Changes

Jump to: navigation, search

Perversion

1,645 bytes added, 20:56, 20 May 2019
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>).
{{Top}}[[pervert]]|perversion (perversion) Perversion was defined by Freud as any form of sexual behaviour which deviates from the norm of heterosexual genital intercourse (Freud, 1905d). However, this defmition is problematised by Freud's own notions of the polymorphous perversity of all human sexuality, which is characterised by the absence of any pregiven natural order.{{Bottom}}
Lacan overcomes this impasse in Freudian theory =====Sigmund Freud=====[[Perversion]] was defined by defining perversion not [[Freud]] as a any [[form ]] of behaviour but as a clinical ''[[Structureperversion|sexual behaviour]].“What is perversion? It is not simply an aberration in relation to social criteria, an anomaly contrary to good morals, although this register is not absent, nor is it an atypicality according to natural criteria, namely that it more or less derogates '' which deviates from the reproductive finality [[perversion|norm]] of the [[sexuality|heterosexual]] [[sexual unionrelationship|genital intercourse]]. It is something else in its very structure<ref>{{F}} ''[[Works of Sigmund Freud|Three Essays on the Theory of Sexuality]]''.” (Sl[[SE]] VII, 221)125. 1905d.</ref>
The distinction between perverse acts and the perverse structure implies that=====Polymorphous Perversity=====However, while there are certain sexual acts which are closely associated with perverse structures, it this defmition is also possible that such acts may be engaged in problematized by non-perverse subjects, and equally possible that a perverse subject may never actually engage in such acts. It also implies a universalist position; while social disapproval and the infraction of [[Freud]]'good morals' may be what determines whether a particular act is perverse or not, this is not the essence s own notions of the perverse structure. A perverse structure remains perverse even when the acts associated with it are socially approved. Hence Lacan regards homosexuality as a [[perversion even when practised in Ancient Greece, where it was widely tolerated (S8, 43). (This is not because homosexuality or any other form |polymorphous perversity]] of all [[human]] [[sexuality is naturally perverse; on the contrary]], the perverse nature of homosexuality which is entirely a question of its infringement of characterized by the normative requirements of the Oedipus complex (S4, 201). Thus Lacan criticises Freud for forgetting at times that the importance of heterosexuality in the Oedipal myth is a question of norms and not [[absence]] of any [[nature (Ec, 223). The analyst's neutrality forbids him from taking sides with these norms; rather than defending such norms or attacking them, the analyst seeks merely to expose their incidence in the subject's history|pregiven natural order]].)
There are two main ways =====Jacques Lacan=====[[Lacan]] overcomes this [[impasse]] in which Lacan characterises the perverse [[Freud]]ian [[theory]] by defining [[perversion]] not as a form of ''[[behaviour]]'' but as a [[structure|clinical structure]].
<blockquote>"What is perversion? It is not simply an aberration in relation to [[social]] criteria, an anomaly contrary to [[good]] morals, although this [[register]] is not [[absent]], nor is it an atypicality according to natural criteria, namely that it more or less derogates from the [[reproductive]] finality of the [[sexual]] union. It is something else in its very structure."<ref>{{S1}} p. 221</ref></blockquote>
=====Perverse Acts, Perverse Structure=====
The [[distinction]] between [[perversion|perverse acts]] and the [[perversion|perverse structure]] implies that, while there are certain [[perversion|sexual acts]] which are closely associated with [[perversion|perverse structures]], it is also possible that such [[perversion|act]]s may be engaged in by [[perversion|non-perverse subjects]], and equally possible that a [[perversion|perverse subject]] may never actually engage in such [[perversion|act]]s.
