Changes

[[Sexual differenceLacan]] refers to speaks of [[recognitionsexual position|sexual ''position'']] by and the [[childsexual relationship|sexual ''relationship'']] , and occasionally of the difference ''differentiation'' of the [[sex]]essexes.<ref>{{S4}} p. 154</ref>

This refers to However, both [[Freud]] and [[Lacan]] address the way question of [[sexual difference]], and an entry has been included for this term because it brings together an import set of related themes in which both [[sexLacan]]es 's [[recognizework]] , and differentiate themselves (in the because it constitutes an important focus for [[feminist]] approaches to [[Lacan]]'s [[unconsciousLacan|work]]).

This recognition ==Freud on Sexual Difference==One of the basic presuppositions underlying [[Freud]]'s work is related to the that just as there are certain [[physical]] differences between [[Oedipus complexmen]] and the [[castration complexwomen]], so also there are psychical differences.

In other [[Sexual differencewords]] refers to the way in which the , there are certain psychical characteristics that can be called '[[subject]] relates to its own anatomical [[sexmasculine]] ' and position itself as [[manothers]] or that can be called '[[womanfeminine]].'

(Rather than trying to give any [[Sexual differenceformal]] introduces important questions in definition of these [[psychoanalysisterms]], as important as the problematic of [[identificationFreud]] limits himself to describing how a [[human]] [[subject]] comes to acquire [[masculine]]/or [[identityfeminine]]psychical characteristics.)

==Castration complex==The This is not an [[childinstinct]] comes to recognize ual or [[sexual differencenature|natural]] through the [[castration process]], but a complexone in which [[anatomical]] differences interact with [[social]]and psychical factors.

For both Freud and LacanThe [[whole]] process revolves around the [[castration complex]], in which the child is at first ignorant [[masculinity|boy]] fears [[being]] deprived of sexual difference his [[penis]] and so cannot take up a sexual positionthe [[femininity|girl]], assuming that she has already been deprived of hers, develops [[penis envy]].

It is only when ==Lacan on Sexual Difference==Following [[Freud]], [[Lacan]] also engages with the child discovers sexual difference in problem of how the human [[castration complexinfant]] that he can begin to take up becomes a sexual position[[sexed subject]].

Both Freud For [[Lacan]], [[masculinity]] and Lacan see this process [[femininity]] are not [[biological]] essences but [[symbolic position]]s, and the assumption of one of taking up a sexual position as closely connected with these two positions is fundamental to the [[Oedipus complexconstruction]], but they differ on the precise nature of [[subjectivity]]; the connection[[subject]] is essentially a [[sexed subject]].

For Freud, the subject'"[[Man]]" and "[[woman]]" are [[signifier]]s sexual that stand for these two [[subjective position is determined by the sex of the parent with whom the subject identifies in the Oedipus complex (if the subject identifies with the father, he takes up a masculine position; identification with the mother entails the assumption of a feminine position)]]s.<ref>{{S20}} p.34</ref>

==Becoming a Sexed Subject==For both [[Freud]] and [[Lacan, however]], the Oedipus complex always involves [[Symbolicchild]] is at first ignorant of [[sexual difference]] identification with the Father, and hence Oedipal identification so cannot determine take up a [[sexual position]].

Both [[Freud ]] and [[Lacan address ]] see this process of taking up a [[sexual]] position as closely connected with the question [[Oedipus complex]], but they differ on the precise [[nature]] of sexual differencethe connection.

One of For [[Freud]], the basic presuppositions underlying Freud[[subject]]'s work [[sexual position]] is that just as there are certain physical differences between men and womendetermined by the sex of the parent with whom the [[subject]] [[identifies]] in the [[Oedipus complex]] (if the [[subject]] [[identifies]] with the [[father]], so also there are psychical differenceshe takes up a [[masculine]] [[position]]; [[identification]] with the [[mother]] entails the assumption of a [[feminine]] [[position]]).

In other wordsFor [[Lacan]], however, the [[Oedipus complex]] always involves a [[symbolic]] [[identification]] with the [[Father]], there are certain psychical characteristics that can be called 'masculine' and others that can be called 'feminine'hence [[Oedipus]] [[identification]] cannot determine [[sexual position]].

