But just when you think he will offer his own peculiarly psychoanalytic theory of homosexuality, he completely bypasses the question. It will be seen, he writes, that we are not in a position to base a satisfactory explanation of the origin of inversion upon the material before us (1905,.146). But it is precisely through his attempt to answer this question that he discovers one of his most radical premises: nevertheless, Freud tells us, our investigation has put us in possession of a piece of knowledge which may turn out to be of greater importance. That piece of knowledge is that the object has no necessary connection to the sexual drive, that they are utterly independent of one another. Jumping from 1905 to 1920, we find Freud again unable to account for homosexuality (this time, specifically female homosexuality) despite his boasts to the contrary. But it is this very impasse that leads to another momentous leap in Freuds theory: the advance to oedipal asymmetry. It is clear that in Psychogenesis Freud struggles mightily to maintain the positive oedipus complex which would simply have the boy love his mother and the girl her father without explanation.
Gays lesbians in Motion Pictures: a bibliography
How the psychical consequences of treatment anatomy and the illusion of sexual complementarity (that the other has what one does not) come to figure lack is the crucial question here. And if Freud falters on this point, it is this very faltering which can show us the way. De lauretis is right to point out that despite its title and Freuds manifest intentions Psychogenesis leaves the reader with no clearer view of homosexuality (p. Indeed, this case history clearly fails in its attempt to offer us a thesis of the etiology of homosexuality. Despite Freuds boasts of a certain and seamless theory, he tells us It is not for psychoanalysis to solve the problem of homosexuality (p. 31 and he consistently undermines his own arguments. However, it is Freuds lapses that reveal to us that this essay is not about female homosexuality at all, but that its topic is feminine sexuality, let us take a little detour back to Three essays where a significant repetition awaits. Recall that Freud begins the Three essays by questioning all conventional theories of sexuality. Homosexuality is the linchpin of his attack on the established view that sexuality is natural. He rejects all existing theories of homosexuality, like degeneracy or acquisition through social influence as unsupportable.
The question is, why do so many of these authors find it necessary to bypass the question of psychogenesis, altogether in order to avoid psychopathologizing same-sex desire? The stumbling block, which is cited again and again in this volume, is Freuds reliance on the inseparable concepts of bisexuality and the oedipus complex, which can provoke the mistaken conclusion that he is simply endorsing a biologically-based heterosexual imperative. De lauretis, harris, and Dimen each highlight the gap between the Freud who rejected such an imperative in The Three essays by radically positing the arbitrariness and contingency of the object and the Freud who asserts that his patient changed into a man and took. Nevertheless, even if one believes Freud is fundamentally reactionary vis-à-vis sexuality (a belief which would have to ignore much red of his writing and practice) building a psychoanalytic theory without structural principles such as the oedipus complex forces one to either presume what one wishes. After all, these concepts, problematic as they may be, make it clear that for Freud, men and women, heterosexuals and homosexuals, are not born, but made. Ultimately, writes DErcole, what we need to develop is a theory of sexuality devoid of gender and sex that is based of feelings, erotic and otherwise.(p.127). This recommendation for a sexual theory without sex endorses the idea that we must rid psychoanalytic theory of sexual difference altogether in order to avoid supporting socio-political inequality. Such a recommendation does not take into account that sexual difference is psychical, not anatomical according to Freud. That is, sexuality is simply how human subjects are constituted as sexed and sexual in relation to lack, and only to each other as an effect of the misapprehension of lack.
Replacing Freuds reading of his patients unconscious conflicts, we find here hypothesized portrayals of her supposed conscious experience as a story self in conflict with the social order. Imagine, writes DErcole, the excitement this 18 year old girl must feel as she catches sight of the possibilities of life lived with a freedom her own mother never enjoyed. Her words suggest a determination and confidence, a sense of agency that is minimized by Freuds psychoanalytic story (p.119). Perez-foster asserts that the girl was courageous and that she protested her confinement and squarely faced her father and eventually his surrogate (p. She shines through as a remarkable resistor to authority and to what has come to be called patriarchy, states david woolwine (p.110). The problem with such portrayals of a lesbian activist avant la lettre is their complete collapse of conscious experience and unconscious dynamics. Such a breakdown obfuscates the specificity of Freudian discourse on sexuality, and its singular achievement in deciphering the trajectory by which the ideas and laws of human civilization come to inhabit us and live us, despite our ignorance, renunciations, and manifest repulsion. As Russell Jacoby writes, If Freud was conservative in his immediate disregard vertebrae of society, his concepts are radical in their pursuit of society where it allegedly does not exist: in the privacy of the individual (1975,.26).
