‌‌‌‌　　英：castration complex; 法：complexe de castration; 德：Kastrationskomplex

‌‌‌‌　　弗洛伊德在1908年首次描述阉割情结时指出，孩子在发现两性之间的解剖学差异（阴茎的在场或缺位）之际，会假设此种差异是由于女性的阴茎被割掉所致(Fr©ud,I9O8c)。阉割情结因而是当一种幼儿理论（人人皆有阴茎）为一种新的理论（女性遭到阉割）所取代的时刻。这一新的幼儿理论，在男孩和女孩身上会产生不同的结果。男孩恐惧他自己的阴茎会被父亲割掉（阉割焦虑）：而女孩则将她自己看作已然遭到（母亲的）阉割，并试图对此进行否认或是通过寻求一个孩子作为阴茎的替代来对此进行补偿（阴茎嫉羡）。

‌‌‌‌　　阉割情结影响到两性，是因为它的出现紧密联系着阳具阶段 (phallic phase), 在此一心理性欲发展的时刻，孩子一无论男孩还是女孩一都只认识一个生殖器官，即男性生殖器。此一时期也以幼儿生殖组织 (infantile genital organisation)而著称，因为它是各种部分冲动在生殖器官的首位之下获得统一的最初时刻。因而，它便预期了在青春期才出现的严格意义上的生殖组织，主体在此时业已获悉了男性与女性的性器官 (见：Freud, 1923e).

‌‌‌‌　　弗洛伊德认为，阉割情结与俄狄浦斯情结（OEDIPUS COMPLEX)虽然有着紧密的关联，但是它在俄狄浦斯情结中的作用对于男孩和女孩来说是不同的。对于男孩而言，阉割情结是出离俄狄浦斯情结的拐点，是俄狄浦斯情结的最终转折点：因为他对阉割的恐惧（往往由某种威胁所唤起），男孩会放弃自己对母亲的欲望，从而进入潜伏期。对于女孩而言，阉割情结则是进入俄狄浦斯情结的拐，点：正是她对母亲的怨恨一她责备母亲剥夺了自己的阴茎一致使她把自己的力比多欲望导离母亲并重新导向父亲。因为此种差异，俄狄浦斯情结在女孩的情况下就没有可比较于男孩的决定性的最终转折点 (Freud, 1924d).

‌‌‌‌　　弗洛伊德渐渐地把阉割情结看作一种普遍的现象，此种现象的根源在于一种基本的“对于女性特质的拒绝”（Ablehung der Weiblichkeit)。它是在每个主体身上都会遇到的现象，而且。代表着精神分析治疗所无法超越的最终界限 (Freud, I937c).

‌‌‌‌　　拉康在其早期著作中对于阉割情结的讨论并不是很多，他通常更多是谈及“阉割”而非“阉割情结”。他在自己有关家庭的文章中曾把儿个段落专门用于阉割情结，在该文中他曾遵循弗洛伊德声称，阉割首先并首要的是一种有关阴茎切断的幻想。拉康将此种幻想同有关身体肢解的整个一系列的幻想联系了起来，这些幻想皆起源于碎裂的身体的形象：这一形象与镜子阶段是同时期的 (6至18个月)，而只有到更晚些的时候，这些肢解幻想才会围绕着特定的阉割幻想而结合起来 (Lacan, 1938:44).

‌‌‌‌　　直至1950年代中期，首先是在1956一1957年度的研讨班上，阉割情结才开始在拉康的教学中扮演某种突出的角色。正是在该期研讨班中，拉康把阉割确定为“对象缺失”(lack of object)的三种形式之一，其他两种形式是挫折与剥夺 (见：缺失[LACK])。与挫折（即一个实在的对象的想象性缺失）和剥夺（即一个象征的对象的实在性缺失）不同。阉割被拉康定义为一个想象的对象的象征性缺失：阉割并非是针对作为一个实在性器官的阴茎，而是针对想象的阳具 (PHALLUS)(S4,219)。拉康有关阉割情结的说明，因而便脱离了简单的生物学或者解剖学的维度：“它不能通过还原为任何生物学的给定来解决。”(E, 282)

