No description available.

While much research has established that gender has undesirable effects, and some has even concluded that subjective and social life would be preferable without it, there has been limited extension of these claims to the corollary of exploring how it might be eradicated and what could replace it. This thesis considers if and how this could be done. It provides a practicable elaboration of an alternative way of being to that of sex/gender difference by developing theory that argues that the eradication of sexual difference is possible and desirable, and presenting various practices that demonstrate this. Drawing on gender theory and feminist science, the durability of gender is traced back to its anterior spectre of an assumed stable and immutable sex, and specifically compulsory sexual difference. Also, drawing on philosophy and empirical sociological studies, it argues that this is not ontologically tied to the nature of sexual difference, but to socially and intersubjectively constituted and enacted factors, and therefore that social life without sexual difference is an ontological possibility and other ways of being and relating are possible. The normative argument that the existence of sexual difference is undesirable is made by appealing to an ideal of “autonomy,” which sexual difference serves to limit. Simone de Beauvoir’s ethical philosophy is drawn on to develop an ontological ethics that posits freedom or autonomy as a collective situated “doing” which sexual difference limits by presenting oppositional antagonism as universal. A more preferable (and practically possible) situated way of “doing” that maximises “autonomy” would be that of reciprocity. In elaborating the principle of reciprocity as a replacement for sexual difference and considering its practicability, it is evaluated in terms of the normative precepts that the thesis takes off from in order to consider its robustness and to avoid accidentally replicating the restriction on, or “violence” towards autonomy that it is intended to replace. Potential antinomies in realising such an ethic, specifically in “impure” real-world contexts are considered. Also, specific features to ensure and maintain reciprocity are developed, by treating the “androgyny” that I argue is inherent to reciprocity as a transcendence, and not combination or collapse, of the oppositional nature of sexual difference. These constitute a specific way of relating to others that is both specific to them individually and also encompasses the universal ethic of reciprocity. In making this ethic practicable, the thesis considers some possible means or strategies through which a reciprocal (in the specific sense developed) ethic could be fostered so that subjects could understand themselves and others without presumptions of sexual difference. It offers some illustrations of ways of perceiving and treating the self and others (and learning how to do so) that are reciprocal, drawing on real-world queer, anarchist and pedagogical practices that are compatible with the ontological, normative and practical precepts of the ethic of reciprocity. It also considers what the consequences for the eradication of sexual difference might be for “sexuality” and desire. My distinctive contribution to knowledge lies in taking critical, deconstructive theoretical work around gender that is often construed as abstract and impracticable, and attempting to render it socially relevant and utilisable, without undermining its antiuniversalising impulses. I have done this by teasing out the practical implications of such theoretical insights and by drawing on non-traditional sources of ideas / theory. Knitting divergent theories together in an original way, I have contributed to making such theories useful for social change by crafting what I argue is a thorough workable re-constructive ethic that is compatible with the impulses of deconstruction.

The common idea of love is a fusion of the individuals into one. The idea has permeated throughout society so that it has now been taken for granted. Such an idea of fusion of two individuals is actually harmful rather than helpful. In this thesis, I will show why the fusion model is not a prime model of love that one should follow, starting with Sartre. He is the paradigmatic example of the traditional model of love going wrong. By taking the fusion model to its final culmination, love is impossible or among other things sadomasochistic. Beauvoir reads Sartre's view as a bad-faith version of love. She inserts her view by giving an account of the €œwoman in love which is an example of a woman under Sartre'€™s interpretation of love. After showing why love under Sartre cannot be true, Beauvoir states that authentic love can only happen if the individuals are equal. That way, love can have grounds for culmination and fusion. Irigaray looks at the fusion model as debunked. She sees what Sartre and Beauvoir try to do but they are still assuming major things. Irigaray states that genuine love is based on the differences particularly sexual differences €”which Sartre and Beauvoir have failed to realize. By looking at Irigaray'€™s account of love, the traditional fusion model is debunked and love based on differences is applauded.

