Changes

woman ({{Top}}femme) Freud's account of SEXUAL DIFFERENCE is based on the view that there are certain psychical characteristics that can be called 'masculine' and others that can be called 'feminine', and that these differ from each other significantly. However, Freud constantly refuses to give any definition of the terms 'masculine' and 'feminine', arguing that they are foundational concepts which can be used but not elucidated by psychoanalytic theory (Freud, 1920a: SE XVIII, 171).{{Bottom}}

==Sigmund Freud==<!-- ===Masculine and Feminine Psychical Characteristics===[[Freud]]'s account of [[sexual difference]] is based on the view that there are certain [[psychical]] characteristics that can be called "[[masculine]]" and [[others]] that can be called "[[feminine]]", and that these differ from each other significantly. However, [[Freud]] constantly refuses to give any definition of the [[terms]] "[[masculine]]" and "[[feminine]]", arguing that they are foundational [[concepts]] which can be used but not elucidated by [[psychoanalytic theory]].<ref>{{F}} "[[Works of Sigmund Freud|The Psychogenesis of a Case of Female Homosexuality]]", 1920a. [[SE]] XVIII, 171</ref> One feature of this opposition is that the two terms do not function in an exactly symmetrical way. -->===Femininity and Masculinity ===[[Masculinity]] is taken by [[Freud ]] as the paradigm; he asserts that there is only one [[libido]], which is [[masculine]], and that the [[psyche|psychical ]] [[development ]] of the [[girl ]] is at first identical to that of the [[boy]], only diverging at a later [[moment]]. [[Femininity ]] is thus that which diverges from the [[masculinity|masculine paradigm]], and [[Freud ]] regards it as a mysterious, unexplored region, a '"[[dark continent]]."<ref>{{F}} ' ('[[Works of Sigmund Freud|The Question of Lay-Analysis]]'', 1926e: . [[SE ]] XX, 212). </ref> The '"riddle of the [[nature ]] of femininity' (Freud, 1933a: SE XXII, l 13) " comes to preoccupy [[Freud ]] in his later writings, and [[drives ]] him to ask the famous question, '"What does woman [[want]]?"<ref>{{F}} ''[[Works of Sigmund Freud|New Introductory Lectures on Psycho-Analysis]]'' (see Jones, 1953-7: vol1933a. 2[[SE]] XXII, 468). 113</ref> [[Masculinity ]] is a [[self]]-evident given, [[femininity ]] is a zone of mystery:

<blockquote>[[Psychoanalysis ]] does not try to describe what a [[woman ]] is -- that would be a task it could scarcely perform -- but sets [[about ]] enquiring how she comes into [[being]], how a [[woman ]] develops out of a [[child ]] with a bisexual disposition. (<ref>{{F}} ''[[Works of Sigmund Freud|New Introductory Lectures on Psycho-Analysis]]'', 1933a: . [[SE ]] XXII, 116).</ref></blockquote>

