Difference between revisions of "Masculinity"

From No Subject - Encyclopedia of Psychoanalysis
Jump to: navigation, search
(The LinkTitles extension automatically added links to existing pages (<a rel="nofollow" class="external free" href="https://github.com/bovender/LinkTitles">https://github.com/bovender/LinkTitles</a>).)
 
(2 intermediate revisions by one other user not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
/ MASCULINE/FEMININE (see also EXCEPTION NOT-ALL)
 
The Lacanian 'formulae of sexuation" make up              a crucial part of
 
Žižek's thinking: one way of characterizing the overall trajectory of his
 
work is as a movement from a masculine logic of the universal and
 
its exception towards a feminine logic of a not-all' without excep-
 
tion. However, Žižek does not simply oppose the masculine and the
 
feminine, but rather argues that the masculine is a certain effect of
 
the feminine: 'Man is a renexive determination of woman's impossi-
 
bility of achieving an identity with herself (which is why woman is a
 
symptom of man)' (p.276). That is, everything in Žižek can ultimately
 
be understood in terms of these two formulae. As Žižek asks: 'What if
 
  sexual difference is ultimately a kind of zero-institution of the social
 
split of humankind, the naturalized, minimal zero-difference, a split
 
that. prior to signalling any determinate social difference, signals
 
this difference as such? The struggle for hegemony would then, once
 
again, be the struggle for how this zero-difference is overdetermined by
 
other particular social differences." (p. 338) But. in fact, are these two
 
positions consistent? On the        one hand, Žižek argues that        man is
 
  
 +
According to [[Jacques Lacan|Lacan]], the lesson of [[psychoanalysis]] is that the [[subject]] is inherently [[divided]] and can never be [[satisfaction|satisfied]].  We are plagued as [[subject]]s by the [[anxiety]] that our ''[[jouissance]]'' - our [[pleasure]] or [[enjoyment]] - is never enough. In other [[words]], we are driven by an inherent [[dissatisfaction]] and [[sense]] of insufficiency.
  
explained by woman: on the other, that the split between the two sexes
+
We constantly have the sense that there is something ''more''; we do not [[know]] what this is, but we have the sense that it is there, and we [[want]] it. This is the [[form]] of jouissance that Lacan [[identifies]] as [[phallus|phallic]] [[jouissance]].  
is irreconcilable, like the two different conceptions of the same village
 
in Lévi-Strauss.
 
  
 +
[[phallus|Phallic]] [[jouissance]] is that form of [[enjoyment]] that most of us [[experience]] most of the [[time]]; that is to say, just when we [[think]] we possess our [[object]] of [[desire]] - be that [[another]] person, a new possession or even a difficult [[idea]] we have been struggling to get hold of - we are still dissatisfied; we are disappointed and have a sense that our [[desire]] has not been fully [[satisfied]]. This sense of (dis)[[satisfaction]] that always leaves something wanting is precisely what [[Lacan]] calls [[phallus|phallic]] [[jouissance]] and defines the [[masculine]] [[structure]].
  
 +
A [[masculine]] [[structure]] is characterized by turning the [[Other]] into an [[objet a]], and mistakenly [[thinking]] that the [[object]] can fully [[satisfy]] our [[desire]]. It is essential to keep in [[mind]] here, though, that [[phallic]] [[jouissance]] is not [[male]] in the sense that only [[men]] can experience it; it is experienced by both [[men]] and [[women]] and is defined as [[phallus|phallic]] insofar as it is characterized by failure.
 +
 +
<!--
 +
The [[Lacanian]] '[[formulae]] of [[sexuation]]" make up a crucial part of Žižek's thinking: one way of characterizing the overall trajectory of his [[work]] is as a movement from a masculine [[logic]] of the [[universal]] and its exception towards a [[feminine]] logic of a [[not-all]]' without exception.
 +
Everything in Žižek can ultimately be [[understood]] in [[terms]] of these two formulae.
 +
As Žižek asks: 'What if [[sexual]] [[difference]] is ultimately a kind of zero-institution of the [[social]] [[split]] of humankind, the naturalized, minimal zero-difference, a split that. prior to signalling any determinate social difference, signals this difference as such? The [[struggle]] for [[hegemony]] would then, once
 +
again, be the struggle for how this zero-difference is overdetermined by other [[particular]] social differences." (p. 338)
 +
-->
 +
 +
==See Also==
 +
* Feminine
 +
* [[Non-all]]
  
 
[[Category:Sexuality]]
 
[[Category:Sexuality]]

Latest revision as of 15:11, 20 May 2019

According to Lacan, the lesson of psychoanalysis is that the subject is inherently divided and can never be satisfied. We are plagued as subjects by the anxiety that our jouissance - our pleasure or enjoyment - is never enough. In other words, we are driven by an inherent dissatisfaction and sense of insufficiency.

We constantly have the sense that there is something more; we do not know what this is, but we have the sense that it is there, and we want it. This is the form of jouissance that Lacan identifies as phallic jouissance.

Phallic jouissance is that form of enjoyment that most of us experience most of the time; that is to say, just when we think we possess our object of desire - be that another person, a new possession or even a difficult idea we have been struggling to get hold of - we are still dissatisfied; we are disappointed and have a sense that our desire has not been fully satisfied. This sense of (dis)satisfaction that always leaves something wanting is precisely what Lacan calls phallic jouissance and defines the masculine structure.

A masculine structure is characterized by turning the Other into an objet a, and mistakenly thinking that the object can fully satisfy our desire. It is essential to keep in mind here, though, that phallic jouissance is not male in the sense that only men can experience it; it is experienced by both men and women and is defined as phallic insofar as it is characterized by failure.


See Also