My dissertation looks at the connections between Lacan’s four discourses and the sexuation graph in order to claim that sexuation is discursive and that, as Lacan presents it with the phallus as its quilting point, the sexuation graph is a narrative based on patriarchal hegemony, which is one of many possible narratives. I argue that through the hysteric’s discourse and a removal of the phallus as the Symbolic-Imaginary quilting point, we can begin to formulate new narratives of sexuated subjectivities. The textual objects I use for this project are literary and filmic works where women are the central topic or figure, and the works are all created and developed by men. Following Kristeva’s focus on the semiotic, in particular men’s avant-garde writing, I choose these works as illustrations of the ways in which the depiction of women has shifted in the wake of at least half a century of feminist and queer scholarship and activism. Grounded in Lacan’s claim that “Woman does not exist,” I explicate Woman as metaphor as an Imaginary construction of masculinist logic in order to develop a theory of Woman as metonymy that collapses the oppressive, Imaginary constructions and proliferations of Woman. Finally, I read closely Lacan’s sexuation graph, specifically turning it sideways and replacing the phallus with the general, empty master signifier to show the ways in which we can construct new meanings of subjectivity.

This thesis offers an exploration of the writing of an irreducible feminine difference in four novels by women. Drawing from the work of the Continental feminist philosopher Luce Irigaray, I read her conceptual undertaking of sexual difference as precipitating an alternative narrative for feminist thought. The crux of this project involves an inscription of the indeterminable, and thus far elided, category of the feminine, back into the uncontested frameworks of patriarchal knowledge. In so doing, the feminine illuminates what Irigaray calls the “otherwise, elsewhere” that troubles the universality of all masculine discourse. Sexual difference can then be extrapolated from these terms, to anticipate a compelling horizon of possibilities for feminism that lies beyond the deterministic confines of the singular present. Its advent marks the creation of radical feminist lines of inquiry that have yet to be imagined. My study builds on Irigaray’s approach to sexual difference to suggest that the transformative space of literature provides a promising blueprint for its otherwise inchoate articulation. The texts I analyse invoke an anticipatory impulse to think the impossible, and offer an imaginative frame of reference for envisioning these processes of sexual difference. By considering four novels by Marilynne Robinson, Jeanette Winterson, Elena Ferrante, and Rachel Cusk, I illustrate that their engagement with sexual difference is a strategic and combative negotiation of our dominant modes of understanding. More crucially, I examine the dialogue that is inspired by these texts when the intimations of sexual difference are brought together with the evocative possibilities of literature, which might accordingly be extended to affirm a new and reflective cartography for the futures of the feminist imaginary. A further narrative can be located in the sequence of the chapters in my thesis, insofar as each of its novels was published around successive decades apart from 1980- 2014. By alluding to the respective contextual backdrops of these texts, I consider the more overarching trajectory of feminist theory and criticism, in which sexual difference has materialised in its contingent narratives as an enduring, and indeed unsettling, question. It circulates as a speculative theoretical paradigm in the multiple intersections of feminist theory, philosophy, and literary studies. My thesis will argue not only for the altogether difficult and necessary unknowability of feminist thought as it looks ahead to the future, but also for the critical relevance of literary perspectives in explicating these processes of feminist world-making.

My dissertation looks at the connections between Lacan’s four discourses and the sexuation graph in order to claim that sexuation is discursive and that, as Lacan presents it with the phallus as its quilting point, the sexuation graph is a narrative based on patriarchal hegemony, which is one of many possible narratives. I argue that through the hysteric’s discourse and a removal of the phallus as the Symbolic-Imaginary quilting point, we can begin to formulate new narratives of sexuated subjectivities. The textual objects I use for this project are literary and filmic works where women are the central topic or figure, and the works are all created and developed by men. Following Kristeva’s focus on the semiotic, in particular men’s avant-garde writing, I choose these works as illustrations of the ways in which the depiction of women has shifted in the wake of at least half a century of feminist and queer scholarship and activism. Grounded in Lacan’s claim that “Woman does not exist,” I explicate Woman as metaphor as an Imaginary construction of masculinist logic in order to develop a theory of Woman as metonymy that collapses the oppressive, Imaginary constructions and proliferations of Woman. Finally, I read closely Lacan’s sexuation graph, specifically turning it sideways and replacing the phallus with the general, empty master signifier to show the ways in which we can construct new meanings of subjectivity.

