sexual difference The phrase 'sexual difference', which has come into
The phrase 'sexual difference', which has come into prominence in the debate between psychoanalysis and feminism, is not part ofFreud's or Lacan's theoretical vocabulary. Freud speaks only of the anatomical distinction between the sexes and its psychical consequences.<ref> (Freud, 1925d)</ref>
Lacan speaks of sexual position and the sexual relationship, and occasionally of the differentiation of the sexes.<ref> (S4, 153)</ref> However, both Freudand Lacan address the question of sexual difference, and an entry has been included for this term because it brings together an important set of related themes in Lacan's or work, and because it constitutes an important focus for feminist approaches to Lacan's theoretical vocabularywork. Freud speaks only of the anatomical<ref> (see Brennan, 1989; Gallop, 1982; Grosz, 1990; Mitchell and Rose, 1982)</ref>
distinction One of the basic presuppositions underlying Freud's work is that just as there are certain physical differences between the sexes men and its women, so also there are psychical differences. In other words, there are certain psychical consequences characteristics that can be called 'masculine' and others that can be called 'feminine'.Rather than trying to give any formal defmition of these terms (an impossible task),<ref> - Freud, 1925d);1920a: SE XVIII, 17 l</ref> Freud limits himself to describing how a human subject comes to acquire masculine or feminine psychical characteristics. This is not an instinctual or natural process, but a complex one in which anatomical differences interact with social and psychical factors. The whole process revolves around the [[Castration Complex]], in which the boy fears being deprived of his penis and the girl, assuming that she has already been deprived of hers, develops penis envy.
Following Freud, Lacan speaks also engages with the problem of sexual position how the human infant becomes a sexed subject. For Lacan, masculinity and femininity are not biological essences but [[Symbolic]] positions, and the sexual relationshipassumption of one of these two positions is fundamental to the construction of subjectivity; the subject is essentially a sexed subject. 'Man' and '[[Woman]]' are signifiers that stand for these two subjective positions.<ref>(S20, and occasionally34)</ref>
For both Freud and Lacan, the child is at first ignorant of sexual difference and so cannot take up a sexual position. It is only when the child discovers sexual difference in the [[Castration Complex]] that he can begin to take up a sexual position. Both Freud and Lacan see this process of taking up a sexual position as closely connected with the [[Oedipus Complex]], but they differ on the precise nature of the differentiation connection. For Freud, the subject's sexual position is determined by the sex of the sexes parent with whom the subject identifies in the Oedipus complex (S4if the subject identifies with the father, 153he takes up a masculine position; identification with the mother entails the assumption of a feminine position). However, both Freud and Lacan
address For Lacan, however, the Oedipus complex always involves [[Symbolic]] identification with the Father, and hence Oedipal identification cannot determine sexual position. According to Lacan, then, it is not identification but the subject's relationship with the [[Phallus]] which determines sexual position.This relationship can either be one of 'having' or 'not having'; men have the [[Symbolic]] phallus, and women don't (or, to be more precise, men are 'not without having it' [ils ne sont pas sans l'avoir]). 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, 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 in the question domain of the [[Symbolic]], that any normal, completed sexual position is realized.<ref> (S3, 177)<.ref>However, there is no signifier of sexual differenceas such which would permit the subject to fully symbolise the function of man and [[Woman]], and an entry has been included 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. The question of one's own sex ('Am I a man or a [[Woman]]?') is the question which defines [[hysteria]]. The mysterious 'other sex' is always the [[Woman]], forboth men and women, and therefore the question of the hysteric ('What is a [[Woman]]?') is the same for both male and female hysterics.<ref> (S3, 178)</ref>
this term because Although the anatomy/[[biology]] of the subject plays a part in the question of which sexual position the subject will take up, it brings together an important set 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 themes to the reproductive function of sexuality, and the unconscious, inwhich 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 [[Symbolic]] 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 the [[Castration Complex]]'.<ref> (E, 198)</ref>
Lacan's work, and because it constitutes an important focus for feminist approaches to Lacan's work (see Brennan, 1989; Gallop, 1982; Grosz, 1990; Mitchell and Rose, 1982). One of the basic presuppositions underlying Freud's work is that just as there are certain physical differences between men and women, so also there are psychical differences. In other words, there are certain psychical character- istics that can be called 'masculine' and others that can be called 'feminine'. Rather than trying to give any formal defmition of these terms (an impossible task - Freud, 1920a: SE XVIII, 17 l), Freud limits himself to describing how a human subject comes to acquire masculine or feminine psychical character- istics. This is not an instinctual or natural process, but a complex one in which anatomical differences interact with social and psychical factors. The whole process revolves around the [[CASTRATION COMPLEX]], in which the boy fears being deprived of his penis and the girl, assuming that she has already been deprived of hers, develops penis envy. Following Freud, Lacan also engages with the problem of how the human infant becomes a sexed subject. 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 sexed subject. 'Man' and '[[Woman]]' are signifiers that stand for these two subjective positions(S20, 34). For both Freud and Lacan, the child is at first ignorant of sexual difference and so cannot take up a sexual position. It is only when the child discovers sexual difference in the [[Castration Complex]] that he can begin to take up a sexual position. Both Freud and Lacan see this process of taking up a sexual position as closely connected with the OEDIPUS COMPLEx, but they differ on the precise nature of the connection. For Freud, the subject's sexual 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). For Lacan, however, the Oedipus complex always involves [[Symbolic]] identifica- tion with the Father, and hence Oedipal identification cannot determine sexual position. According to Lacan, then, it is not identification but the subject's relationship with the [[Phallus]] which determines sexual position. This relationship can either be one of 'having' or 'not having'; men have the [[Symbolic]] phallus, and women don't (or, to be more precise, men are 'not without having it' [ils ne sont pas sans l'avoir]). 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 (S4, 153): 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 in the domain of the [[Symbolic]], that any normal, completed sexual position is [[Real]]ized. (S3, 177) However, there is no signifier of sexual difference as such which would permit the subject to fully symbolise the function of man and [[Woman]], 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. The question of one's own sex ('Am I a man or a [[Woman]]?') is the question which defineS HYSTERIA. The mysterious 'other sex' is always the [[Woman]], for both men and women, and therefore the question of the hysteric ('What is a [[Woman]]?') is the same for both male and female hysterics (S3, 178). Although the anatomy/BIOLOGY 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' (S11, 204). There is no signifier of sexual difference in the [[Symbolic]] 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' (S3, 176). Hence the phallus is 'the pivot which completes in both sexes the questioning of their sex by the [[Castration Complex]]' (E, 198). 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 [[Woman]] the [[Real]]ization 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 identifica- tion 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, 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 [[WOMANwoman]] (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 CAD [[sexual relationship]] can misfire .<ref> (S20, 53-4).</ref>
