Chaosophy - autonomous learning

to the micro politics of desire on which is founded, in each particular
situation, the social differentiation of the sexes, the alienation of the
child. As far as we are concerned, the struggles of desire should not
just be circumscribed in the domain of the signifier-even in the case
of a "pure" signifying neurosis, like obsessional neurosis. They always
overflow into somatic, social, and economic domains, etc. And
unless one believes the signifier is found in everything and anything,
one may as well admit that the role of the unconscious has been singularly
restrained in order to consider it only from the angle of the
signifying chains it activates. "The unconscious is structured like a
language," Lacan tells us. Certainly. But by whom By the family, the
school, the barracks, the factory, the cinema, and, in special cases, by
psychiatry and psychoanalysis. When one has fixed it, succeeded in
crushing the polyvocity of its semiotic modes of expression, bound it
to a certain type of semiological machine, then yes, it ends up being
structured like a language. It remains fairly docile. It starts speaking
the language of the dominant system, which is, moreover, not everyday
language, but a special, sublimated, psychoanalyzed language.
Not only has desire come to accept its alienation within the signifying
chains, but it keeps demanding more and more signifier. It no longer
wants to have anything to do with the rest of the world and its modes
of semiotization. Any troubling problem will find there, if not its
solution, at least a comforting suspension in the interplay of the
signifier. Under such conditions, what becomes, for example, of the
age-old alienation of women by men For the signifier, as it is conceived
by linguists, only neutral and innocent traces such as the
opposition of masculine/feminine, and for the psychoanalysts, the
mirages that play around the presence/absence of the phallus. In fact,
for each type of linguistic performance, for each "degree of grammaticality"
of an enonce, there is a corresponding formation of power.
The structure of the signifier is never completely reducible to pure
mathematical logic; it is always partly bound by diverse, repressive
,:' 261