My dissertation presents a new reading of a rarely-studied early Christian text, the First Apocalypse of James, and seeks to intervene in major scholarly debates concerning martyrdom, scriptural interpretation and sexual difference. I begin by showing how the text exhorts its readers and hearers toward martyrdom by narrating the progress of James, the brother of Jesus, in overcoming his fear and preparing for martyrdom. Here Jesus' revelation to James sets out a ritual of ascent that constitutes the martyr's confession of faith—a previously unattested form to articulate the meaning of dying for God. I use intertextual methods to identify an interpretation of the Gospel of John in which Jesus' statements of identity in John are read as descriptions of the true nature of the perfected martyr. This analysis locates scripturally-based debates about the nature of Christ within a context in which practices of preparation for martyrdom are being devised. 1ApocJas also reads Isaiah to identify female heroes whose example it exhorts James to follow. I use this reading of 1ApocJas to challenge the notion that a strict gendered hierarchy was reinscribed equally by Christian martyrdom texts. Through comparison to select examples of Valentinian theology, I establish that 1ApocJas envisions a productive tension in the divine realms between lower and higher female divine figures. By associating female martyrs with the higher female divinities and contrasting them to the lower female divinities, 1ApocJas valorizes martyrs as female and thus complicates any straightforward masculinization of the martyrs. My reading of 1ApocJas broadens our understanding of how Christians prepared themselves for martyrdom by interpreting scripture in innovative ways, devising new ritual practices, and developing distinctive articulations of human and divine sexual difference.

The purpose of this study is to explore the manifestations and representations of masculinity and feminity in two novels of Marguerite Duras from a gender studies perspective. We will first review the traditional place of masculine and feminine stereotypes in the phallocentric order, basing our research on Bourdieu’s and Badinter’s work about the role of men and women in our society. Regarding the topic of sexual identity, our theoretical background will include feminist theories as Judith Butler’s gender performativity concept as well as Luce Irigaray’s notion of mimesis. The philosophy part can also give important clues for the interpretation of both male and female sentimental and sexual behavior: the work of the philosopher Michel Onfray, in particular his theory called "solar erotic", will help us to reveal the characteristics of Duras’ erotic writing. The results of our analysis show that both characters in the two novels present an ambiguous sexual identity: they seem to hesitate between the social obligation relative to their gender and the need of acting according to their own nature (androgyny of the Chinese). Our analysis shows the possibility of a deconstruction of the gender as well as a tendency to what Butler calls the subversion of identity. The exploration of Duras’ erotic writing seems to confirm those results, demonstrating the power of feminine desire and sexual pleasure in opposition to masculine sentimental pain and fragility.

x, 244 p. / This dissertation presents a reading of the work of French feminist philosopher Luce Irigaray, with a particular focus on her most recent texts, which explicitly concern the question of ethics. Responding to concerns that Irigaray's work displays a discontinuity, and that this "later" work is perhaps no longer useful for feminists, I argue that there is in fact a rigorous philosophical continuity to Irigaray's work. In particular, I claim that Irigaray's central philosophical contribution is a transformation of the concept of human subjectivity by way of the thinking of sexuate difference as what I call a "relational limitation." This concept is at once ontological and ethical, and it describes the way in which Irigaray's oeuvre, taken as a continuous whole, transforms philosophical understandings of language, being, and ethics by way of thinking them relationally, combining all of these terms together into a new understanding of human subjectivity that involves a new way of thinking about language and meaning as constitutively shared. I discuss the way in which Irigaray elaborates this new understanding in dialogue with male thinkers, in particular with Lacan and Heidegger. I identify an interest in the issue of relation in Irigaray's earlier work, notably through her engagement with Lacan, in whom she identifies what I call a "non-relational" limit, or a conception of human subjectivity and language that refuses the priority of relation. Through her dialogue with Heidegger, I argue, Irigaray comes closer to articulating her own vision of subjectivity as inherently structured by "relational limitation," but she must surpass both Lacanian and Heideggerian paradigms in order to articulate her own unique vision of sexuate difference as two different, yet interrelated, manners of the unfolding of language and of human subjectivity itself. Thus, my tracing of this continuity of Irigaray's project shows how her most recent work is extremely important for feminist theory, insofar as it elaborates a philosophical and ethical vision of how to improve the (often impoverished and/or violent) relations between men and women. In particular, the concept of a "non-relational" limitation versus a "relational limitation" provides a helpful way of understanding the underlying causes and dynamics of the distorted relationship between the sexes under patriarchy--a point that I illustrate with the example of domestic violence. / Committee in charge: Beata Stawarska, Co-Chair; Alejandro A. Vallega, Co-Chair; Theodore A. Toadvine, Member; Karen C. McPherson, Outside Member