It is this emphasis on Freud as the agent of deprivation which leads Lesser, in her Introduction, to state, we wished to remove the patient from Freuds shadow and give her a voice (p. But let us listen to what happens when the attempt is made to actualize this wish: in place of the fantasied restoration of the patients singular voice, we encounter a profusion of imaginary authorial identifications. Perez-foster reflects upon her experience of Carribean gender training; Schoenberg reviews a dream and narrates her struggles writing her essay; Carolyn Grey recounts her Wellesley college education. Thus, in response to this impossible wish, to give what one does not have to give, we find the authors repeating the very thing for which they inculpate Freud. That is, they substitute their own voices there where they damn Freud for confusing the voice in his own head for that of the patient (DErcole,. Dimens Conclusion recognizes this problem, but excuses it by concluding, If you discredit the personal voice, the first-person narrative, you risk eliminating one of the most important resistances to disciplinary power (p.250). However, such an assertion misses the mark by refusing to engage the penetrating questions raised by moss and zeavins powerful psychoanalytic argument for the unreliability of the first person voice, even when (or perhaps especially when) it speaks in the name of moral authority.
Essay : The biggest Mistake you can make and How
Through the succession to antimonies that this thought always presents us with, within each of these stages, and between them, it is a matter of confronting what is properly the object of our experience(1954-55/1988b,.147). On the other hand and in sparknotes contrast, the majority of writers in this collection deploy a reading strategy which Lesser describes in her Introduction as viewing knowledge as a sociopolitical product (p. Their works foreground critiques of Freud the misogynist, Freud the homophobe, freud the heterosexist, and Freud the oppressor, seeking to address and redress the injustices they believe freud perpetrated upon his patient fueled by what Goldner (in her publicity blurb) describes as feminist indignation regarding. 1) as he is blindsided by his need, (ibid,. 4) thus denying subjecthood to his patient (ibid,.
Freud is called to task for his profoundly digressive and incoherent essay(Gagnon,. 78 and accused of simply perpetuating the heterosexual myth of his time (and ours) (DErcole,. 118) as well as reacting with thinly disguised rage to challenges to masculine authority and prerogative (Grey,. He is also denounced for enforcing a determined silencing of one female homosexual (Schoenberg,. 216) that results in a blaming, self-serving account (ibid,.228). And with a large dose of the Schadenfreude dimen notes in her Conclusion, we are even told that the only thing that makes this particular text pleasurable to read is that ultimately, freud is shown, despite his own attempt to have it otherwise,.
Their creativity is achieved against a solid background of attention to the elements of Freuds text without sacrificing careful regard to the cultural context of his work. Allowing the gaps, contradictions, and slippages in the writing to speak to us, these writers interpret Freuds text. Delauretis inventive piece works and re-works Freuds case as she theorizes lesbian desire by re-conceptualizing the oedipus complex, thoughtfully contemplating memory, desire and reading itself in the process. In an essay reprinted from. Psychoanalytic dialogues, harris scrupulous attention to the letter of Freuds case history opens onto a provocative analysis of psychoanalytic history, which offers a firm base for her exploration of gender as paradox.
Moss and zeavins The female homosexual: Cest nous is a rewarding and utterly original psychoanalytic improvisation on sexuality and the voice. Using Freuds case as their starting note, these analysts remind us of the fundamental psychoanalytic principle, which we insist on forgetting time and again: that consciousness is a manifestation of unconscious dynamics, not the other way around. At once poetic and startlingly clear, their essay does nothing less than reveal how psychoanalytic truth radically undermines conventional epistemology. In fact, moss and zeavin perfectly capture the strategy of reading Freud they share with de lauretis and Harris when they write: we aim to counter Freuds sexual theorizing with. Freudian sexual theorizing (p.199; emphasis mine). And what is Freudian theorizing? Lacan defines it thus: Not for us the synchronization for the various stages of Freuds thought, nor even getting them to agree. It is a matter of seeing to what unique and constant difficulty the development of this thought-made of the contradictions and its various stages-responded.