‌‌‌‌　　拉康遵循弗洛伊德的观点指出，阉割情结是整个俄狄浦斯情结围绕其转动的枢轴 (S4,216)。然而，弗洛伊德认为这两个情结是被不同地表达在男孩和女孩身上的，而拉康则认为阉割情结在两性中皆始终表示着俄狄浦斯情结的最后时刻。拉康把俄狄浦斯情结划分成了三个“时间”(Lacan, 1957-8:1958年1月22日的研讨班)。在第一时间上，孩子发觉母亲欲望着某种超出孩子自身之外的东西一想象的阳具一于是便试图为了母亲而成为阳具 (见：前俄狄浦斯期[PREOEDIPAL PHASE])。在第二时间上，想象的父亲介入进来，通过颁布乱伦禁忌而剥夺了母亲的对象；严格地讲，这不是阉割而是剥夺。阉割仅仅被实现于最后的第三时间，这个时间代表着俄狄浦斯情结的“消解”。于是，实在的父亲便通过表明他真正拥有阳具而介入进来，以这样一种方式迫使孩子放弃自己成为阳具的企图 (S4,208-9,227)

‌‌‌‌　　根据有关俄狄浦斯情结的此种说明，拉康显然是用“阉割”这一术语来指称两种不同的运作：

‌‌‌‌　　- 对母亲的阉割在俄狄浦斯情结的第一时间上，“母亲被两性皆视为拥有阳具的，是阳具母亲”(E, 282)。通过在第二时间上颁布乱伦禁忌，想象的父亲便被看作剥夺了她的这一阳具的人。拉康指出，严格地讲，这不是阉割而是剥夺。然而，拉康自己时常交替使用这些术语，既讲对母亲的剥夺，也讲对母亲的阉割。

‌‌‌‌　　- 对主体的阉割此即严格意义上的阉割，就它是针对一个想象性对象的象征性行动的意义而言。在俄狄浦斯情结的第二时间上发生的对母亲的阉割/剥夺，否定的是“有”(to have)的动词（母亲并不拥有阳具），而在俄狄浦斯情结的第三时间上对主体的阉割，则否定的是“是”(tobc)的动词（主体必须放弃他为母亲而成为阳具的企图）。当放弃了自己想要作为母亲欲望的对象时，主体也就放弃了某种“享乐”(jouissance), 此种享乐是他无论怎么努力都不会重新获得的：“阉割意味着享乐必须被拒绝，以至于它能够在欲望法则的翻转阶梯 (I'echelle renversee)上被抵达”(E, 324)。这一点同样适用于男孩和女孩：此种“与阳具的关系…是在不考虑两性的解剖学差异的情况下被建立起来的”(E, 282).

‌‌‌‌　　在一个更具根本性的层面上，“阉割”这一术语也可能并不指涉某种“运作”（想象的父亲或实在的父亲介入的结果），而是指涉早在主体诞生之前使已然存在于母亲身上的某种缺失状态。此一缺失明显可见于她自身的欲望，主体将其看作一种对于想象的阳具的欲望。也就是说，主体在很早的阶段上便认识到，母亲就其本身而言并非是完整的与自足的，她也并不充分满足于自己的孩子（主体自己），而是对某种别的东西产生欲望。这是主体第一次发觉大他者并非完整的而是缺失的

‌‌‌‌　　此两种形式的阉割（对母亲的阉割与对主体的阉割）皆给主体呈现了一种选择：要么接受阉割，要么拒绝阉割。拉康认为，只有通过接受 (或是“承担”[assuming])阉制，主体才能抵达某种程度的精神正常。换句话说，对阉割的承担具有某种“正常化的效果”(normalising effect)。此种正常化的效果要同时根据精神病理学（临床的结构与症状）和性别同一性两个方面来理解。

‌‌‌‌　　- 阉割与临床结构正是对阉割的拒绝处在所有精神病理性结构的根源。然而，因为全然接受阉割是不可能的，所以一种完全“正常”的位置便是从来不会被抵达的。最接近于这样一个位置的是神经症的结构，然而即便在这里，主体也仍旧会通过压抑对阉割的认识来防御大他者中的缺失。这就防止了神经症患者充分承担起他的欲望，因为“正是对阉割的承担造成了欲望被建立在其上的那一缺失”(Ec, 852)。相较于压抑而言，一种更激进的对抗阉割的防御是拒认，后者是性倒错结构的根源。精神病患者则走上了其中最极端的道路：他完全拒斥阉割，仿佛阉割从未存在过似的 (S1,53)。对于象征性阉割的此种拒斥，便导致了阉割在实在界中的返回，诸如以肢解的幻觉 (例如在狼人的个案里：见：S1,58-9)或甚至是以自行切断实在的生殖器官的形式返回实在界。

