{"id":23766,"date":"2024-08-07T17:16:36","date_gmt":"2024-08-07T15:16:36","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/nyje.al\/?p=23766"},"modified":"2024-08-24T11:19:38","modified_gmt":"2024-08-24T09:19:38","slug":"lexome-deshiren-seksi-dhe-euthanazia-e-arsyes-ii","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/nyje.al\/sq\/lexome-deshiren-seksi-dhe-euthanazia-e-arsyes-ii\/","title":{"rendered":"Lexom\u00eb d\u00ebshir\u00ebn: Seksi dhe euthanazia e arsyes (II)"},"content":{"rendered":"\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\"\"\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t

Lexom\u00eb d\u00ebshir\u00ebn: Seksi dhe euthanazia e arsyes (II) \n<\/h2>\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t

07.08.2024 | Nga Joan Copjec | P\u00ebrkthimi: Genc Shehu | nyje.al\u00a0<\/strong><\/span><\/p>

T\u00eb thuash se subjekti \u00ebsht\u00eb n\u00eb t\u00eb nj\u00ebjtin nivel me ligjin nuk \u00ebsht\u00eb e barasvlershme me pretendimin se ajo <\/span>\u00ebsht\u00eb<\/span><\/i> ligji, pasi \u00e7do shkrirje e subjektit me ligjin vet\u00ebm e redukton at\u00eb, e n\u00ebnshtron at\u00eb absolutisht <\/span>ndaj<\/span><\/i> ligjit. N\u00eb t\u00eb nj\u00ebjtin nivel me dhe prap\u00eb jo ligji, subjekti mund t\u00eb konceptohet vet\u00ebm si d\u00ebshtim i ligjit, i gjuh\u00ebs. <\/span>N\u00eb<\/span><\/i> gjuh\u00eb dhe prap\u00eb <\/span>m\u00eb shum\u00eb<\/span><\/i> se gjuh\u00eb, subjekti \u00ebsht\u00eb nj\u00eb shkak t\u00eb cilin asnj\u00eb shenjues nuk mund ta shpjegoj\u00eb. Jo sepse ajo e tejkalon shenjuesin, por sepse ajo banon n\u00eb t\u00eb <\/span>si kufi<\/span><\/i>. Ky subjekt, radikalisht i panjohsh\u00ebm, radikalisht i pallogaritsh\u00ebm, \u00ebsht\u00eb e vetmja garanci q\u00eb kemi kund\u00ebr racizmit. Kjo \u00ebsht\u00eb nj\u00eb garanci q\u00eb na ik\u00ebn prej duarsh sa her\u00eb q\u00eb nuk p\u00ebrfillim mos-transparenc\u00ebn e subjektit ndaj shenjuesit, sa her\u00eb q\u00eb e b\u00ebjm\u00eb subjektin t\u00eb p\u00ebrkoj\u00eb me shenjuesin n\u00eb vend se me mekjen e tij.<\/span><\/span><\/p>

Objeksionit tim t\u00eb par\u00eb filozofik ndaj p\u00ebrkufizimit t\u00eb Butler p\u00ebr seksin duhet t\u2019i shtojm\u00eb jo vet\u00ebm at\u00eb t\u00eb m\u00ebparshmin etik, por edhe nj\u00eb objeksion psikoanalitik. Kam theksuar sakaq se ekziston nj\u00eb dallim vendimtar midis pozicionit t\u00eb saj dhe atij psikoanalitik mbi seksin. Tani dua t\u00eb shkoj m\u00eb tej duke ekspozuar \u201cpap\u00ebrputhshm\u00ebrin\u00eb totale\u201d t\u00eb k\u00ebtyre dy pozicioneve. E zgjedh k\u00ebt\u00eb fraz\u00eb p\u00ebr t\u2019i b\u00ebr\u00eb jehon\u00eb akuz\u00ebs s\u00eb ngritur kund\u00ebr Jungut nga Frojdi, karakterizimi i q\u00ebndrimin e t\u00eb parit n\u00eb lidhje me libidon \u00ebsht\u00eb i zbatuesh\u00ebm n\u00eb diskutimin ton\u00eb. Frojdi thot\u00eb se q\u00ebndrimi i Jungut \u201cp\u00ebrzgjedh disa tone kulturore nga simfonia e jet\u00ebs dhe … p\u00ebrs\u00ebri nuk arrin t\u00eb d\u00ebgjoj\u00eb melodin\u00eb e hatashme dhe t\u00eb fuqishme t\u00eb [shtysave].\u201d1<\/sup><\/span> Frojdi k\u00ebtu akuzon Jungun p\u00ebr zbrazjen e libidos nga \u00e7do p\u00ebrmbajtje seksuale duke e nd\u00ebrlidhur at\u00eb ekskluzivisht me proceset kulturore. \u00cbsht\u00eb kjo nd\u00ebrlidhje q\u00eb e \u00e7on Jungun t\u00eb theksoj\u00eb plasticitetin ose lakueshm\u00ebrin\u00eb esenciale t\u00eb libidos: seksi vall\u00ebzon sipas intonimit t\u00eb kultur\u00ebs. Frojdi argumenton, p\u00ebrkundrazi, se seksi duhet t\u00eb kuptohet jo n\u00eb terrenin e kultur\u00ebs, por n\u00eb terrenin e shtysave, t\u00eb cilat \u2013 pavar\u00ebsisht faktit q\u00eb nuk ekzistojn\u00eb jasht\u00eb kultur\u00ebs \u2013 nuk jan\u00eb kulturore. Ato jan\u00eb, p\u00ebrkundrazi, tjetri i kultur\u00ebs dhe, si t\u00eb tilla, nuk bien pre e manipulimeve t\u00eb saj.<\/span><\/span><\/p>

