: 159.964.28/.

3:305
159.922.1:305
: 203417356

. . 1

, ,

. , , , ,
,
. ()
, . , ,
, , .
, ,
.
. , . , (Judith Butler),
, .
; , (Butler 2010:77).
.
.

: , , ,
, .
1

misotodorovic@yahoo.com

197

 LIII (2)/2013
a (Havelock Ellis 1968) , (Otto Veininger
1986) (Bloch 1981) ,
(Luce Irigaray 1993a, 1993b) ,
. ao praxis,
. , ,
, , ,
(Hegel 1986)
.

()
, . , , , , ,
(),

. , ,
.

, ,
.
.
, ,
.

, ,
: .
. , par excellence; ,
, , .
, ,
(Freud 1970a) - (Claude Levi-Strauss 1969)
198

 :
, ,
(). , ,
. , ,
, , ,
(
)
(Irigaray 1985). o
.
, a.

, , . , ,

, . , . , ,

.
, . , (Simone de Beauvoir
1982), .
,
. ,
, ,
.
,
.
, - . ,
,
. ,
. ,
() ()
. ,
,
.
.

199

 LIII (2)/2013
,
.
( ) . . ,
( ) , , . . -,
, , .
, :
. ,
. --,
, , .
( ), (
) ( )
.2
, ,
.
, , .
: , / ! (Shaespeare 1978:531).
, ;


2

200

,
. , (Klein&Riviere 2008:37).

(, ). (, , ). ()
, , .

 :
. , , .

( , )
. , , , ,
.
. , , .
, ;
, ,
,
.
, , , .

, ,
,
.
, ,
. , , , . , ( ) . 3
.
, .
3

.
.

(Evans 1996:202). .
,
, .

201

 LIII (2)/2013

. , ,
, , ,
. : , ,
, , . , ,
, .
, . ; . .
,
, ,

,
.
, 4 ,
.
,
,
. , , .
.
, , . ,
? ,
, ? (Baudrillard
1981: 69) . ,
, .
4

202

 :
, ,
,
.
.
,
.
,
,

,
,

,
,
.
.
, ,
,
. : . , .
, (Beauvoir 1982).
, , ,
,
. ,
. (, ,
, , )

(Beauvoir 1982). , , ,
.
. , ,
,
,
.

203

 LIII (2)/2013
, .

.
. .

,
.
. , . :
, ,
, ,
(Beauvoir 1982:172).
.
, , .
,
. ,
, , .

, ,5 . , x,
.
, ,
. , , , ,
(Beauvoir 1982:172). ,
, , . 5

204

, .
, , .

 :
, .

, , ,
.

(, ) . ,
.
. , , , . .
,
(Freud 1970b). ,
, .
, . , ,
.
, .

.
, .
, . , .6
, 6

(Rheim 1976:22).

205

 LIII (2)/2013
, . ,
, .

.
.
.
, , ,
. ,

. ,

.

, , , .
,
. ,
, .
.
, .
, .
, ,
, .
. ,
,
, .

, - (-) .
, ,
206

 :
, .
, .
,
.
,
, -
, .

.
,
.
,
, .
.
,
, ,
.
, , , .

, . , ,
,7
.
.
, .
7

: . (Bettelheim)
. ,
(Badenter 1988:138). ,
, , .
, , .

,
. , , .

207

 LIII (2)/2013
, ,
,
() .
.
()
, , , .
, ,
(Beauvoir 1982:11).
, , . ,
, ,
, , .
.
() (), - (Badinter 1988: 225).


, 1974.
DSM-IV.

.
, ,
.


. ,

. ,
: ,
.

208

 :
. , () ().

-- --.
.
.
,
, (ie 1996:161),
.
, . , () .
, , .
.
, , .
, (Badinter 1988:22), , , . , XXXIII
(Freud 2006:411), .
,
.
, ,
, .
(), , , .
, (S). ,
. , , ,
. ,
.

209

 LIII (2)/2013

, . (Joan Riviere) , , ,
(Riviere 1929: 307).
, (Elizabeth
Wright), ,
(Wright 2000:42).
.
, ,
. .

