对堕胎禁忌的思考:取代失败的乱伦禁忌?

IF 0.5 4区 心理学 Q4 PSYCHIATRY Contemporary Psychoanalysis Pub Date : 2023-04-03 DOI:10.1080/00107530.2023.2247809
Jill Gentile
{"title":"对堕胎禁忌的思考:取代失败的乱伦禁忌?","authors":"Jill Gentile","doi":"10.1080/00107530.2023.2247809","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"AbstractThe author suggests reading the forces culminating in the Dobbs’ decision and the dismantling of Roe v. Wade as the expression of an “abortion taboo,” which represents patriarchy’s refusal to concede to—and its failure to achieve—the incest taboo. The incest taboo, in turn, reflects a weakened paternal law, the failure of which pivots on an archaic and pervasive repudiation of the non-unitary feminine. The abortion taboo performs the labor of annulling (sexed/feminine) difference, on the manifest level advocating reproduction and the life of the unborn, while—latently—insisting on the reproduction of the (White-hetero-masculinist) same, thus reaffirming incestuous relations and their frozen temporality. This essay highlights the signifying and politically liberatory potential of the vaginal, which introduces uncanny contradiction and is disruptive of patriarchal sameness, as well as bearing accountability to a law beyond the paternal: feminine law.Keywords: abortionincest taboopaternal lawfeminine lawvaginalfetus AcknowledgmentsThe author expresses her gratitude to Meredith Darcy for shepherding this essay, and to Helena Vissing and Ali Shames Dawson, for their generous and substantive editorial contributions.Disclosure statementNo potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).Notes1 In the case of a recently advanced “Prenatal Equal Protection Act” in South Carolina, all accomplices who “conspire” for an abortion would be equally liable of homicide (Zivot, Citation2023).Additional informationNotes on contributorsJill GentileJill Gentile, Ph.D., is clinical adjunct associate professor at the NYU Postdoctoral Program in Psychotherapy and Psychoanalysis, associate editor for Psychoanalytic Dialogues and Studies in Gender and Sexuality, and the author of Feminine Law: Freud, Free Speech, and the Voice of Desire, with Michael Macrone (Karnac, 2016). She received the 2017 Gradiva Award for her essay “What is special about speech?” and the 2020 Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association (JAPA) prize for “Time may change us: The strange temporalities, novel paradoxes, and democratic imaginaries of a pandemic.” She practices in New York City and hosts online clinical study groups.","PeriodicalId":46058,"journal":{"name":"Contemporary Psychoanalysis","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-04-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Thoughts on the Abortion Taboo: Displacement of a Failing Incest Taboo?\",\"authors\":\"Jill Gentile\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/00107530.2023.2247809\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"AbstractThe author suggests reading the forces culminating in the Dobbs’ decision and the dismantling of Roe v. Wade as the expression of an “abortion taboo,” which represents patriarchy’s refusal to concede to—and its failure to achieve—the incest taboo. The incest taboo, in turn, reflects a weakened paternal law, the failure of which pivots on an archaic and pervasive repudiation of the non-unitary feminine. The abortion taboo performs the labor of annulling (sexed/feminine) difference, on the manifest level advocating reproduction and the life of the unborn, while—latently—insisting on the reproduction of the (White-hetero-masculinist) same, thus reaffirming incestuous relations and their frozen temporality. This essay highlights the signifying and politically liberatory potential of the vaginal, which introduces uncanny contradiction and is disruptive of patriarchal sameness, as well as bearing accountability to a law beyond the paternal: feminine law.Keywords: abortionincest taboopaternal lawfeminine lawvaginalfetus AcknowledgmentsThe author expresses her gratitude to Meredith Darcy for shepherding this essay, and to Helena Vissing and Ali Shames Dawson, for their generous and substantive editorial contributions.Disclosure statementNo potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).Notes1 In the case of a recently advanced “Prenatal Equal Protection Act” in South Carolina, all accomplices who “conspire” for an abortion would be equally liable of homicide (Zivot, Citation2023).Additional informationNotes on contributorsJill GentileJill Gentile, Ph.D., is clinical adjunct associate professor at the NYU Postdoctoral Program in Psychotherapy and Psychoanalysis, associate editor for Psychoanalytic Dialogues and Studies in Gender and Sexuality, and the author of Feminine Law: Freud, Free Speech, and the Voice of Desire, with Michael Macrone (Karnac, 2016). She received the 2017 Gradiva Award for her essay “What is special about speech?” and the 2020 Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association (JAPA) prize for “Time may change us: The strange temporalities, novel paradoxes, and democratic imaginaries of a pandemic.” She practices in New York City and hosts online clinical study groups.