==Jacques Lacan==<!--===Development of Thought===Apart from a few remarks on the function of the MOTHER [[mother]] in the [[family ]] [[complexes (Lacan]], <ref>{{1938), }}</ref> [[Lacan]]'s pre-war writings do not engage with the debate on [[femininity]]. ===Women as Objects of Exchange===The occasional statements on the [[subject ]] which occur in [[Lacan]]'s [[Works of Sigmund Freud|work ]] in the early 1950s are couched in terms derived from [[Claude LÈviLévi-Strauss]]; [[woman|women ]] are seen as [[objects ]] of [[exchange ]] which circulate like signs [[sign]]s between kinship groups (see LÈvi.<ref>[[Claude Lévi-Strauss|Lévi-Strauss, Claude]]. ''[[The Elementary Structures of Kinship]]'', Boston: Beacon Press, 1969 [1949b)]. '</ref> <blockquote>"Women in the [[real ]] [[order ]] serve . . . as objects for the exchanges required by the elementary [[structures ]] of kinship' (."<ref>{{E, }} p. 207). </ref></blockquote>[[Lacan ]] argues that it is precisely the fact that [[woman ]] is pushed into the [[position ]] of an exchange object that constitutes the difficulty of the [[feminine position]]:<blockquote>For her, there's something insurmountable, let us say unacceptable, in the fact of being placed in the position of an [[object]] in the [[symbolic order]], to which, on the other hand, she is entirely subjected no less than the man.<ref>{{S2}} p. 262</ref></blockquote>====Dora Case====[[Lacan]]'s [[analysis]] of the [[Dora]] [[case]] makes the same point: what is unacceptable for [[Dora]] is her position as object of exchange between her [[father]] and Herr K.<ref>{{L}} 1951a</ref> Being in this position of exchange object means that [[woman]] "has a relation of the second degree to this [[symbolic]] order."<ref>{{S2}} p.262; {{S4}} p.95-6</ref>-->===Hysteria===In 1956, [[Lacan]] takes up the traditional [[association]] of [[hysteria]] with [[femininity]], arguing that [[hysteria]] is in fact [[nothing]] other than the question of [[femininity]] itself, the question which may be phrased "[[woman|What is a woman?]]". This is [[true]] for both [[male]] and [[female]] [[hysteric]]s.<ref>{{S3}} p. 178</ref> The term "[[woman]]" here refers not to some [[biology|biological]] [[essence]] but to a position in the [[symbolic order]]; it is synonymous with the term "[[feminine position]]".

For her, [[Lacan]] also argues that "thereis no [[symbolization]] of woman's something insurmountablesex as such", let us say unacceptable, in since there is no feminine equivalent to the "highly prevalent symbol" provided by the [[phallus]].<ref>{{S3}} p.176</ref> This symbolic dissymmetry forces the [[woman]] to take the fact of being placed in same route through the position of an object in [[Oedipus complex]] as the symbolic orderboy, i.e. to which[[identify]] with the [[father]]. However, on this is more [[complex]] for the other hand[[woman]], since she is entirely subjected no less than required to take the [[image]] of a member of the other [[sex]] as the manbasis for her [[identification]].<ref>{{S3}} p. (S2, 262)176</ref>

<!--===Feminine Sexuality===[[Lacan's analysis ]] returns to the question of the Dora case makes the same point: what is unacceptable [[femininity]] in 1958, in a paper entitled "[[Guiding remarks for Dora is her position as object a congress on feminine sexuality]]."<ref>{{L}} "[[Works of exchange between her father and Herr K (see Jacques Lacan|Propos directifs pour un congrès sur la sexualité féminine]]," 1958d, 1951a)in {{E}} pp. Being in 725-36</ref> In this position paper he [[notes]] the impasses which have beset [[psychoanalytic]] discussions of exchange object means [[feminine]] [[sexuality]], and argues that [[woman]] is the [[Other]] for both [[men]] and [[women]].<blockquote>"Man here [[acts]] as the relay whereby the woman becomes this Other for herself as she is this Other for him."<ref>{{Ec}} p. 732</ref></blockquote>-->===Feminine 'has 'Jouissance''===[[Lacan]]'s most important contributions to the debate on [[femininity]] come, like [[Freud]]'s, late in his [[work]]. In the [[seminar]] of [[{{Y}}|1972-3]], [[Lacan]] advances the [[concept]] of a relation specifically [[feminine]] ''[[jouissance]]'' which goes "beyond the phallus";<ref>{{S20}} p. 69</ref> this ''[[jouissance]]'' is "of the order of the second degree to infinite," like mystical ecstasy.<ref>{{S20}} p. 44</ref> [[Women]] may [[experience]] this symbolic order' (S2'[[jouissance]]'', 262; see S4, 95-6)but they [[know]] nothing about it.<ref>{{S20}} p.71</ref>