Freud speaks only ==="Having" or "Not Having" the Phallus===This relationship can either be one of "having" or "not having"; [[men]] have the anatomical distinction between the sexes [[symbolic]] [[phallus]], and its psychical consequences[[women]] don't (or, to be more precise, [[men]] are "not without having it" [''ils ne sont pas sans l'avoir'']).<ref>Freud, 1925d</ref>

In 1908 (1908c) Sigmund Freud presented for <blockquote>It is insofar as the first time function of man and woman is [[symbolized]], it is insofar as it's literally uprooted from the notion [[domain]] of the castration complex[[imaginary]] and situated in the domain of the symbolic, that any normal, completed sexual position is realized.<ref>{{S3}} p.177</ref></blockquote>

Freud limits himself to describing how The [[subject]]'s sexual [[identity]] is thus always a human subject comes to acquire masculine or feminine psychical characteristicsrather precarious matter, a source of perpetual [[self]]-questioning.

This The question of one's own sex ("Am I a man or a woman?") is not an instinctual or natural process, but a complex one in question which anatomical differences interact with social and psychical factorsdefines [[hysteria]].

The whole process revolves around mysterious "other sex" is always the [[Castration Complexwoman]], in which for both men and women, and therefore the boy fears being deprived question of his penis the [[hysteric]] ("What is a woman?") is the same for both male and the girl, assuming that she has already been deprived of hers, develops penis envyfemale [[hysterics]].

The awareness There is a rupture between the [[biological]] aspect of [[sexual difference]] (for example at the level of the presence or absence chromosomes) which is related to the [[reproductive]] function of sexuality, and the male genital organ [[unconscious]], in which this reproductive function is not represented.

The genital organ will be taken into account for both sexesGiven the non-[[representation]] of the reproductive function of sexuality in the [[unconscious]], based on "in the presence or absence of pysche there is [[nothing]] by which the subject may situate himself as a male genital organor female being."<ref>{{S11}} p. 204</ref>

It There is this awareness that leads to no [[signifier]] of [[sexual difference]] in the question of castration[[symbolic order]].

It The only sexual signifier is through identification with the father [[phallus]], and mother during the oedipal period that the child acquires the symbolic cues for masculine and feminine. there is no "female" equivalent of this signifier:

==Jacques Lacan==Hence the [[Jacques Lacanphallus]] reformulates is "the pivot which completes ''in both sexes'' the questioning of their sex by the [[castration complex]]complex."<ref>{{E}} p.198</ref>

==Penis Whereas the [[male]] [[subject]] [[desire]]s the parent of the other sex and phallus==[[Lacanidentifies]] distinguishes between with the parent of the same sex, the [[penisfemale]] [[subject]] [[desire]]s the parent of the same sex and "is required to take the [[phallusimage]]of the other sex as the basis of its identification."<ref>{{S3}} p.176</ref>

<blockquote>"For [[Lacan]]a woman the realization of her sex is not accomplished in the Oedipus complex in a way symmetrical to that of the man's, not by identification with the mother, but on the relation to contrary by identification with the paternal [[phallusobject]] , which assigns her an extra detour."was established without regard for the anatomical difference of the sexes<ref>{{S3}} p." 172</ref></blockquote>

According to <blockquote>"This signifying dissymmetry determines the paths down which the Oedipus complex will [[Lacanpass]], it is not . The two paths make [[identificationthem]] but both pass down the [[subject]]'s relationship with same trail - the [[phallus]] which determines [[sexual position]]trail of castration."<ref>{{S3}} p.176</ref></blockquote>

This relationship can either be one of 'having' or 'not having'; men have ===Opposition Masculine-Feminine===If, then, there is no [[symbol]] for the opposition [[masculine]]-[[Symbolicfeminine]] phallus, and women don't (oras such, the only way to be more precise, men are 'not without having it' [ils ne sont pas sans l'avoir[understand]] [[sexual difference]] is in terms of the opposition [[activity]]-[[passivity])].<ref>{{S11}} p. 192</ref>