ï The =====Social Dis/Approval=====It also implies a universalist [[Phallusposition]] and [[Disavowal]] Perversion is distinguished from the other clinical structures by the operation of disavowal. The pervert disavows castration; he perceives that the mother lacks the phallus, while social disapproval and at the same time refuses to accept the [[Real]]ity infraction of this traumatic perception. This is most evident in FETISHISM (the 'perversion of perversions'; S4, 194), where the fetish is "good morals" may be what determines whether a [[Symbolicparticular]] substitute for the mother's missing phallus. However, this problematic relation to the phallus is not exclusive to fetishism but extends to all the perversions (S4, 192-3). 'The whole problem of the perversions consists in conceiving how the child, in his relation to the mother . . . identifies himself with the [[Imaginaryperversion|act]] object of [her] desire [i.e. the phallus]' (E, 197-8). This is why the preoedipal [[Imaginary]] triangle plays such an important role in the perversion|perverse structure. In the perversions, the phallus can only function as veiled (see Lacan's discussion of the role of the veil in fetishism, transvestism, homosexuality and exhibitionism; S4, 159-63).The [[Drive]] Perversion is also a particular way in which the subject situates himself in relation to the drive. In perversionor not, the subject locates himself as object of the drive, as the means of the other's jouissance (Sll, 185). This is to invert the structure of [[Fantasy]], which is why the formula for perversion appears as a0S in the first schema in 'Kant with Sade' (Ec, 774), the inversion of the matheme of fantasy. The pervert assumes the position of the object-instrument of the 'will-to-enjoy' (volontÈ-de-jouissance), which this is not his own will but that of the [[big Otheressence]]. The pervert does not pursue his activity for his own pleasure, but for the enjoyment of the [[big Otherperversion|perverse structure]]. He finds enjoyment precisely in this instrumentalisation, in working for the enjoyment of the Other; 'the subject here makes himself the instrument of the Other's jouissance' (E, 320). Thus in scopophilia (also spelled scoptophilia), which comprises exhibitionism and voyeurism, the pervert locates himself as the object of the scopic drive. In SADISM/MASOCHISM, the subject locates himself as the object of the invocatory drive (S11, 182-5). The pervert is the person in whom the structure of the drive is most clearly revealed, and also the person who carries the attempt to go beyond the pleasure principle to the limit, 'he who goes as far as he can along the path of jouissance' (E, 323).
Freud's remark that 'A [[perversion|perverse structure]] remains [[perversion|perverse]] even when the neuroses [[perversion|acts]] associated with it are the negative of the perversionssocially approved.Moreover, in Lacan' has sometimes been interpreted as meaning that perversion s formulation, it is simply the direct expression of a natural instinct which [[neurotic subject]] who is repressed in NEUROSIS (Freud[[conflict]] with the [[Name-of-the-Father]], 1905d: SE VIIin other [[words]], 165)with [[Law]] as such. HoweverThe [[perverse subject]], Lacan rejects this interpretation entirely (S4on the other hand, 113'[[knows]] very well' the [[letter]] of the [[Law]]--in other words, 250)knows what the [[Other]] desires. FirstlyThe perverse structure follows the [[Law]] to the letter, follows the "''No''" of the drive is [[Father]]--the dictum not to be conceived of as a natural instinct which could be discharged in a direct way; it has no zero degree of satisfaction[[enjoy]].SecondlyAccording to Jean Clavreul, " As far as the pervert is clear from the above remarksconcerned, this conflict [between [[desire]] and [[Law]]] is resolved by making desire the pervert's relation to the drivelaw of his [[acts]]."[http://www.lacan.com/conformperf.htm]
i Just =====Homosexuality=====Hence [[Lacan]] regards [[perversion|homosexuality]] as complex and elaborated as that of the neurotic. From the point of view of genetic development, a [[perversion is at the same level as neurosis; both have reached the third 'time' of the Oedipus complex (S4, 251). Perversion therefore 'presents the same dimensional richness as ]] even when practiced in Ancient [[a neurosisGreece]], the same abundance, the same rhythms, the same stages' (S4, 113)where it was widely tolerated. It is therefore necessary to interpret Freud's remark in another way: perversion is structured in an inverse way to neurosis, but is equally structured (S4, 251)<ref>{{S8}} p.43</ref>
