本篇論文旨在探究個人化(individualization)運作於台灣地區男同性戀溫泉活動所產生的雙重效應，並依此突顯曖昧、晦密的男同性戀溫泉活動所隱涵足以質問「異性戀常態機制」管束(heteronormative regulation)的能動性。
在個人化過程中，男同性戀，如同其他個人，在國家與市場的管束之下，已培育成為自我關照(self-concerned)的現代公民，並且受到鼓勵，積極透過消費活動來滿足個人慾望。此等自我關照的慾望追求，將個人建構成順從、有用的主體(docile and useful subjects)，以便符合「異性戀常態機制」最大利益。一九七九年台北市議會廢除北投侍應生營業執照的決議，昭示了「非常態性」(non-normative sexuality)的去除已是重新建構溫泉成為健康、自然、去性化(de-sexualized)的休閒模範/商品的基本原則。然而，去性化管理卻無法全然掌控溫泉空間中的男同性戀情/慾/社群活動(sex/erotic/communal acts)。在個人化的同一過程中，男同性戀一方面被塑造成為偃服於「異性戀常態」親密意識型態(ideology of intimacy)的順民，然而在另一方面，他們也被啟發，於溫泉空間中積極了解、追求、實現他們的需求。
由於男同性戀巧妙運用溫泉傳統及空間元素，諸如男女分池、裸裎共浴、渾沌池水、狹小空間、隱密角落以及幽黯深夜，同性戀情/慾/社群需求得以在曖昧的眼神流轉與晦密的身體碰觸下偷渡、實踐。在異性戀機制的監管下，男同性戀於溫泉空間習得並實行迴避規訓的非口語式(non-verbal)性邀約與性冒險。此外，在性追逐的過程中，男同性戀也發展出一套足以回應「異性戀常態機制」要求的親密意識型態的嶄新身體空間概念(neo-body-space concept)。男同性戀回應「異性戀常態機制」管束的策略也許看似低調、順從，然而在曖昧、晦密的謹慎活動中，具實質效應的能動性於焉產生，男同性戀也因此得以拓展其活動領域、跨越「公共」與「私密」疆界、創造/保存男同性戀溫泉文化，最終確認其在「異性戀常態機制」紛圍中的獨特性(distinct sexuality)。
本論文將以四種研究方法，分梳「異性戀常態機制」於溫泉空間對男同性戀所執行的權力運作，以及男同性戀在此權力管束下所回應的個人化情/慾實踐：一、進行個人深度訪談，呈現男同性戀實現身體與心理渴求的操作方式，以及面對「異性戀常態機制」監管的對應策略；二、現地觀察，以便了解空間與男同性戀活動之間的互動與衝突關係；三、透過相關報導與文獻資料，反映異性戀「常態」社會對溫泉空間中(同性戀)情/慾活動(或同性戀族群本身)的監管技術；四、藉由諸多權力論述(power discourses)，剖析同性戀情/慾政治及其展演的個人化特質與權力的糾葛關係。
本論文同意男同性戀溫泉活動受到國家與市場機制的管束與掌控的說法，然而男同性戀在積極追求受打壓、限制的情/慾展演中所呈現的能動性與個人化特質—自主性、自省性、個人性，更是本論文戮力呈現的焦點。

In this thesis I aim to explore the double effects of individualization exerting on homosexuals at hot springs in Taiwan, and thereby to unveil the counter agency of the ambiguous and secret homosexual performance against the heteronormative regulation.
In the process of individualization, homosexuals, like other individuals, are cultivated to become self-concerned citizens, and are encouraged to fulfill their desires through consumption. Such a self-concerned pursuit is regulated by the state and the market in order to construct individuals to be docile and useful subjects for the heteronormative institutions’ benefits. The termination of sex workers’ official license at Peitou in 1979 designates that the eradication of “non-normative” sexuality out of hot spring industry has become the heteronormative institutions’ principle of reconstructing hot spring as a healthful, natural, and de-sexualized leisure model/commodity. Nevertheless, the implementation of de-sexualization fails to eliminate homosexual performance at hot springs. In the same process of individualization, homosexuals are indeed on the one hand cultivated as compliant subjects to conform to the heteronormative ideology of intimacy, whereas on the other hand, they are individualized, like other consumers, to know their own need, pursue their own need, and fulfill their own need actively at hot springs.