==Symbolic castration==[[Symbolic]] [[castration]] This polarity is an operation through which the [[subject]] is formed. ==Subject formation==[[Lacan]] developed his idea of [[sexuation]] to show the [[subject]]'s modes of inscription in the [[phallic function]].   ==Hysteria== The question of one's own [[sex]] ('Am I a [[man]] or a [[woman]]?') is the question which defines [[hysteria]].       [[Lacan]] speaks of sexual position and the [[sexual relationship]], and occasionally of the differentiation of the [[sex]]es.<ref>{{S4}} p.153</ref>  For [[Lacan]], [[masculinity]] and [[femininity]] are not biological essences but [[symbolic]] positions, and the assumption of one of these two positions is fundamental to the construction of [[subjectivity]]; the [[subject]] is essentially a [[sex]]ed [[subject]].  Following [[Freud]], [[Lacan]] also engages with the problem of how the [[human]] [[infant]] becomes a [[sex]]ed [[subject]].  '[[Man]]' and '[[woman]]' are [[signifier]]s that stand for these two subjective positions.<ref>{{S20}} p.34)</ref>    The assumption of a sexual position is fundamentally a [[symbolic]] act, and the difference between the sexes can only be conceived of on the [[symbolic]] plane.<ref> ({{S4}} p.153)</ref> It is insofar as the function of man and [[woman]] is symbolized, it is insofar as it's literally uprooted from the domain of the [[imaginary]] and situated way in the domain of the [[symbolic]], that any normal, completed sexual position is realized.<ref> (S3, 177)</ref> However, there is no signifier of sexual difference as such which would permit the subject to fully symbolise the function of man and opposition [[womanmale]], and hence it is impossible to attain a fully 'normal, finished sexual position'.  The subject's sexual identity is thus always a rather precarious matter, a source of perpetual self-questioning.          Although the anatomy/[[biologyfemale]] of the subject plays a part in the question of which sexual position the subject will take up, it is a fundamental axiom in psychoanalytic theory that anatomy does not determine sexual position.  There is a rupture between the biological aspect of sexual difference (for example at the level of the chromosomes) which is related to the reproductive function of sexuality, and the unconscious, in which this reproductive function is not represented.  Given the non-representation of the reproductive function of sexuality in the unconscious, 'in the psyche there is nothing by which the subject may situate himself as a male or female being'.<ref> (S11, 204)</ref>  There is no signifier of sexual difference in the [[Symbolicpsyche]] order.  The only sexual signifier is the phallus, and there is no 'female' equivalent of this signifier: 'strictly speaking there is no symbolization of [[Woman]]'s sex as such .  the phallus is a symbol to which there is no correspondent, no equivalent.  It's a matter of a dissymmetry in the signifier'.<ref> (S3, 176)</ref>  Hence the phallus is 'the pivot which completes in both sexes the questioning of their sex by since the [[Castration Complex]]'.<ref> (E, 198)</ref> It is this fundamental dissymmetry in the signifier which leads to the dissymmetry between the Oedipus complex in men and women.  Whereas the male subject desires the parent of the other sex and identifies with the parent of the same sex, the female subject desires the parent of the same sex and 'is required to take the image of the other sex as the basis of its identification'.<ref> (S3, 176)</ref>  'For a [[Womanbiological]] the realization of her sex is not accomplished in the Oedipus complex in a way symmetrical to that of the man's, not by identification with the mother, but on the contrary by identification with the paternal object, which assigns her an extra detour'.<ref>(S3, 172</ref> 'This signifying dissymmetry determines the paths down which the Oedipus complex will pass. The two paths make them both pass down the same trail - the trail of castration'.<ref> (S3, 176</ref> If, then, there is no symbol for the opposition masculine-feminine as such, the only way to understand sexual difference is in terms of the opposition activity-passivity.<ref>Sll, 192)</ref>  This polarity is the only way in which the opposition male-female is represented in the psyche, since the biological function of sexuality (reproduction) is not represented.<ref>(Sll, {{S11}} p.204)</ref>  This is why the question of what one is to do as a man or a [[Woman]] is a drama which is situated entirely in the field of the Other (Sll, 204), which is to say that the subject can only [[Real]]ise his sexuality on the [[Symbolic]] level.<ref> (S3, 170)</ref> In the seminar of 1970-1 Lacan tries to formalise his theory of sexual difference by means of formulae derived from [[Symbolic]] logic.  These reappear in the diagram of sexual difference which Lacan presents in the 1972-3 seminar.