Response to review
- Elise, in her own erudite and engaging way, addresses the question, >Why won't he really talk to me-< Underpinning her core argument, Elise posits that a >masculine sense of self is felt to be dependent on an impermeable psychic boundary that is not to be penetrated.< In coining male impenetrability as the >citadel complex,< however, Elise introduces a lexicon of battle, polarization, and defense. And it is around this arena of her argument that Wrye raises most of her questions. First, Wrye questions if Elise's conceptualization of a penetrating nipple forcing >Unlawful Entry< into the vulnerable young male psyche reflects the lived, body-based experience of nursing mothers and babies. She also raises the question of whether Elise is describing normal >good-enough< or pathological mothering and fathering? Is she talking about a psychoanalytic model that emphasizes the biological differences between the sexes as opposed to the particular dynamics of the nursing couple? Does Elise's model privilege more binary gender-identity models than models of gender pluralities? Wrye suggests that the paper might actually have been developed as three smaller theoretical papers with more clinical >flesh< on each of the three strands: (a) the forces of bodily development on the male psyche (b) its role in the establishment of gender identity and (c) the >law of the father< in the course of separation-individuation.
Author: | Harriet Kimble Wryeand |
---|---|
Parent Title (English): | Psychoanalytic Dialogues Vol. 11 (2001), pp. 533-539. |
Document Type: | Articles |
Language: | English |
Year of first Publication: | 2001 |
Release Date: | 2017/11/20 |
Format: | xerox upon request / Fotokopie auf Anfrage |
IdNo: | Wryeand_H_K_2001 |
Erich Fromm's Library and Erich Fromm Archive: | Articles / Artikel |
Licence (German): |