With the cover of hot spring customs and spatial elements, such as opposite sexes bathing separately, same-sex bathing naked together, opaque hot spring water, small pools, secluded corners and the darkness of the night, homosexuals fulfill their sex/erotic/communal longing through the prudent practice of ambiguous eye contact and secret body touch. In hot spring space, homosexuals learn and practice skills of non-verbal sexual adventure under the surveillance of heteronormative institutions, and develop a neo-body-space concept to counter the heteronormative ideology of intimacy. Homosexuals’ strategies of dealing with the heteronormative regulation may be rather low-toned and compliant, whereas in practicing ambiguous and secret homosexual acts, the counter agency is generated for them to expand homosexual territories, to cross the boundary of “public” and “private,” to create/preserve homosexual hot spring culture and thus to affirm their distinct sexuality in the heteronormative milieu.
The interacting and conflicting matrix of the powers of the state and the market, hot spring, homosexuals and their sex/erotic/communal acts will be explored in four ways. First, I conduct interview with homosexuals who have hot spring experience in order to bring into light the strategies taken by homosexuals in fulfilling their physical as well as mental needs and the tactics utilized by them to deal with the heteronormative surveillance. Secondly, I visit hot spring sites famous for homosexual congregation; I examine them as my case studies so as to closely observe how the location, the degree of openness and other spatial arrangement affect homosexual sex/erotic/communal acts, and how homosexual patrons deal with the heteronormative way of arranging a public locale. Thirdly, I take news reports and documents as texts of studying and investigating the technologies of surveillance and regulation employed by heteronormative institutions. Above all, I intend to employ the theories of power discourses to examine the homosexual performance in hot spring space so as to probe into the relationship between the power and the subject in the exertion of individualization.
This thesis assures the manipulation of the power of the state and that of the market in regulating homosexual acts in hot spring space, whereas it furthermore intends to recognize the homosexuals’ agency of questing restricted sex/erotic/communal longing with their individualized character—autonomy, self-reflexivity and individuality.

Table of Contents
Chapter One Introduction: Utilizing Hot Spring as Homosexual Arena1
1.1 Homosexual performance vs. sex-negative policy of hot spring1
1.2 Activating homosexual performance: hot spring customs and individualization5
1.3 Research concerns and methods9
Chapter Two The Individualization of Homosexual Performance at Hot Springs14
2.1 Marketing hot spring as a leisure product of health and nature14
2.2 Consuming pluralistic pleasures of hot spring15
2.2.1 Therapeutic effects of body, mind and soul15
2.2.2 Homosexual sex/erotic/communal need17
2.2.2.1 Performing homosexual sex/erotic acts19
2.2 2.1.1 Eye contact20
2.2 2.1.2 Body touch23
2.2 2.1.2.1 In the pool24
2.2 2.1.2.2 At the poolside27
2.2 2.1.2.3 In the darkness of the night29
2.2.2.2 Fulfilling the communal longing34
2.3 Individualizing homosexual performance38
2.3.1 Site-selecting39
2.3.2 Risk-taking40
2.3.3 Neo-body attitude42
Chapter Three The Regulation of Homosexuality at Hot Springs45
3.1 Performing homosexual acts with the anxiety of heteronormative surveillance45
3.2 Technologies of governmentality: repression and individualization46
3.2.1 Regulating sexuality with surveillance51
3.2.1.1 Hot spring consumers and owners’ supervision51
3.2.1.2 Police raids56
3.2.2 The alliance of the state and the market58
3.2.3 Regulating sexuality through individualization60
3.3 The awareness of the sexual citizenship63
Chapter Four Individualizing Homosexual Subjects, Homosexualizing Hot Springs65
4.1 Expanding homosexual territories with the employment of ambiguity and secrecy67
4.1.1 Critiques of sex in the city67
4.1.2 Legitimizing the frequentation of hot springs69
4.1.3 Heteronormative repression and homosexuals’ predilection71
4.1.4 Ambiguous Area, Secret Sex72
4.1.5 The effects of disseminating homosexual knowledge74
4.2 Crossing the boundary of “public” and “private”77
4.2.1 Querying the manipulation of the ideology of intimacy77
4.2.2 Rethinking sex in “public” space79
Bibliography83
Appendix I87
Appendix II88

Bibliography
I. English works:
Ainley, Rosa, ed. “Watching the Detectors: Control and the Panopticon.” New Frontiers of Space, Bodies and Genders. London: Routledge, 1998.