While neurosis is characterised by a question, perversion is characterised by the lack of a question; the pervert does not doubt that his acts serve the jouissance of the Other. Thus it is extremely rare for a perverse subject to demand analysis, and in the rare cases when he does, it This is not because he seeks to change his mode [[perversion|homosexuality]] or any other form of jouissance. This perhaps explains why many psycho- analysts have argued that psychoanalytic treatment [[sexuality]] is not appropriate for [[nature|naturally]] [[perversion|perverse subjects, a line which even some Lacanian analysts have taken, comparing the certainty of the pervert with that of ]]; on the psychoticcontrary, and arguing that perverts cannot take the position [[perversion|perverse nature]] of 'one who does not know' before a 'subject supposed to know' (Clavreul, 1967). However, most Lacanian analysts do not take this view, since it [[perversion|homosexuality]] is entirely a view completely at odds with Lacan's own position. In the seminar question of 1956-7, for example, Lacan points to the dream its infringement of the young homosexual [[Womannormative]] whom Freud treated as a clear manifestation requirements of transference in a perverse subject (S4, 106-7; see Freud, 1920a). Also, in the 1960-1 seminar, Lacan's principal example of transference is that shown by Alcibiades, whom he clearly regards as a pervert (see E, 323; 'Alcibiades is certainly not a neurotic')[[Oedipus complex]]. Thus Lacan argues that perverse subjects can be treated at the same level as neurotics, although there will of course be different problems in the direction of the treatment. One important implication of this is that the psychoanalytic treatment of a perverse subject does not set as its objective the elimination of his perverse behaviour<ref>{{S4}} p.201</ref>
=====Norms Not Nature=====
Thus [[Lacan]] criticizes [[Freud]] for [[forgetting]] at [[times]] that the importance of [[perversion|heterosexuality]] in the [[Oedipus complex|Oedipal myth]] is a question of [[perversions|norms]] and not of [[nature]].<ref>{{Ec}} p. 223</ref>
== def ==The pursuit of "abnormal" sexual objects without repression. Freud at one point lists five forms of [[analyst]]'s [[ethics|neutrality]] forbids him from taking sides with these [[perversion|norms]]; rather than defending such [[perversion|norms]] or attacking [[them]], which is the [[analyst]] seeks merely to say five ways that an individual "differs from the normal": "first, by disregarding the barrier of species (the gulf between men and animals), secondly, by overstepping the barrier against disgust, thirdly that against incest (expose their incidence in the prohibition against seeking sexual satisfaction from near blood-relations), fourthly that against members of one[[subject]]'s own sex and fifthly the transferring of the part played by the genitals to other organs and areas of the body" (Introductory Lectures 15.208). He makes clear that a young child will not recognize any of these five points as abnormal—and only does so through the process of education. For this reason, he calls children "polymorphously perverse."<ref>(Introductory Lectures 15[[history]].209)</ref>
Polymorphous Perversity: The ability to find erotic pleasure out of any part of the body. According to Freud, a young child is, by nature, "polymorphously perverse" (Introductory Lectures 15.209), =====Perverse Structure=====There are two main ways in which is to say that, before education in [[Lacan]] characterizes the conventions of civilized society, a child will turn to various bodily parts for sexual gratification and will not obey the rules that in adults determine [[perversion|perverse behavior. Education however quickly suppresses the polymorphous possibilities for sexual gratification in the child, eventually leading, through repression, to an amnesia about such primitive desires. Some adults retain such polymorphous perversity, according to Freudstructure]].
=====Disavowal=====[[Perversion]] is distinguished from the other [[structure|clinical structures]] by the operation of [[disavowal]].  The [[perversion|pervert]] [[disavowal|disavows]] [[castration]]; he perceives that the [[mother]] [[lack]]s the [[phallus]], and at the same [[time]] refuses to accept the [[reality]] of this [[traumatic]] [[perception]].  This is most evident in [[fetishism]] (the "[[perversion|perversion of perversions]]")<ref>{{S4}} p. 194</ref> where the [[fetish]] is a [[symbolic]] [[metaphor|substitute]] for the [[mother]]'s [[lack|missing]] [[phallus]]. One can also formulate the fetish object as a [[veil]] that the perverse subject erects in front of the [[Thing]] in [[order]] to avoid an [[encounter]] with it. =====Phallus=====However, this problematic relation to the [[phallus]] is not exclusive to [[fetishism]] but extends to all the [[perversion]]s.<ref>{{S4}} p. 192-3</ref>  <blockquote>"The [[whole]] problem of the perversions consists in conceiving how the [[child]], in his relation to the mother . . . [[identifies]] himself with [[the imaginary]] object of [her] desire [i.e. the phallus]."<ref>{{E}} p. 197-8</ref></blockquote> This is why the [[preoedipal]] [[imaginary]] [[structure|triangle]] plays such an important [[role]] in the [[perversion|perverse structure]].  In the [[perversion]]s, the [[phallus]] can only function as veiled. =====Drive=====[[Perversion]] is also a particular way in which the [[subject]] situates himself in relation to the [[drive]].  In [[perversion]], the [[subject]] locates himself as [[object]] of the [[drive]], as the means of the [[Other]]'s ''[[jouissance]]''.