{"title":"精神分析的变态:女巫、婊子和荡妇","authors":"Thamy Ayouch","doi":"10.1080/15240657.2023.2211902","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Considered one of the three main structures of psychoanalytic psychopathology, perversion is quite an extensive category that is often based on behavior that is supposedly abnormal: nonhegemonic sexual practices and antisocial offenses or uncontrollable impulses. The epistemological and political controversy involved in the use of this term raises several questions, one of which is the moral reach of this notion coined by 19th-century psychiatry and passed on to mainstream psychoanalysis. This article aims to tackle the role sexuality naturalization plays in the psychoanalytic theorization of perversions, but also the extensiveness of this category. To address these questions, the author considers some current definitions of perversions in psychoanalytic psychopathology, to try to question some of their theoretical assumptions. When confronting these controversial definitions with Freud’s multilayered considerations about perversions, the author finds that it appears that Freud did not so much take up the category as he subverted it. Hence, in light of gender and sexuality deconstruction, and following Foucault’s injunction to “bodies and pleasures,” the author tries to show how psychoanalysis should remain perverse, in order to perpetuate Freud’s subversive approach to perversions.","PeriodicalId":39339,"journal":{"name":"Studies in Gender and Sexuality","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-04-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Psychoanalysis’s Perversions: Witches, Bitches, and Sluts\",\"authors\":\"Thamy Ayouch\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/15240657.2023.2211902\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT Considered one of the three main structures of psychoanalytic psychopathology, perversion is quite an extensive category that is often based on behavior that is supposedly abnormal: nonhegemonic sexual practices and antisocial offenses or uncontrollable impulses. The epistemological and political controversy involved in the use of this term raises several questions, one of which is the moral reach of this notion coined by 19th-century psychiatry and passed on to mainstream psychoanalysis. This article aims to tackle the role sexuality naturalization plays in the psychoanalytic theorization of perversions, but also the extensiveness of this category. To address these questions, the author considers some current definitions of perversions in psychoanalytic psychopathology, to try to question some of their theoretical assumptions. When confronting these controversial definitions with Freud’s multilayered considerations about perversions, the author finds that it appears that Freud did not so much take up the category as he subverted it. Hence, in light of gender and sexuality deconstruction, and following Foucault’s injunction to “bodies and pleasures,” the author tries to show how psychoanalysis should remain perverse, in order to perpetuate Freud’s subversive approach to perversions.\",\"PeriodicalId\":39339,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Studies in Gender and Sexuality\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-04-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Studies in Gender and Sexuality\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/15240657.2023.2211902\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Studies in Gender and Sexuality","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/15240657.2023.2211902","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
Psychoanalysis’s Perversions: Witches, Bitches, and Sluts
ABSTRACT Considered one of the three main structures of psychoanalytic psychopathology, perversion is quite an extensive category that is often based on behavior that is supposedly abnormal: nonhegemonic sexual practices and antisocial offenses or uncontrollable impulses. The epistemological and political controversy involved in the use of this term raises several questions, one of which is the moral reach of this notion coined by 19th-century psychiatry and passed on to mainstream psychoanalysis. This article aims to tackle the role sexuality naturalization plays in the psychoanalytic theorization of perversions, but also the extensiveness of this category. To address these questions, the author considers some current definitions of perversions in psychoanalytic psychopathology, to try to question some of their theoretical assumptions. When confronting these controversial definitions with Freud’s multilayered considerations about perversions, the author finds that it appears that Freud did not so much take up the category as he subverted it. Hence, in light of gender and sexuality deconstruction, and following Foucault’s injunction to “bodies and pleasures,” the author tries to show how psychoanalysis should remain perverse, in order to perpetuate Freud’s subversive approach to perversions.
期刊介绍:
Beginning in the final two decades of the 20th century, the study of gender and sexuality has been revived from a variety of directions: the traditions of feminist scholarship, postclassical and postmodern psychoanalytic theory, developmental research, and cultural studies have all contributed to renewed fascination with those powerfully formative aspects of subjectivity that fall within the rubric of "gender" and "sexuality." Clinicians, for their part, have returned to gender and sexuality with heightened sensitivity to the role of these constructs in the treatment situation, including the richly variegated ways in which assumptions about gender and sexuality enter into our understandings of "normality" and "pathology."