Bech, Henning. When Men Meet: Homosexuality and Modernity. Trans. Teresa Mesquit and Tim Davies. Cambridge: Polity, 1997.
Beck, Ulrich. Risk Society: Towards a New Modernity. Trans. Mark Ritter. London: Sage, 1992.
---, and Elizabeth Beck-Gernsheim. “Individualization and ‘Precarious Freedoms’: Perspectives and Controversies of a Subject-orientated Sociology.” Detraditionalization: Critical Reflections on Authority and Identity. Eds. Paul Heelas, and Paul Morris. Malden: Blackwell, 1996.
Bell, David. “Perverse Dynamics, Sexual Citizenship and the Transformation of Intimacy.” Mapping Desire: Geographies of Sexualities. Eds. David Bell and Gill Valentine. London: Routledge, 1995.
Berlant, Lauren, and Michael Warner. “Sex in Public.” Critical Inquiry. Winter. 1998: 24:2.
Binnie, Jon. “Trading Places: Consumption, Sexuality and the Production of Queer Space.” Mapping Desire: Geographies of Sexualities. Eds. David Bell and Gill Valentine. London: Routledge, 1995.
Califia, Pat. “Public Sex.” Public Sex. Pittsburgh: Cleis, 1994.
Certeau, Michel de. The Practice of Everyday Life. Trans. Steven Rendall. Berkeley: California ,1984.
der Meer, Theo van. “Private Acts, Public Space: Defining Boundaries in Nineteenth-century Holland.” Public Sex / Gay Space. Ed. William L. Leap. New York: Columbia UP, 1999.
Duncan, Nancy, ed. “Renegotiating Gender and Sexuality in Public and Private Space.” Bodyspace: Destabilizing Geographies of Gender and Sexuality. London: Routledge, 1996.
Edwards, Tim. “Public Sex: the Eroticisation of an Oppressed Position.” Erotics and Politics: Gay Male Sexuality, Masculinity and Feminism. London: Routledge, 1994.
Evans, David T.. Sexual Citizenship: The Material Construction of Sexualities. London: Routledge, 1993.
Featherstone, Mike, ed. Introduction. Love and Eroticism. London: Sage, 1999. 1-18.
“Five-Day Bonanza.” Time. 22 Dec. 1967.
Foucault, Michel. Discipline and Punish. Trans. Alan Sheridan. New York: Vintage, 1995.
---. The History of Sexuality. Trans. Robert Hurley. Vol. 1. New York: Vintage, 1990.
---. "Technologies of the Self." Technologies of the Self. Eds. Luther H. Martin, Huck Gutman, Patrick H. Hutton. Amherst: Massachusetts UP, 1988.
Giddens, Anthony. Modernity and Self-Identity. Cambridge: Polity, 1991.
---. The Transformation of Intimacy: Sexuality, Love and Eroticism in Modern Societies. Cambridge: Polity, 1993.
Kaplan, Morris B. Sexual Justice: Democratic Citizenship and the Politics of Desire. New York: Routledge, 1997.