<ref>{{S11}} p. 185</ref> This is to [[inversion|invert]] the [[structure]] of [[fantasy]], which is why the [[formula]] for [[perversion]] appears as ''a <> $'' in the first [[matheme|schema]] in "[[Kant with Sade]]",<ref>{{Ec}} p. 774</ref> the [[inversion]] of the [[matheme]] of [[fantasy]]. =====Instrumentalization=====The [[perversion|pervert]] assumes the position of the [[perversion|object-instrument]] of the "[[perversion|will-to-enjoy]]" (''[[perversion|volonté-de-jouissance]]''), which is not his own will but that of the [[Other|big Other]].  The [[perversion|pervert]] does not pursue his [[activity]] for his own [[pleasure]], but for the [[enjoyment]] of the [[Other|big Other]].  He finds [[enjoyment]] precisely in this [[perversion|instrumentalization]], in [[working]] for the [[enjoyment]] of the [[Other]]. <blockquote>"The subject here makes himself the [[instrument]] of the Other's jouissance."<ref>{{E}} p. 320</ref></blockquote>   Thus in [[perversion|scopophilia]] (also spelled [[perversion|scoptophilia]]), which comprises [[perversion|exhibitionism]] and [[perversion|voyeurism]], the [[perversion|pervert]] locates himself as the [[object]] of the [[drive|scopic drive]]. In [[sadism/masochism]], the [[subject]] locates himself as the [[object]] of the [[drive|invocatory drive]].<ref>{{S11}} p. 182-5</ref>  The [[perversion|pervert]] is the person in whom the [[structure]] of the [[drive]] is most clearly revealed, and also the person who carries the attempt to go beyond the [[pleasure principle]] to the [[limit]], "he who goes as far as he can along the path of jouissance."<ref>{{E}} p. 323</ref> =====Natural Instinct=====[[Freud]]'s remark that "the [[neuroses]] are the [[negative]] of the perversions" has sometimes been [[interpretation|interpreted]] as [[signification|meaning]] that [[perversion]] is simply the direct expression of a [[natural]] [[instinct]] which is [[repression|repressed]] in [[neurosis]].<ref>{{F}} 1905d: [[SE]] VII, 165</ref> However, [[Lacan]] rejects this [[interpretation]] entirely.<ref>{{S4}} p. 113, 250</ref> Firstly, the [[drive]] is not to be conceived of as a [[natural]] [[instinct]] which could be [[discharged]] in a direct way; it has no zero degree of [[satisfaction]]. Secondly, as is clear from the above remarks, the [[perversion|pervert]]'s relation to the [[drive]] is just as [[complex]] and elaborated as that of the [[neurotic]].  From the point of view of [[development|genetic development]], [[perversion]] is at the same level as [[neurosis]]; both have reached the [[third]] "time" of the [[Oedipus complex]].<ref>{{S4}} p. 251</ref>  =====Neurosis=====[[Perversion]] therefore "presents the same dimensional richness as [a neurosis], the same abundance, the same rhythms, the same [[stages]]."<ref>{{S4}} p. 113</ref>  It is therefore necessary to [[interpretation|interpret]] [[Freud]]'s remark in [[another]] way: [[perversion]] is [[structure]]d in an [[inversion|inverse]] way to [[neurosis]], but is equally [[structure]]d.<ref>{{S4}} p. 251</ref>  While [[neurosis]] is characterized by a question, [[perversion]] is characterised by the [[lack]] of a question; the [[perversion|pervert]] does not [[doubt]] that his [[perversion|acts]] serve the ''[[jouissance]]'' of the [[Other]].  =====Psychoanalytic Treatment=====Thus it is extremely rare for a [[perversion|perverse subject]] to [[demand]] [[treatment|analysis]], and in the rare cases when he does, it is not because he seeks to [[change]] his mode of ''[[jouissance]]''.  This perhaps explains why many [[psychoanalysis|psychoanalysts]] have argued that [[psychoanalytic treatment]] is not appropriate for [[perversion|perverse subjects]], a line which even some [[Lacan]]ian [[psychoanalysis|analysts]] have taken, comparing the [[certainty]] of the [[perversion|pervert]] with that of the [[psychosis|psychotic]], and arguing that [[perversion|perverts]] cannot take the position of "one who does not [[know]]" before a "[[subject supposed to know]]." However, most [[Lacan]]ian [[psychoanalysis|analysts]] do not take this view, since it is a view completely at odds with [[Lacan]]'s own position.  In the [[seminar]] of 1956-7, for example, [[Lacan]] points to the [[formation|dream]] of the young [[homosexual]] [[woman]] whom [[Freud]] treated as a clear manifestation of [[transference]] in a [[perversion|perverse subject]].<ref>{{S4}} p. 106-7; {{F}} 1920a</ref> Also, in the 1960-1 [[seminar]], [[Lacan]]'s principal example of [[transference]] is that shown by [[Alcibiades]], whom he clearly regards as a [[perversion|pervert]] ("Alcibiades is certainly not a neurotic").<ref>{{E}} p. 323</ref> Thus [[Lacan]] argues that [[perversion|perverse subjects]] can be treated at the same level as [[neurosis|neurotics]], although there will of course be different problems in the direction of the [[treatment]].  One important implication of this is that the [[psychoanalytic treatment]] of a [[perversion|perverse subject]] does not set as its [[objective]] the elimination of his [[perversion|perverse behaviour]]. =====See Also====={{See}}{{Also}} ===== References =====<div style="font-size:11px" class="references-small">
<references/>
[[Category:Dictionary]]</div>[[Category:Jacques Lacan]][[Category:Terms]]{{OK}}[[Category:Concepts]][[Category:Psychoanalysis]]__NOTOC__
Anonymous user
Retrieved from "https://nosubject.com/Special:MobileDiff/12833...46454"

Navigation menu