, ,
(Lacan 1983:50).
Adler, A. (1984): Poznavanje ivota. Novi Sad Beograd: Matica srpsa
Prosveta

Badinter, E. (1988): Jedno je Drugo. Sarajevo: Svjetlost

Baudrillard, J. (1991): Fatalne strategije. Novi Sad: Knjievna zajednica
Beauvoir, S. (1982): Drugi pol. Beograd: BIGZ
Bloch, E. (1981): Princip nada. Zagreb: Naprijed
Butler, J. (2010): Gender Trouble. Feminism and the Subversion of Identity.
London: Routledge
Ellis, H. (1968): Psihologija seksualnosti. Zagreb: Matica hrvatska
Evans, D. (1996): An Introductory Dictionary of Lacanian Psychoanalysis.
London: Routledge
Freud, S. (1970a): Totem i tabu. Novi Sad: Matica srpska
Freud, S. (1970b): Tri rasprave o seksualnoj teoriji. Novi Sad: Matica srpska
Freud, S. (2006): Kompletan uvod u psihoanalizu. Podgorica: Nova njiga
Hegel, G.W.F. (1986): Fenomenologija duha. Beograd: BIGZ
Irigaray, L. (1985): Speculum of the Other Woman. Ithaca: Cornell University
Press

210

 :
Irigaray, L. (1993a): Sexes and Genealogies. New Yor: Columbia University
Press
Irigaray, L. (1993b): An Ehtics of Sexual Difference. London: The Athlone
Press
Klein, M.&Riviere, J. (2008): Ljubav, mrnja i reparacija. Novi Sad: Akademska
knjiga
Lacan, J (1983): Spisi. Beograd: Prosveta
Lacan, J. (1998): The Seminar of Jacques Lacan: On Feminine Sexuality. The
Limits of Love and Knowledge. Boo XX. Encore 1972-1973. London: W.W.
Norton&Company
Shaespeare, W. (1978): Timon Atinjanin. Beograd: BIGZ Narodna knjiga
Nolit Rad
Riviere, J. (1929): Womanliness as a Masquerade. International Journal of
Psycho-Analaysis, 8:303-313
Rheim, G. (1976): Nastana i funkcija kulture. Beograd: BIGZ
Weininger, O. (1986): Pol i karakter. Beograd: Knjievne novine
Wright, E. (2000): Lacan and Postfeminism.London: Icon Boos
ie, S. (1996): The Invisible Remainder: An Essay of Schelling and Related
matters. London: Verso

211

 LIII (2)/2013
MILORAD V. TODOROVI

UNIVERSITY OF PRITINA WITH TEMPORARY HEAD OFFICE

IN KOSOVSKA MITROVICA, FACULTY OF PHILOSOPHY
DEPARTMENT OF PSYCHOLOGY

MASCULINE COMPLEX: FROM REALISTIC DISCRIMINATION

TO UNCONSCIOUS IMPLEMENTATION8

SUMMARY

Critics that is coming from women and women's movements,

marred in large part by psychoanalysis, structuralism, semiology
and deconstructionism, have made significant inroads in the dispossession of strong subject, not only for their own benefit but also for
the benefit of that same powerless strong subject.
Rejecting the imposition of a false universalism of one single (male) culture, women's studies have made the necessary re-interpretation of history in which women were excluded. Excluded women,
woman commodity, woman sign that enables male communication,
had the means to reduce the power of strong subject and destroy her
and his sexuality. This was mainly contributed by inevitable unconscious position of excluded, slave, commodity or poor subject as
complex of masculinity. It's not only about the fact that power is in
the one that is object of envy. Through complex of masculinity and
rejection of women, woman is trying to " be ". Women , in the words
of Judith Butler ( Butler ) , can never just " be ", because they are the
mesure of the difference. Women are the "difference" that can not
be seen as a "second ", or, they are merely the negation of the subject that can only be male ( Butler 2010:77 ). For mental development it is of paramount importance in which way will complex of
masculinity affect the sexuality as a central place of 'psychic'. It is a
question of most importance for civilization.
KEY WORDS: complex of masculinity, patriarchal unconscious, the
symbolic order, "weak" subject, sexuation.

212

31. 2013, 21. 2013.