In 1956, ==="Woman Does Not Exist"===It is also in this [[seminar]] that [[Lacan ]] takes up his controversial [[formula]], first advanced in the traditional association [[seminar]] of 1970-1, "[[woman|Woman does not exist]]" (''la femme n'existe pas''),<ref>{{L}} (1973a) ''[[Works of Jacques Lacan|Télévision]]'', [[Paris]]: Seuil, 1973 [''[[Works of HYSTERIA with femininityJacques Lacan|Television: A Challenge to the Psychoanalytic Establishment]]'', arguing that hysteria ed. [[Joan Copjec]], trans. Denis Hollier, Rosalind Krauss and Annette Michelson, New York: Norton, 1990]. p.60</ref> which he here rephrases as "[[woman|there is no such thing as Woman]]" (''il n'y a pas La femme'').<ref>{{S20}} p. 68</ref> As is clear in fact nothing other than the original [[French]], what [[Lacan]] puts into question of femininity itselfis not the noun "[[woman]]", but the question definite article which may be phrased precedes it. In [[French]] the definite article indicates [[universality]], and this is precisely the characteristic that [[women]] [[lack]]; [[women]] "do not lend themselves to generalisation, even to phallocentric generalisation."<ref>{{L}} "[[Works of Jacques Lacan|Conférence à Genève sur le symptôme]]", 1975b. ''Les Block-Notes de la [[psychanalyse]]'What is a woman?', Brussels.</ref>

This is true ===Not-All===Hence [[Lacan]] strikes through the definite article whenever it precedes the term ''[[femme]]'' in much the same way as he strikes through the '''A''' to produce the [[symbol]] for the [[bar]]red [[Other]], for both male and female hysterics like [[woman]], the [[Other]] does not [[exist]]. To press home the point, [[Lacan]] speaks of [[woman]] as "[[not-all]]" (S3''[[not-all|pas-toute]]'');<ref>{{S20}} p. 13</ref> unlike [[masculinity]], 178which is a [[universal]] function founded upon the [[phallic]] exception ([[castration]]), [[woman]] is a non-universal which admits of no exception. The term 'woman'

here refers <!-- [[Woman]] is compared to [[truth]], since both partake of the [[logic]] of the [[not -all]] (there is no such [[thing]] as all [[women]]; it is [[impossible]] to some biological essence but say "the [[whole]] truth."<ref>{{L}} (1973a) ''[[Works of Jacques Lacan|Télévision]]'', Paris: Seuil, 1973 [''[[Works of Jacques Lacan|Television: A Challenge to the Psychoanalytic Establishment]]'', ed. Joan Copjec, trans. Denis Hollier, Rosalind Krauss and Annette Michelson, New York: Norton, 1990]. p. 64</ref> -->==="Woman is a Symptom of Man"===[[Lacan]] goes on in 1975 to [[state]] that a "[[woman|woman is a position symptom]]."<ref>{{L}} (1974-5) ''[[Seminar XXII|Le Séminaire. Livre XXII. RSI, 1974-75]]'', published in ''[[Ornicar?]]'', nos. 2-5, 1975. [[Seminar]] of 21 January 1975.</ref> More precisely, a [[woman]] is a [[symptom]] of a [[man]], in the [[sense]] that a [[woman]] can only ever enter the [[psychic]] [[economy]] of men as a [[fantasy]] [[object]] (a), the symbolic[[cause]] of their [[desire]].

===Feminist Theory===[[Lacan]]'s remarks on [[woman]] and on [[feminine sexuality]] have become the focus of controversy and debate in [[feminist]] [[theory]]. Feminists have [[divided]] over whether to see [[Lacan]] as an ally or an [[enemy]] of the feminist cause. Some have seen his theories as providing an incisive description of [[patriarchy]] and as a way of challenging fixed concepts of [[sexual]] [[identity]].<ref>Mitchell, Juliet and Rose, Jacqueline (eds) (1982) ''Feminine Sexuality: [[Jacques Lacan]] and the école freudienne'', [[London]]: Macmillan.</ref> Others have argued that his concept of the [[symbolic order; it is synonymous with ]] reinstates patriarchy as a transhistorical given, and that his privileging of the [[phallus]] simply repeats the term alleged misogynies of [[Freud]] himself.<ref>Gallop, Jane. (1982) ''[[Feminism]] and Psychoanalysis: The Daughter's [[Seduction]]'feminine position', London: Macmillan. ; Grosz, Elizabeth. (1990) ''Jacques Lacan also argues: A Feminist Introduction'', London and New York: Routledge.</ref>

that ==See Also=={{See}}* [[Castration]]* 'there is no symbolisation of woman's sex as such[[Jouissance]]', since there is no'||* [[Libido]]* [[Sexual difference]]||* [[Sexual relationship]]* [[Symptom]]{{Also}}