<ref> (Figurel6, taken from S20, 73)</ref>  The diagram is divided into two sides: on the left, the male side, and on the right, the female side.  The formulae of sexuation appear at the top of the diagram.  Thus the formulae on the male side are Exæ (= there is at least one x which is not submitted to the phallic function) and Vx¢x (= for all x, the phallic function is valid).  The formulae on the female side are Exæ (= there is not one x which is not submitted to the phallic function) and TGx (= for not all x, the phallic function is valid).  The last formula illustrates the relationship of [[woman]] (O the logic of the not-all.  What is most striking is that the two propositions on each side of the diagram seem to contradict each other: 'each side is defined by both an affirmation and a negation of the phallic function, an inclusion and exclusion of absolute (non-phallic) jouissance'.< ref>(Copjec, 1994: 27)</ref>  However, there is no symmetry between the two sides (no sexual relationship); each side represents a radically different way in which the [[sexual relationship]] can misfire.<ref> (S20, 53-4)</ref>  Lacan’s formalization of sexual difference in his famous "formulas of sexuation," presented by means of an idiosyncratic usage of mathematical symbols derived from symbolic logic and set theory, attempts to distill Freud’s efforts to distinguish the girl’s experience of castration from the boy’s.  In the first logical moment of masculine sexuation, an exception to the phallic function—Lacan’s term for the interdiction of castration—is posited, which is then followed by a contradictory assertion of the function’s universality.  Though abstracted beyond immediate recognition, it is possible to discern here the logic of the Freudian primal father, who lives in the masculine subject’s fantasy as the exception that proves the universal rule of castration.  In the first logical moment of feminine castration, in contrast, it is asserted that there are no exceptions to the phallic function.  But there then follows the notion that "not-all" elements of the feminine subject, elements Lacan represents with the symbol designating the negation of the universal quantifier, are subject to the rule of castration.  This is the background to Lacan’s controversial assertion that women are "pas-toute."  Though numerous feminists, including luce irigaray, have attacked this claim as a rationalization for what they see as women’s secondary status within a patriarchal socio-symbolic order, others have argued that the implication of Lacan’s assertion is simply that women, or more precisely feminine subjects, do not avail themselves to categorization.  Whereas masculine subjects routinely abstract themselves in such a way that they constitute a whole paradoxically unified by the exception embodied by the primal father fantasy (a masculine subject, in colloquial terms, can be "just one of the guys"), feminine subjects, so it appears, feature an irreducible element of singularity, one resistant to counting, that renders each of them, one might say, a world unto herself.  The implications of Lacan’s suggestive and oft-misunderstood theory of sexual difference for feminism and the theory of sexuality have still to find their full elaboration.  One thing, however, remains clear.  For Lacan, sex emerges as an impasse resulting from the impossibility of representing sexual difference symbolically and therefore of establishing sexual identities.  In contrast to the Anglo-American ideology of "gender," then, which upholds the idea that masculinity and femininity are socially preestablished meanings that may never be fully embodied, sex, in the Lacanian view, refers instead to the impossibility of sexual meanings themselves, of the frustration of every attempt to define sexual difference in positive terms, and therefore of the unforgiving resistance with which sexuality necessarily thwarts the ambitions of our conscious intentions.  we are led to the conclusion that psychoanalytic theory on sexual difference and, in particular, on what a woman is, remains highly incomplete.The phrase 'sexual difference' has come into prominence in the debate between psychoanalysis and feminism. it brings together an important set of related themes in Lacan's work, and because it constitutes an important focus for feminist approaches to Lacan's work.

||* [[Sexuality]] * [[Sexual Relationship]]{{Also}}

</div># [[Freud|Freud, Sigmund]]. (1908c). On the sexual theories of [[children]]. SE, 9: 205-226.# ——. (1923e). The [[infantile ]] [[genital ]] organization (An interpolation into the theory of sexuality). SE, 19: 141-145.# [[Lacan, Jacques]]. (1966). "''La [[signification ]] du phallus (Die [[Bedeutung ]] des Phallus)''." [[Écrits, ]]. 685-695. [[Paris]]: Le Seuil. (Original work published 1958)