‌‌‌‌　　- 阉割与性别同一性唯有通过（在此两种意义上）承担阉割，主体才能够作为一个男人或是一个女人而占据某种性别位置 (见：性别差异[SEXUAL DIFFERENCE])。拒绝阉割的不同形态表现在各种形式的性倒错之中。

‌‌‌‌　　(complexe de castration) Freud first described the castration complex in 1908, arguingthat the child, on discovering the anatomical difference between the sexes (the presenceor absence of the penis), makes the assumption that this difference is due to the female'spenis having been cut off (Freud, 1908c). The castration complex is thus the momentwhen one infantile theory (everyone has a penis) is replaced by a new one (females havebeen castrated). The consequences of this new infantile theory are different in the boyand in the girl. The boy fears that his own penis will be cut off by the father (castrationanxiety), while the girl sees herself as already castrated (by the mother) and attempts todeny this or to compensate for it by seeking a child as a substitute for the penis (penisenvy).

‌‌‌‌　　The castration complex affects both sexes because its appearance is closely linkedwith the phallic phase, a moment of psychosexual development when the child, whetherboy or girl, knows only one genital organ-the male one. This phase is also known as theinfantile genital organisation because it is the first moment when the partial drives areunified under the primacy of the genital organs. It thus anticipates the genital organisationproper which arises at puberty, when the subject is aware of both the male and the femalesexual organs (see Freud, 1923e).

‌‌‌‌　　Freud argued that the castration complex is closely linked to the OEDIPUSCOMPLEX, but that its role in the Oedipus complex is different for the boy and the girl. In the case of the boy, the castration complex is the point of exit from the Oedipuscomplex, its terminal crisis; because of his fear of castration (often aroused by a threat) the boy renounces his desire for the mother and thus enters the latency period. In the caseof the girl, the castration complex is the point of entry into the Oedipus complex; it is herresentment of the mother, whom she blames for depriving her of the penis, that causesher to redirect her libidinal desires away from the mother and onto the father. Because ofthis difference, in the case of the girl the Oedipus complex has no definitive terminalcrisis comparable to the boy's (Freud, 1924d).

‌‌‌‌　　Freud came to see the castration complex as a universal phenomenon, one which isrooted in a basic 'rejection of femininity' (Ablehnung der Weiblichkeit). It is encounteredin every subject, and represents the ultimate limit beyond which psychoanalytic treatmentcannot go (Freud, 1937c).

‌‌‌‌　　Lacan, who talks more often about'castration'than'the castration complex', does notdiscuss the castration complex very much in his early work. He dedicates a fewparagraphs to it in his article on the family, where he follows Freud in stating thatcastration is first and foremost a fantasy of the mutilation of the penis. Lacan links thisfantasy with a whole series of fantasies of bodily dismemberment which originate in theimage of the fragmented body; this image is contemporary with the mirror stage (six toeighteen months), and it is only much later that these fantasies of dismembermentcoalesce around the specific fantasy of castration (Lacan, 1938:44).

‌‌‌‌　　It is not until the mid-1950s that the castration complex comes to play a prominentrole in Lacan's teaching, primarily in the seminar of 1956-7. It is in this seminar that Lacan identifies castration as one of three forms of 'lack of object', the others beingfrustration and privation (see LACK). Unlike frustration (which is an imaginary lack of areal object) and privation (which is a real lack of a symbolic object), castration is definedby Lacan as a symbolic lack of an imaginary object; castration does not bear on the penisas a real organ, but on the imaginary PHALLUS (S4,219). Lacan's account of thecastration complex is thus raised out of the dimension of simple biology or anatomy: 'Itis insoluble by any reduction to biological givens' (E, 282).