Writing get Professional, essay, help
The authors herein seek alternatives to Freuds account of the unconscious determinants of the adoration this beautiful and clever girl of eighteen lavishes upon her beloved, a woman about 10 years her senior, who was known to live with a married woman as her friend. Whereas Freud characterizes his narrative as one in which it was possible to trace its origin and development in the mind with complete certainty and almost without a gap (p.13 each author in this collection challenges the discrepancy between this bold assertion and the twisting. Freuds chronicle provides fertile ground for these writers, who call into question nearly every aspect inventory of the case, including Freuds decision to see the patient (despite his misgivings) since she was brought to psychoanalysis by her father; his use of the oedipus complex to map. The papers in this volume are divided into two main sections: Contributions from Academic Scholars, and Contributions from Psychoanalysts. However, the great divide in this collection does not run along the lines of authorial profession; there is a notable schism in how these writers approach the act of reading Freud. This divergence is one that bears close scrutiny. On the one hand, several outstanding pieces by teresa de lauretis, Adrienne harris and Donald Moss with Lynne zeavin are noteworthy taxi for their original theorizing, not about Freud the man, but about the objects of his inquiry, sexuality and the unconscious.
Disorienting Sexualities: Psychoanalytic reappraisals of Sexual Identity ) and Erica Schoenberg, Phd, are analysts widely known for their influential work highlighting queer, gay and lesbian perspectives. This collection of essays is conceived as a dialogue amongst scholars, each of whom take as their starting point Freuds 1920 paper, The Psychogenesis of a case of Homosexuality in a woman, which is helpfully reprinted in this volume. To begin Psychogenesis, Freud stakes his papers claim to attention upon his observation that homosexuality in women. Has been neglected by psychoanalytic research (p. Echoing Freud in her Introduction, lesser tells us that the inspiration for this volume is the disregard this case has suffered throughout the history of psychoanalytic discourse as well as the marginalization of lesbians in the broader cultural milieu. However, she also points out that Psychogenesis has served as a foundation for subsequent disparaging theories of female homosexuality. Thus, we are drawn to the interesting paradox that the significance of Freuds case history lays at once in its obscurity and its influence. Much like in, doras Case, an interdisciplinary collection of essays compiled nearly two decades ago spotlighting the spiritual twin of our anonymous putative lesbian (Grey,. 148 the project of this anthology is to initiate discovery on the ground of Freuds failure, precisely there where he encountered alphabet questions regarding what he called the dark continent, feminine sexuality.
6, olive avenue in the tower District. Free parade, 5 festival pass (559) 266-5465,. Author: Lesser, ronnie. And Erica Schoenberg (Editors). Publisher: Philadelphia, pa: routledge, 1999, reviewed By: Ona nierenberg, winter 2003,. That Obscure subject of Desire: Freuds Female homosexual revisited is a multi-disciplinary effort, including papers by academic theorists notable in the areas of film theory, the social sciences and literary theory as well as those by practicing psychoanalysts. The editors, ronnie. Lesser, PhD, (co-editor.
Its a remembrance of riots, rebellion and revolution. Pride events take place in cities across the country and celebrate the Stonewall riots, which took place in New York citys Greenwich Village in 1969 and set the stage for the modern gay rights movement. Fresnos Pride event has grown and evolved over the years. The first parade lasted no more than 10 minutes and was attended mostly by the die-hard lgbt community. There has been conflict from groups like the ku klux Klan, which once picketed the event. The last several years have marked with diversity — both from those inside and out the lgbt community. More than 50 community groups and nonprofits enter floats in the parade each year. That includes several churches.essay
Story, fifth 5th Grade English Language Arts
Questions answers, share your knowledge answering the questions task below. Questions About: to unlock more"s and new features!, next, live chat (Members Only questions. Need help finding a specific"? Or just looking for some advice? Here you can ask questions on any topic and get answers from real people. Fresno rainbow Pride is one of the lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender (lgbt) community events in the central Valley. The annual celebration, which begins with a street parade down the center of Olive avenue, is also one of the oldest — just behind the reel Pride film Festival. Rainbow Pride celebrates 25th anniversary in Fresnos Tower District.