Changes

The [[genital]] [[stage]] first arises between the ages of three and five (the [[development|infantile genital organization ]] or [[phallic]] [[phase]]) and is then interrupted by the [[latency period]], before returning at puberty (the [[genital]] [[stage]] proper).

[[Freud]] defined this [[stage]] as the final "complete organization" of the [[libido]], a synthesis of the previously anarchic "polymorphous perversity" of the pregenital stages.<ref>{{F}} "[[Works of Sigmund Freud. |Splitting of the Ego in the Process of Defence]]" 1940a[1938]. [[SE ]] XXIII. p.155</ref>

==Genitality==Because of this, the concept of '"[[genital|genitality' " came to represent a privileged value in [[psychoanalytic theory]] after [[Freud]], coming to represent a [[stage]] of full [[development|psychosexual maturity]].

[[Lacan]] rejects most [[psychoanalytic theory]] concerning the [[genital]] [[stage]], [[genital]] [[love]], etc., calling it an "absurd hymn to the [[harmony]] of the [[genital]]."<ref>{{E}} p.245</ref>

===The genital stage=Genital Stage==The stages of [[development|psychosexual development ]] are conceived by [[Lacan]] not as natural phases of [[biology|biological maturation ]] but as forms of [[demand]] which are structured [[structure]]d [[punctuation|retroactively]].<ref>{{S8}} p.238-46</ref>

In the [[development|oral ]] and [[development|anal stages]], [[desire]] is eclipsed by [[demand]], and it is only in the [[genital stage]] as a third moment which comes after the [[development|oral ]] and [[development|anal stages]].<ref>{{S8}} p.268</ref>

However, [[Lacan]]'s discussion of this stage focuses on what [[Freud]] referred to as the ''"[[genital|infantile'' genital organization ]]" (also known as the [[phallic phase]]); a stag ewhen stage when the [[child ]] knows only one sexual organ (the male one) and passes through the [[castration complex]].

Thus the [[genital|genital phase ]] is only thinkabloethinkable, [[Lacan]] emphasizes, insofar as it is marked by the [[sign ]] of [[castration]]; "[[genital|genital realization]]" can only be achieved on condition that the [[subject]] first assumes his own [[castration]].<ref>{{S4}} p.219</ref>

FurhtermoreFurthermore, [[Lacan]] insists that even when the [[perversion|polymorphous perverse ]] [[sexuality ]] of the [[genital|pregential phases ]] comes under the domination of the genital organization, this does not mean that pregenital [[sexuality ]] is abolished.

<blockquote>"The most archaic aspirations of the child are... a nucleus that is never completely resolved under some primacy of genitality."<ref>{{S7}} p.93</ref></blockquote>

He therefore rejects the concept of a [[development|final stage ]] of [[progress|synthesis]]; [[progress|synthesis ]] is not possible for [[human beings]] [[being]]s, in [[Lacan]]'s view, since [[human]] [[subjectivity]] is essentially and irremediably [[split|divided]].

===The genital driveGenital Drive===The [[genital|genital drive]] is not listed by [[Lacan]] as one of the [[drive|partial drive]]s.

Given that [[Lacan]] argues that every [[drive]] is a [[drive|partial drive]], his refusal to include the [[genital|genital drive]] among the [[drive|partial drive]]s is tantamount to questioning its [[existence]].

He writes: "the partial drive, if it exists, is not at all articulated like the other drives.<ref>{{S11}} p.189</ref> Unlike the other [[drive]]s, the [[genital|genital drive]] (if it [[exist]]s) "finds its form" on the side of the [[Other]].<ref>{{S11}} p. 189</ref> Furthermore, there is no "[[genital|genital object]]" that would correspond to a supposed [[genital drive]]. ==Genital Love==[[Lacan]] rejects Michael Balint's concept of "[[genital|genital love]]". The term indicates a [[development|psychosexual maturity]] in which the two elements of sensuality and affection are completely integrated and harmonized, and in which there is thus no longer any [[ambivalence]]. [[Freud]], however, never used the term, and [[Lacan]] rejects it as completely alien to [[psychoanalytic theory]]. For [[Lacan]], the idea of final [[development|psychosexual maturity]] and [[progress|synthesis]] implied in the term "[[genital|genital love]]" is an [[illusion]] which completely overlooks "the barriers and snubs (''Erniedrigungen'') that are so common even in the most fulfilled love relation."<ref>{{E}} p. 245</ref>  There is no such thing as a [[ambivalence|post-ambivalent]] [[object]] relation. ===Oblativity===The concept of [[genital|genital love]] is closely linked to that of "[[genital|oblativity]]", a term used by some [[psychoanalyst]]s to designate a mature form of [[love]] in which one [[loves]] the other person for what he is rather than for what he can give. [[Lacan]] is as critical of the concept of [[genital|oblativity]] as he is of the concept of [[genital|genital love]], viewing it as a form of moralism and a betrayal of the analytic discovery of the [[part-object]].<ref>{{S8}} pp. 173-4</ref>

Unlike He argues that the other concept of [[drivegenital|oblativity]]s, the has little to do with [[genital drive|genitality]] (if it exists) "finds its form" on the side of the [[Other]].<ref>{{S11}} pand has far more in common with anal eroticism.189</ref>

FurthermoreFollowing [[Freud]]'s equation between faeces and gifts, there is no [[Lacan]] states that the formula of [[genital|oblativity]] - "genital objecteverything for the other" -- shows that would correspond to it is a supposed [[genital drivefantasy]] of the [[obsessional neurosis|obsessional neurotic]].<ref>{{S8}} p. 241</ref>