Le sexuel à l’oeuvre dans la clinique psychanalytique s'avère toujours traversé par des enjeux de genre, genre commesexe social mais aussi comme catégorie discursive produisant le corps sexué et questionnant la subjectivité d'uneépoque. Cette thématique est analysée du point de vue de la question des normes et de la prise en compte de sonincorporation et de son attachement dans les processus d'identification. Il s'agira de penser les insuffisancesthéoriques et politiques de la notion de « différence sexuelle » pour une clinique qui souhaite prendre en compte leschangements sociaux relatifs à la sexualité et inventer de nouvelles manières de « faire de la politique ». Unefétichisation de la différence sexuelle m'est apparue un obstacle majeur aux avancées du travail théorico-clinique. Maclinique au quotidien comme psychologue clinicienne en service d'urologie à l'hôpital accueillant des personnessouffrant dans leur sexualité m'a invité à m'enrichir de l'apport de la pluridisciplinarité, et particulièrement des étudesde genre et féministes. Celles-ci me sont apparues comme pouvant permettre à la psychanalyse de demeurer undispositif critique à l'endroit des normes, envisagées comme grammaire de la subjectivation. De penser le lien entremode d'assujettissement, désir de normes et souffrance sexuelle et d'entendre la plainte, le symptôme dans sasingularité et comme résistance psychique aux normes sociales. L'approche de la différence sexuelle sous l'angle dugenre propose à la psychanalyse d'autres configurations du désir, du symbolique, du pouvoir et de la sexuation pourainsi articuler l'individuel et le collectif, le sujet social avec le sujet de l'inconscient. Ainsi pouvons nous penserpsychanalytiquement sans les pathologiser les configurations de genre, sexe et sexualité contestant la conceptionbinaire de la différence sexuelle et ses assignations, avec la question centrale du traitement politique que l'on souhaitefaire de la différence. / In psychoanalysis clinical practice, the sexual always is confronted to gender's issues ; gender as social sex butalso as a discursive category producing sexed body and questionning a particular time's subjectivity. We haveinvestigated those questions from the perspective of norms, taking into account its incorporation and attachment inthe identification process. This will involve thinking about the concept of “sexual difference” theorical and politicalshortcomings, in order to propose a clinical approach that takes into account social changes related to sexuality and toinvent new ways to « do politics ». The fetichization of sexual difference, it seems to me, is a obstacle to theoreticaland clinical work's advancement. My daily clinical practice as a clinical psychologist in the hospital urologydepartment, where I see people suffering in their sexuality, opened upfor me the benefits of a multidisciplinaryapproach, particulary in gender and feminist studies. These ones appeared to me allowing psychoanalysis to remain acritical perspective of the norms, seen as a “grammar of subjectivation” ; allow also to investigate the link betweenmodes of submission, desire of norms and sexual suffering, and lastly to be able to hear the complaint, the symptom,as a singularity, a resistance to social norms. The approach of the sexual difference seen from the gender perspectiveopen up for psychoanalysis new configurations of desire, symbolic, power and sexuation, allowing a differentarticulation of the individual and collective, of the social actor and the unconscious. We may attain a psychoanalyticalapproach that doesn't see as pathology, gender, sex and sexuality's configurations which contest the binary conceptionof sexual difference and its assignations, withing the central question, the political treatment of “ difference”.