Knopp, Lawrence. “Sexuality and Urban Space: A Framework for Analysis.” Mapping Desire: Geographies of Sexualities. Eds. David Bell and Gill Valentine. London: Routledge, 1995.
Lindell, John. “Public Space for Public Sex.” Policing Public Sex: Queer Politics and the Future of Aids Activism. Eds. Dangerous Bedfellows, et al. Boston: South End, 1996.
Manning, Toby. “Gay Culture: Who Needs It?” Anti-Gay. Ed. Mark Simpson. London: Freedom, 1996.
Pile, Steve. The Body and the City: Psychoanalysis, Space and Subjectivity. London: Routledge, 1996.
Rubin, Gayle. “The Catacombs: A Temple of the Butthole.” Leatherfolk. Ed. Mark Thompson. Boston: Alysun, 1991.
Simmel, Georg. “The Adventure.” Simmel on Culture. Eds. David Frisby & Mike Featherstone. London: Sage, 1997.
“Spa,” Encyclopedia Britannica, 15th ed. 1994.
Tattelman, Ira. “Presenting a Queer (Bath)House.” Queer Frontiers: Millennial Geographies,
Genders, and Generations. Eds. Joseph A. Boone, et al. Madison: Wisconsin UP, 2000.
Thomas, Kendall. “Going Public: A Conversation with Lidell Jackson and Jocelyn Taylor.”
Policing Public Sex: Queer Politics and the Future of Aids Activism. Eds. Dangerous Bedfellows, et al. Boston: South End, 1996.
II. Chinese works:
太平洋溫泉會館。〈泡湯在北投--戀戀北投，盡覽溫泉故鄉新風貌〉，宣傳單。
何甦，倪家珍，祐祐，Hank，斯斯。〈同志史觀：叫同性戀真難忘—台灣同志運動史概論〉，網路資料。http://www.hotline.org.tw/gay/media-events.htm。2002年3月5日。
阮慶岳。《出櫃空間---虛擬同志城》。台北：元尊文化，1998。
吳琬瑜。〈再會吧！溫泉鄉的溫柔〉。《天下雜誌》。1997年2月1日。
洪德仁編著。〈北投溫泉風流韻事〉。《北投采風》。台北：人人月曆，2000。
洪德仁。《戀戀北投溫泉》。台北：玉山社，1997。
陳耀民。〈虛擬情境下的真實身分認同：以台灣IRC系統為例〉。《第五屆性教育、性學、性別研究暨同性戀研究國際學術研討會論文集》。中央大學性別研究室編。中壢：中央大學性別研究室，2000。
張立伶。〈北投溫泉地人文變遷〉。《歷史月刊》。2000年2月號。
喀飛。〈台灣同志運動史摘要1990-2000〉。1999年12月16日。網路資料。http://www.hotline.org.tw/gay/history.htm#media。2002年3月5日。
國立台灣大學土木工程學研究所都市計劃室。《台灣北部地區溫泉規劃---台灣溫泉旅遊之分析與政策擬議》。台北：台灣省旅遊事業管理局，1988。
簡文燦。〈溫泉浴春色無邊趣事多〉。《中國時報》。1998年6月25日。19版。
---。〈溫泉鴛鴦浴，情人最傾心，一室難求〉。《中國時報》。2000年2月13日。
5版。
III. Interviews:
Brandon (pseudonym). Personal interview. 24 June 2001. Taipei.
Horatio (pseudonym). Personal interview. 24 June 2001. Taipei.
Hsiao-fong (psedonym). Personal interview. 6 Jan. 2002. Taipei.
Jack (pseudonym). Personal interview. 12 June 2001. Taipei
Kelvin (pseudonym). Personal interview. 25 June 2001. Taipei.
Leo (pseudonym). Personal interview. 26 June 2001. Taipei.
Peter (pseudonym). Personal interview. 6 Jan. 2002. Taipei.
Warner (pseudonym). Personal interview. 20 Dec. 2001. Taipei.
Wat (pseudonym). Personal interview. 9 Jan. 2002. Taipei.