\",\"PeriodicalId\":46058,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Contemporary Psychoanalysis\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-04-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Contemporary Psychoanalysis\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/00107530.2023.2247809\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHIATRY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Contemporary Psychoanalysis","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00107530.2023.2247809","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

摘要作者建议将多布斯案的判决和罗伊诉韦德案的瓦解中达到高潮的力量解读为“堕胎禁忌”的表达,这代表了父权制拒绝承认——以及它未能实现——乱伦禁忌。乱伦禁忌反过来反映了父权法则的弱化,父权法则的失败在于对非单一女性的陈旧而普遍的否定。堕胎禁忌进行了废除(性别/女性)差异的劳动,在表面上提倡生殖和未出生的生命,同时——潜在地——坚持(白人-异性恋-男性主义)相同的生殖,从而重申乱伦关系及其冻结的暂时性。这篇文章强调了阴道的象征意义和政治解放潜力,它引入了不可思议的矛盾,破坏了父权的同一性,并对父权之外的法律负有责任:女性法。关键词:堕胎乱伦禁忌父系法律女性法律阴道胎儿致谢作者感谢梅雷迪思·达西对这篇文章的指导,感谢海伦娜·维辛和阿里·沙姆斯·道森慷慨而实质性的编辑贡献。披露声明作者未报告潜在的利益冲突。注1在南卡罗来纳州最近推进的“产前平等保护法案”中,所有“共谋”堕胎的同谋将同样承担杀人罪的责任(Zivot, Citation2023)。吉尔·金泰尔,博士,纽约大学心理治疗和精神分析博士后项目的临床兼职副教授,《精神分析对话和性别与性研究》的副主编,《女性法:弗洛伊德、言论自由和欲望之声》的作者,与迈克尔·马克隆(Karnac, 2016)合著。她凭借论文《演讲有什么特别之处?》获得2017年格拉迪瓦奖。以及2020年《美国精神分析协会杂志》(JAPA)的“时间可能改变我们:流行病的奇怪的时间性、新颖的悖论和民主想象”奖。她在纽约市执业,并主持在线临床研究小组。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Thoughts on the Abortion Taboo: Displacement of a Failing Incest Taboo?
AbstractThe author suggests reading the forces culminating in the Dobbs’ decision and the dismantling of Roe v. Wade as the expression of an “abortion taboo,” which represents patriarchy’s refusal to concede to—and its failure to achieve—the incest taboo. The incest taboo, in turn, reflects a weakened paternal law, the failure of which pivots on an archaic and pervasive repudiation of the non-unitary feminine. The abortion taboo performs the labor of annulling (sexed/feminine) difference, on the manifest level advocating reproduction and the life of the unborn, while—latently—insisting on the reproduction of the (White-hetero-masculinist) same, thus reaffirming incestuous relations and their frozen temporality. This essay highlights the signifying and politically liberatory potential of the vaginal, which introduces uncanny contradiction and is disruptive of patriarchal sameness, as well as bearing accountability to a law beyond the paternal: feminine law.Keywords: abortionincest taboopaternal lawfeminine lawvaginalfetus AcknowledgmentsThe author expresses her gratitude to Meredith Darcy for shepherding this essay, and to Helena Vissing and Ali Shames Dawson, for their generous and substantive editorial contributions.Disclosure statementNo potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).Notes1 In the case of a recently advanced “Prenatal Equal Protection Act” in South Carolina, all accomplices who “conspire” for an abortion would be equally liable of homicide (Zivot, Citation2023).Additional informationNotes on contributorsJill GentileJill Gentile, Ph.D., is clinical adjunct associate professor at the NYU Postdoctoral Program in Psychotherapy and Psychoanalysis, associate editor for Psychoanalytic Dialogues and Studies in Gender and Sexuality, and the author of Feminine Law: Freud, Free Speech, and the Voice of Desire, with Michael Macrone (Karnac, 2016). She received the 2017 Gradiva Award for her essay “What is special about speech?” and the 2020 Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association (JAPA) prize for “Time may change us: The strange temporalities, novel paradoxes, and democratic imaginaries of a pandemic.” She practices in New York City and hosts online clinical study groups.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
19
期刊最新文献
What Happens When We Talk to Each Other: Psychoanalytic Perspectives on Race and Other Difficult Conversations A Fresh Beginning to an Old Conversation: Thoughts on Leon Hoffman’s “We Don’t Trust YOU: Reflections on Anti-Racism in Psychoanalysis” Looking for Love in All the Wrong Places: Hatred as a Conflict Between Dependency and the Pseudo-Autonomous Self Surviving Hating and Being Hated On “Othering”
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1