Male fantasy, female makeup

Male fantasies are a small resistance to the symbolism brought about by castration. They try to push sex into a dimension that has no rules and is higher than pleasure. However, men know better than anyone else that there is no possibility of success in this matter. Women don't put on makeup to seduce men, but to "hint" and "hint" that she has something that men don't have, and this "extra" thing for men is "emptiness". Decorating "emptiness" on their bodies gives them The body as the equivalent of "being", an unparalleled beauty. Lacan uses "castration" to define male enjoyment, and " one more time " to highlight the surplus nature of female enjoyment.

The difference here is that the mother is the son's first big other, while the daughter takes the initiative to "move" herself to the mother's position and then gives her mother

Put on the big fork, and then with this big fork, go directly to the father, lusting after the father's penis. Women can swim to the other side of the law without much effort, and here behind the law

Shore, males are still trying to learn pleasure again through castration.

A man "needs" castration. In fact, what he "needs" is a veil marking "lack" to cover up what he can never have. However, a woman's lack is not covered up. Her "lack" can be understood as a A kind of "naked" "lack". Therefore, women’s enjoyment is always excessive compared to men’s. After all, the upper limit of male pleasure is the pleasure of the symbolic world: the pleasure of phallus. Women, on the other hand, have found richer, even more "positive" enjoyment outside of Philos, which is the enjoyment of the Big Other. An interesting and not uncommon plot twist must be mentioned at this time: women who have escaped castration enter the male castration drama as others, teasing men, "Say 'no'!" All male enjoyment is necessary With the "consent" of the law of the "father" and his surrogate phallus (and through the mediation of a castrated remnant a), female enjoyment is, by contrast, an unabashed "absence" Enjoyment.

Lacan's formulation of sexual logic illustrates what he sees as the real differences between men and women. Males, almost all males are castrated, there is only one exception, that is the "father", only he castrates his son. There are no similar roles for women. The relationship between women and castration is much more ambiguous: neither all are castrated, nor all escape castration, so when we talk about women, we can only say "not necessarily" & "not all", women cum " negate the possibility. The "castration" of women is postponed indefinitely. Every woman may have preserved some kind of primitive enjoyment. In other words, every woman's enjoyment is very different. When it comes to pleasure, men are like depositing all their assets in a single bank account (philes) in the same currency. When they want to use it, they can only withdraw cash from this account again and again. A woman, on the other hand, converts her assets into various currencies and circulates them as she pleases, and there is no back-end system that contains all of her transactions. Women are not like men. Their enjoyment is primitive, vigorous, and strange. In this sense, there is no collective concept of "women". "Women do not exist" because women are such an "empty set", an infinity in a negative theological sense.

The "not necessarily & not everything" that is unique to women as "extra" always puts women in a situation where they want to say something but can't seem to say it clearly. They need to face too many mysteries that have lost their meaning, and they It is itself the biggest mystery related to pleasure.

The subject accepts the castration of the father's law and gives up the enjoyment of object a. Therefore, after entering the realm of the big other, it can be marked by the signifier. Since the female subject does not all obey the father's law, nor does it fully accept the castration of the Big Other, for the female subject, after entering the symbolic world, at least part of it cannot be expressed by the signifier, which constitutes The mystery of female existence, "what is a woman".

The problem here is still: there is and only one stone ancestor. If you must find a "sister" for Shizu, it will be "missing". There is no symbolization of female sexual organs, something Freud and Lacan have always insisted on. Lacan believed that it was a strange logic to use a male sexual organ to distinguish between men and women, so he proposed that this was not an anatomical issue, but a gender distinction issue at the level of the signifier. If it is a visual thing, we cannot see something that is not there, so there is an imaginary filling there. The imaginary stone ancestor is to replace the thing that is not there. It is precisely because of the production of this imaginary stone ancestor, Only in women can we see "nothing". The problem Lacan faced was how to use a signifier to indicate an "empty" position. Because the signifier only changes a present thing into an absence, there must be a symbolic stone ancestor here to "sexualize" "Imaginary Stone Ancestor. The symbolic stone ancestor is the missing signifier and the signifier of the desire of the Other.