137 KB67 KB198920252025Hatch, Ryan Anthonyštevilka:2letnik:46str. 203-228ISSN:0353-4510DOI:10.3986/fv.46.2.09COBISSID_HOST:266685443URN:URN:NBN:SI:doc-VIC6LE0VenFilozofski inštitut ZRC SAZUFilozofski vestnikgenderpsihoanalizapsychoanalysisrazlika med spolomasexual differencespolSex| trouble|This essay sets out from the observation that, by and large, the Lacanian field has tend-ed to celebrate Joan Copjec’s “Sex and the Euthanasia of Reason” at the expense of rig-orously engaging with it. Indeed, Copjec’s explosive text has often been taken—wrong-ly—as warranting both an indiscriminate dismissal of the entire project of queer theory (especially where it contests psychoanalytic theorizations of sexual difference) and the frequent confusion of transphobic countertransference with psychoanalytic thinking. Moving against this tendency, “Sex: Trouble” disencumbers the queer- and trans-eman-cipatory kernel of Copjec’s argument—that is, that sex serves no other purpose than to serve no purpose—from the dimorphic and sometimes “cisnormative” terms through which this radical kernel is at once elaborated and undermined. Setting “Sex and the Euthanasia of Reason” in dialogue with a number of queer and trans theorists, “Sex: Trouble” establishes Copjec’s thought as an indispensable weapon in the struggle against the profusion of meanings that threaten to obliterate the negativity, the nothing, that sex is, and on which the freedom of queer and trans (read: all) subjects is stakedEsej izhaja iz opazke, da je lacanovsko polje na splošno slavilo poglavje »Spol in evta-nazija uma« iz knjige Joan Copjec Read My Desire na račun tega, da se ni zares strogo ukvarjalo z njim. Copjecino eksplozivno besedilo je bilo namreč pogosto – napačno – razumljeno kot opravičilo za brezpogojno zavračanje celotnega projekta kvir teorije (zlasti tam, kjer ta nasprotuje psihoanalitičnim teoretizacijam spolne razlike) in za pogosto pomešanje transfobnega kontratransferja s psihoanalitičnim mišljenjem. V nasprotju s to tendenco pričujoče besedilo osvobaja kvir in transemancipacijsko jedro Copjecinega argumenta – namreč, da je edina stvar, ki ji seks služi, ta, da ne služi ni-čemur – od dimorfnih in včasih »cisnormativnih« izrazov, skozi katere je to radikalno jedro hkrati razdelano in spodkopano. Pričujoče besedilo postavi »Spol in evtanazijo uma« v dialog z več kvir in trans teoretiki, s čimer Copjecino misel uveljavlja kot nepo-grešljivo orožje v boju proti obilici pomenov, ki grozijo, da bodo izbrisali negativnost, ta nič, ki je spol, in na katerem temelji svoboda kvir in trans (beri: vseh) subjektovTEXTznanstveno časopisjejournalsSlovenian National E-content AggregatorNational and University Library of SloveniaZRC SAZU