the fact that there is no sexual relationship in no way implies that “there is no sexual difference in the unconscious,” that the unconscious is beyond or beneath sexual difference, a fluid domain of partial drives that defy sexuation. … The unconscious is thoroughly and only about sexual difference in the sense of an antagonism that is impossible to symbolize and that haunts the symbolic order. The impossibility of sexual relationship does not mean that sexual relationship is simply absent from the unconscious. … The very impossibility of sexual relationship is the traumatic point of failure which structures the entire symbolic space, or, as Lacan put it…, “we take language as that which functions as a supplement for the absence of the only part of the real that cannot manage to be formed in being, namely, the sexual relationship.” … There is objet a because there is no sexual relationship. …Sexual difference is the point of failure of logos, of the Symbolic, but this failure absolutely does not mean that there is a domain of sexuality prior to (or outside of) sexual difference and its deadlock. Sexual difference/antagonism is not just the point at which logos/reason fails; it is nothing but the effect of this failure.

SLAVOJ ZIZEK http://ift.tt/2fnsT6o

masculine and feminine positions are the two inconsistent ways to cope with—or, rather, to assume—the trauma of the impossibility of sexual relationship

SLAVOJ ZIZEK http://ift.tt/2fsn2LX

Not only sexuality but human subjectivity as such is thoroughly “sexed” precisely in the sense of the trauma of sexual difference. …Yes, every solution to the failure of sexual relationship is unsatisfactory and in this sense incomplete, but this does not mean that sexual difference is a secondary imposed frame

SLAVOJ ZIZEK http://ift.tt/2fl16ni

Nancy Fraser has shown how the predominant form of feminism in the US was basically co-opted by neoliberal politics.

http://twitter.com/extimacy/status/769079482783264770 http://ift.tt/2eI5Zpi

The link between the struggle for sexual liberation and what was traditionally designated a “class struggle” in all its diverse dimensions (not just the workers’ struggle but…the plight of immigrants and refugees, etc.) is…ignored by my opponents.

SLAVOJ ZIZEK http://ift.tt/2eHzEPw

Although critics like to emphasize how they reject normativity (“the imposed heterosexual norm,” etc.), their stance itself is one of ruthless normativity, denouncing every minimal deviation from the PC dogma as “transphobia,” or “Fascism,” or whatever. Such a tweet culture, combining official tolerance and openness with extreme intolerance towards actually different views, simply renders critical thinking impossible. It is a true mirror image of the blind populist rage à la Donald Trump, and it is simultaneously one of the reasons why the Left is so often inefficient in confronting rightwing populism, especially in today’s Europe. If one just mentions that this populism draws a good part of its energy from the popular discontent of the exploited, one is immediately accused of “class essentialism”…

SLAVOJ ZIZEK http://ift.tt/2ejCUzw

His or her “positive” characteristics are glow in some void and are a “positivisation” of the void itself – of objet a, that x.

http://twitter.com/extimacy/status/767876592613920769 http://ift.tt/2fhaISB