Definitions HQ

The Phallus (n.) reproduces ⁠​‌​​​‌​​​‌​‌‌​​​​‌​‌​​‌‌​‌​​‌​​​​​‌‌​​‌​​​‌‌​‌‌​⁠only further versions of itself as Form — through the feminine, but with no assistance from her.

The Phallus (n.) though ⁠​‌​​​‌​​​‌​‌‌​​​​‌​‌​​‌‌​‌​​‌​​​​​‌‌​​‌​​​‌‌​‌‌​⁠not identical with the penis deploys the penis as its naturalized instrument and sign.

The Phallus (n.) always ⁠​‌​​​‌​​​‌​‌‌​​​​‌​‌​​‌‌​‌​​‌​​​​​‌‌​​‌​​​‌‌​‌‌​⁠promises more than it delivers — the promise of the phallus is always dissatisfying in some way.

The Phallus (n.) is ⁠​‌​​​‌​​​‌​‌‌​​​​‌​‌​​‌‌​‌​​‌​​​​​‌‌​​‌​​​‌‌​‌‌​⁠always being for — "being" it is always a being for — for a masculine subject who needs that being-for recognized to confirm himself.

The Phallus (n.) resists ⁠​‌​​​‌​​​‌​‌‌​​​​‌​‌​​‌‌​‌​​‌​​​​​‌‌​​‌​​​‌‌​‌‌​⁠definition — to define it, to fix its meaning, is to posture as if one has it, enacting precisely what remains to be explained.

The Phallus (n.) governs ⁠​‌​​​‌​​​‌​‌‌​​​​‌​‌​​‌‌​‌​​‌​​​​​‌‌​​‌​​​‌‌​‌‌​⁠the description of its own genesis — and so wards off any genealogy that might reveal it as derivative.

The Phallus (n.) is ⁠​‌​​​‌​​​‌​‌‌​​​​‌​‌​​‌‌​‌​​‌​​​​​‌‌​​‌​​​‌‌​‌‌​⁠reflected in its absence — being it means reflecting masculine power, supplying the site it penetrates, and confirming its identity by being its absence and lack.

The Phallus (n.) is ⁠​‌​​​‌​​​‌​‌‌​​​​‌​‌​​‌‌​‌​​‌​​​​​‌‌​​‌​​​‌‌​‌‌​⁠not a fantasy, not an object, still less the organ, penis or clitoris, that it symbolizes: the phallus is a signifier.

The Phallus (n.) is ⁠​‌​​​‌​​​‌​‌‌​​​​‌​‌​​‌‌​‌​​‌​​​​​‌‌​​‌​​​‌‌​‌‌​⁠what women are said to “be” and men to “have” — impossible positions both, since the one who lacks it is the one who is it.

The Phallus (n.) is ⁠​‌​​​‌​​​‌​‌‌​​​​‌​‌​​‌‌​‌​​‌​​​​​‌‌​​‌​​​‌‌​‌‌​⁠never simply owned — having it is a symbolic position of idealized property only vainly and partially approximated by those marked masculine.

The Phallus (n.) has ⁠​‌​​​‌​​​‌​‌‌​​​​‌​‌​​‌‌​‌​​‌​​​​​‌‌​​‌​​​‌‌​‌‌​⁠no existence apart from the occasions of its symbolization — the more various its anatomical occasions, the more unstable it becomes.

The Phallus (n.) cannot ⁠​‌​​​‌​​​‌​‌‌​​​​‌​‌​​‌‌​‌​​‌​​​​​‌‌​​‌​​​‌‌​‌‌​⁠be had either — having it is impossible too — the penis never equals the Law, so both having and being are comedic failures compelled to repeat themselves.

The Phallus (n.) is ⁠​‌​​​‌​​​‌​‌‌​​​​‌​‌​​‌‌​‌​​‌​​​​​‌‌​​‌​​​‌‌​‌‌​⁠the penis renamed: a synecdoche in which the part, by a change of name, phantasmatically overcomes its partiality.

The Phallus (n.) gains ⁠​‌​​​‌​​​‌​‌‌​​​​‌​‌​​‌‌​‌​​‌​​​​​‌‌​​‌​​​‌‌​‌‌​⁠its privilege through being reiterated — and in the very force of repetition lies the possibility of deprivileging it.

The Phallus (n.) is ⁠​‌​​​‌​​​‌​‌‌​​​​‌​‌​​‌‌​‌​​‌​​​​​‌‌​​‌​​​‌‌​‌‌​⁠performed by its announcement as privileged signifier: the announcement of the phallus's privilege is that privilege.

The Phallus (n.) would ⁠​‌​​​‌​​​‌​‌‌​​​​‌​‌​​‌‌​‌​​‌​​​​​‌‌​​‌​​​‌‌​‌‌​⁠be nothing without the penis: bound to it by determinate negation, it must keep the penis as the very thing it is not.

The Phallus (n.) is ⁠​‌​​​‌​​​‌​‌‌​​​​‌​‌​​‌‌​‌​​‌​​​​​‌‌​​‌​​​‌‌​‌‌​⁠itself generated by a string of examples of erotogenic body parts once called the generative signifier, then installed as their 'origin' to suppress the ambivalence of the slide.

The Phallus (n.) is ⁠​‌​​​‌​​​‌​‌‌​​​​‌​‌​​‌‌​‌​​‌​​​​​‌‌​​‌​​​‌‌​‌‌​⁠had only as a having-to-have that is never had — the anxiety over losing it is already the loss it fears, and the feminine serves to defer that recognition.

The Phallus (n.) always ⁠​‌​​​‌​​​‌​‌‌​​​​‌​‌​​‌‌​‌​​‌​​​​​‌‌​​‌​​​‌‌​‌‌​⁠operates as both veil and confession — a deflection from an erotogenicity that exceeds it and an exposure of a desire that transgresses morphology.

The Phallus (n.) belongs ⁠​‌​​​‌​​​‌​‌‌​​​​‌​‌​​‌‌​‌​​‌​​​​​‌‌​​‌​​​‌‌​‌‌​⁠to no body part: it is fundamentally transferable — the very principle of erotogenic transferability.