are always differently produced according to specific geographies, histories, and ethical practices. This kind of theory does not shy away from the exercise of diverse forms of power (including co-optation, seduction, capture, subordination, cooperation, parasitism, symbiosis, conflict, coexistence, complementarity) that might influence different economic practices. Instead it encourages us to explore their complex spatialities and temporalities (Gibson-Graham, 2006, pp. 71–72).

Weak theory seeks to destabilize grand meta-narratives that claim purchase on the 'truth' of how the world works. Instead, this form of theorizing attends to the mundane intersections of economy and politics that occur on a daily basis through the material interactions of individuals and communities across locales without making claims to be able to generalize. It operates through the logic of alterity, finding ways of speaking about economy and politics that deny the totality of capitalism(s).

While it might appear solipsistic, weak theory transgresses the normativities of hard theory, which claims to be 'all knowing'. I thus offer flaccid theory here as a form of weak theory: it is a way to read the complicated geographies of sex and drug use against the grain of the medicalized (and capitalocentric) logics of hardness and an erectile imperative brought on by sexuopharmaceuticals, their distributions and diffusions, uses, and relationship to sex, sexuality, and sexual health.

This theory is flaccid also because it does not presume to 'know' per se, nor does it assume that an erection is an essential state of being male. It operates against the pathologization of erectile flaccidity as a dysfunction and challenges the notion that sex needs to be penetrative, culminating in male ejaculation.4 As a weak theory it validates the flaccid, suggesting that we need not be hard to be active sexual (or social scientific) beings: there are multiple ways (for men) to practice sex that need not include an erection. It also cuts through the binary logics of much social scientific discourse, which tends to cleave apart theory and practice, the theoretical and the empirical (Berg, 1994). Borrowing from Berg (1994, p. 256) flaccid theory suggests that "'empirical investigations' are always already theoretical, just as 'theory' is always touched by our empirical experiences."

Flaccid theory, therefore, does not shy away from theoretically discussing the materiality and intimacy of the sexual body—the brain, the hard and soft penis, the clitoris, nipples, anus, vagina, mouth, breasts, and skin—that partially constitute the performative nature of our sexualized identities and subjectivities. Moreover, '[a]ttention to the social organization which surrounds [bodily functions such as] urination and bleeding [and the other fluids that seep out, across, and through] … may help us to understand how bodies which do this (in)correctly are categorized and managed by a medicalized society' (Parr, 2002, p. 247). Reciprocally, flaccid theory suggests that those (in)correct practices may be socially corrected in certain spaces as individuals and communities perform identities through the use of sexuopharmaceuticals in ways that deny and challenge the heterosexualized power dynamics that may underpin their production. This is an intentionally queer project because it challenges the presumptive heteronormativities associated with the development of sexuopharmaceuticals and dysfunction discourses that act as 'all-encompassing markers of heterosexual competence, now largely detached from reproductive imperatives, but refashioned as integral to responsible and successful self-management' (Katz and Marshall, 2004, p. 53). As a queer project, flaccid theory challenges the dominant narratives of sexuality present in everyday geographic practice, which tend to privilege the 'hard', the 'masculine', and the 'straight.' Moreover, it suggests that "the queer 'way of life' … [which] encompass[es] subcultural practices, alternative modes of alliance, forms of transgender embodiment, and … forms of representation dedicated to capturing these willfully eccentric modes of being" (Halberstam, 2005, p. 1) should be foregrounded in any critical analysis of subjectivity and identity, sex and sexuality, and/or drug use and sexual health. We do not want to normatively assume that Viagra and other sexuopharmaceuticals can be practiced in only one (straight) way and in one particular set of spaces.