성차이, 여성성, 남근기 논쟁-여자는 태어나는가 만들어지는가: 프로이트와 존스

The Controversy on the Sexual Difference, Feminity, and the Phallic Phase: Are Women Born or Made?: Freud and Jones

The historical and theoretical sources of the contemporary debates over the sexual difference, feminity and sexual identity go back to the debates over the phallic phase and the feminine sexuality which were prevalent in 1920-30 Psychoanalysts like Karen Homey, Ernest Jones and Melanie Klein, who oppposed the infamous Freudian 'phallic monism' proposed a new interpretation of the sexual identity and feminine sexuality. This paper deals With above all the criticism/new interpretation of E Jones against Freud in order to take the meaning and limit of his criticism into consideration systematically and to bring new lights to the Freudian phallic problem The author of this paper, after reviewing critically the important theses of Jones, shows that the theoretically and clinically contradictory conclusions of Jones's theory are due to the biologism and insistence on the 'natural right' of the two sexes, and proposes new reading of the Freudian themes such as castration complex, feminine sexuality, phallic phase and sexual difference in the light of the Freudian texts themselves and the Lacanian psychoanalysis This paper also demonstrates that Jones's theory of phallic phase and/or Oedipus complex is, notwithstanding its critical stance against Freud, simply the retroactive justification of the already existing biological sexual identity According to the author of this paper, the Freudian theory of Oedipus complex and phallic phase is, in contrast to Jones', the analytic theory which aims at the explanation of the mechanism, how and by which way a subject without sexual identity finally becomes man or woman through the phallic phase and Oedipus complex In conclusion, this paper focuses on in what aspects Jones' theory of the feminine sexuality is problematic and relies on a biologism unlike the original thinker, Freud whose theory of Oedipus complex goes beyond biologism and naive theory of natural equality of both sexes, and 'brings the dialectical relationship of the masculinity of the drive and sexual identity into relief, answering the ungrounded accusation of Freud's patriarchal bias by Jones