A model of gender as a paradoxical and multidimensional structure is proposed. An extended critical reading of Freud's essay on a case of homosexuality in a woman undermines the notion of gender identity and sexual object choice as monolithic categories of experience. The Freud case is considered for its radical model of sexuality and gender, but also for its restrictive use of classical interpretation. Alternative interpretive lines and transference countertransference meanings are considered. With the use of contemporary clinical material, a model of gender identity and sexuality is proposed in which the unconscious and symbolic meaning of bodies and genders, rather than biological sex of the lover and the beloved, carries the interpretive weight.
The current reemergence of clinicians’ attention to the sequelae of childhood sexual abuse has been met by a powerful critical opposition. The criticisms often extend to many forms of psychotherapy and to psychoanalytic treatments of trauma. This article situates the debate in its historical context. It examines the use of eyewitness testimony and the work of Elizabeth Loftus in this controversy and makes a case for a more wide-ranging, careful, and critical reading of cognitive neuroscience and empirical studies of memory processes. The distinctions between clinical data, legal evidence, and research findings are considered. The essay also examines some of the challenges and problems in treating trauma and in considering the impact of real events in a relational and social constructionist psychoanalysis.