(S3, 176). This symbolic dissymmetry forces the woman to take the same route[[Category:Psychoanalysis]]  through the Oedipus complex as the boy, i.e. to identify with the father.  However, this is more complex for the woman, since she is required to take  the image of a member of the other sex as the basis for her identification (S3,  176).  [[Category:Jacques Lacan returns to the question of femininity in 1958, in a paper entitled]][[Category:Dictionary]] 'Guiding remarks for a congress on feminine sexuality' (Lacan, 1958d). In  this paper he notes the impasses which have beset psychoanalytic discussions  of feminine sexuality, and argues that woman is the Other for both men and  women; 'Man here acts as the relay whereby the woman becomes this Other  for herself as she is this Other for him' (Ec, 732).  Lacan's most important contributions to the debate on femininity come, like  Freud's, late in his work. In the seminar of 1972-3, Lacan advances the  concept of a specifically feminine JOUISSANCE Which goes 'beyond the phal-  lus' (S20, 69); this jouissance is 'of the order of the infinite', like mystical  ecstasy (S20, 44). Women may experience this jouissance, but they knoW  nothing about it (S20, 71). It is also in this seminar that Lacan takes up his  controversial formula, first advanced in the seminar of 1970-1, 'Woman does  not exist' (la femme n'existe pas - Lacan, 1973a[[Category: 60), which he here rephrases  as 'there is no such thing as Woman' (il n'y a pas La femme - S20, 68). As is  clear in the original French, what Lacan puts into question is not the noun     'woman', but the definite article which precedes it. In French the definite article indicates universality, and this is precisely the characteristic that women lack; women 'do not lend themselves to generalisation, even to phallocentric generalisation' (Lacan, 1975b). Hence Lacan strikes through the definite article whenever it precedes the term femme in much the same way as he strikes through the A to produce the symbol for the barred Other, for like woman, the Other does not exist (see BAR). To press home the point, Lacan speaks of woman as 'not-all' (pas-toute; S20, 13); unlike masculinity, which isSexuality]] a universal function founded upon the phallic exception (castration), woman is a non-universal which admits of no exception. Woman is compared to truth, since both partake of the logic of the not-all (there is no such thing as all women; it is impossible to say 'the whole truth') (Lacan, 1973a[[Category: 64).Concepts]] Lacan goes on in 1975 to state that 'a woman is a symptom' (Lacan, 1974-5[[Category: seminar of 21 January 1975). More precisely, a woman is a symptom of a man, in the sense that a woman can only ever enter the psychic economy of men as a fantasy object (a), the cause of their desire.  Lacan's remarks on woman and on feminine sexuality have become the focus of controversy and debate in feminist theory. Feminists have divided over whether to see Lacan as an ally or an enemy of the feminist cause. SomeTerms]]

have seen his theories as providing an incisive description of patriarchy and as a way of challenging fixed concepts of sexual identity (e.g. Mitchell and Rose, 1982). Others have argued that his concept of the symbolic order reinstates patriarchy as a transhistorical given, and that his privileging of the phallus simply repeats the alleged misogynies of Freud himself (e.g. Gallop, 1982; Grosz, 1990). For representative samples of the debate, see Adams and Cowie (1990) and Brennan (1989). For a Lacanian account of feminine sexuality, see Leader (1996).  == [[Kid A In Alphabet Land]] == [[Image:Kida_w.gif |right|frame]]'''Kid A In Alphabet Land Wallops Another Wayward Wench - The Wanton Woman!''' Wouldn't I Like To Whack You - But Isn't That What You Want! You Fill Out The Lack In Man! You Are The Ideal Partner With Whom The Sexual Relationship Is Finally Realized - Not! Hmph! The Woman Doesn't Exist![[Category:Kid A In Alphabet Land]]  [[Category:Sexuality]][[Category:Jacques Lacan]][[Category:Psychoanalysis]]{{Footer Kid A}}__NOTOC__