‌‌‌‌　　Following Freud, Lacan argues that the castration complex is the pivot on which thewhole Oedipus complex turns (S4,216). However, whereas Freud argues that these twocomplexes are articulated differently in boys and girls, Lacan argues that the castrationcomplex always denotes the final moment of the Oedipus complex in both sexes. Lacandivides the Oedipus complex into three 'times' (Lacan, 1957-8: seminar of 22 January1958). In the first time, the child perceives that the mother desires something beyond thechild himself-namely, the imaginary phallus-and then tries to be the phallus for themother (see PREOEDIPAL PHASE). In the second time, the imaginary father intervenesto deprive the mother of her object by promulgating the incest taboo; properly speaking, this is not castration but privation. Castration is only realised in the third and final time, which represents the 'dissolution'of the Oedipus complex. It is then that the real fatherintervenes by showing that he really posesses the phallus, in such a way that the child isforced to abandon his attempts to be the phallus (S4,208-9,227).

‌‌‌‌　　From this account of the Oedipus complex, it is clear that Lacan uses the termcastration'to refer to two different operations:

‌‌‌‌　　- Castration of the mother In the first time of the Oedipus complex,'the mother isconsidered, by both sexes, as possessing the phallus, as the phallic mother' (E, 282). Bypromulgating the incest taboo in the second time, the imaginary father is seen to depriveher of this phallus. Lacan argues that properly speaking, this is not castration butprivation. However, Lacan himself often uses these terms interchangeably, speaking bothof the privation of the mother and of her castration.

‌‌‌‌　　- Castration of the subject This is castration proper, in the sense of being a symbolicact which bears on an imaginary object. Whereas the castration/privation of the motherwhich comes about in the second time of the Oedipus complex negates the verb 'to have' (the mother does not have the phallus), the castration of the subject in the third time ofthe Oedipus complex negates the verb 'to be' (the subject must renounce his attempts tobe the phallus for the mother). In renouncing his attempts to be the object of the mother'sdesire, the subject gives up a certain jouissance which is never regained despite allattempts to do so;'Castration means that jouissance must be refused so that it can bereached on the inverted ladder (l'echelle remversee) of the Law of desire' (E, 324). Thisapplies equally to boys and girls: this 'relationship to the phallus... Is established withoutregard to the anatomical difference of the sexes' (E, 282).

‌‌‌‌　　On a more fundamental level, the term castration may also refer not to an 'operation' (the result of an intervention by the imaginary or real father) but to a state of lack whichalready exists in the mother prior to the subject's birth. This lack is evident in her owndesire, which the subject perceives as a desire for the imaginary phallus. That is, thesubject realises at a very early stage that the mother is not complete and self-sufficient inherself, nor fully satisfied with her child (the subject himself), but desires something else. This is the subject's first perception that the Other is not complete but lacking.

‌‌‌‌　　Both forms of castration (of the mother and of the subject) present the subject with achoice: to accept castration or to deny it. Lacan argues that it is only by accepting (or 'assuming') castration that the subject can reach a degree of psychic normality. In otherwords, the assumption of castration has a 'normalising effect'. This normalising effect isto be understood in terms of both psychopathology (clinical structures and symptoms) and sexual identity.

‌‌‌‌　　- Castration and clinical structures It is the refusal of castration that lies at the rootof all psychopathological structures. However, since it is impossible to accept castrationentirely, a completely 'normal'position is never achieved. The closest to such a positionis the neurotic structure, but even here the subject still defends himself against the lack inthe Other by repressing awareness of castration. This prevents the neurotic from fullyassuming his desire, since 'it is the assumption of castration that creates the lack uponwhich desire is instituted' (Ec, 852). A more radical defence against castration thanrepression is disavowal, which is at the root of the perverse structure. The psychotic takesthe most extreme path of all; he completely repudiates castration, as if it had neverexisted (S1,53). This repudiation of symbolic castration leads to the return of castrationin the real, such as in the form of hallucinations of dismemberment (as in the case of the Wolf Man; see S1,58-9) or even self-mutilation of the real genital organs.

‌‌‌‌　　- Castration and sexual identity It is only by assuming castration (in both senses) that the subject can take up a sexual position as a man or a woman (see SEXUALDIFFERENCE). The different modalities of refusing castration find expression in thevarious forms of perversion.

‌‌‌‌