Seksi p\u00ebrcaktohet nga nj\u00eb ligj (i shtysave) me t\u00eb cilin (p\u00ebr t\u2019u kthyer n\u00eb fraz\u00ebn e Balibar) \u201cnuk \u201cb\u00ebhet pazar,\u201d q\u00eb nuk i \u201cb\u00ebhet bisht\u201d.\u201d Kund\u00ebr besimit jungian dhe atij kritik-bashk\u00ebkohor n\u00eb plasticitetin e seksit, tundohemi t\u00eb argumentojm\u00eb se, nga k\u00ebndv\u00ebshtrimi i kultur\u00ebs, <\/span>seksi nuk tundet vendit<\/span><\/i>. Kjo do t\u00eb thot\u00eb, nd\u00ebr t\u00eb tjera, se <\/span>seksi, dallimi seksual, nuk mund t\u00eb dekonstruktohet<\/span><\/i>, pasi dekonstruktimi \u00ebsht\u00eb nj\u00eb operacion q\u00eb mund t\u00eb aplikohet vet\u00ebm ndaj kultur\u00ebs, ndaj shenjuesit, dhe nuk pi uj\u00eb n\u00eb k\u00ebt\u00eb sfer\u00ebn tjet\u00ebr.2<\/sup><\/span> T\u00eb flas\u00ebsh p\u00ebr dekonstruktimin e seksit ka aq kuptim sa t\u00eb flas\u00ebsh p\u00ebr p\u00ebrmbarimin3<\/sup><\/span> e nj\u00eb dere; veprimi dhe objekti, kall\u00ebzuesi dhe kundrinori nuk i p\u00ebrkasin t\u00eb nj\u00ebjt\u00ebs hap\u00ebsir\u00eb diskursive. K\u00ebshtu, ne do t\u00eb argumentojm\u00eb se nd\u00ebrsa subjekti \u2013 i cili nuk \u00ebsht\u00eb i ngulitur te shenjuesi, i cili \u00ebsht\u00eb nj\u00eb efekt, por jo nj\u00eb send\u00ebrtim i diskurseve sociale \u2013 \u00ebsht\u00eb, n\u00eb k\u00ebt\u00eb kuptim, i lir\u00eb nga kufizimet absolute shoq\u00ebrore, ai ose ajo megjithat\u00eb <\/span>nuk<\/span><\/i> \u00ebsht\u00eb i lir\u00eb t\u00eb jet\u00eb subjekt kuturu: brenda \u00e7far\u00ebdo diskursi subjekti vet\u00ebm mund t\u00eb marr\u00eb ose nj\u00eb pozicion mashkullor ose fem\u00ebror.<\/span><\/span><\/p>

Pozicioni jungian \u2013 dhe ai bashk\u00ebkohor \u201cneo-jungian\u201d \u2013 duke q\u00ebndruar i shurdh\u00ebr ndaj \u201cmelodis\u00eb s\u00eb shtysave,\u201d nuk e njeh k\u00ebt\u00eb dimension detyrues t\u00eb seksit, pashmangshm\u00ebrin\u00eb e tij. Duke u p\u00ebrqendruar vet\u00ebm n\u00eb loj\u00ebn \u201ce lir\u00eb\u201d\u00a0 kulturore t\u00eb shenjuesit, ky pozicion \u00e7bashkon lirin\u00eb nga detyrimi: p\u00ebr k\u00ebt\u00eb arsye [ky pozicion] \u00ebsht\u00eb <\/span>voluntarist<\/span><\/i>, pavar\u00ebsisht t\u00eb gjitha masave paraprake q\u00eb merr, pavar\u00ebsisht t\u00eb gjitha hapave t\u00eb nd\u00ebrmarra p\u00ebr t\u2019u mbrojtur nga kjo akuz\u00eb. <\/span>Gender Trouble<\/span><\/i>, p\u00ebr shembull, nuk \u00ebsht\u00eb i shkujdesur n\u00eb k\u00ebt\u00eb pik\u00eb. P\u00ebrfundimi i librit e anticipon k\u00ebt\u00eb sulm dhe rreket t\u00eb mbrohet kund\u00ebr akuz\u00ebs s\u00eb voluntarizmit q\u00eb e di se e pret at\u00eb. Duke rip\u00ebrkufizuar nocionin e agjencis\u00eb, kapitulli i fundit synon t\u00eb vendos\u00eb subjektin \u201cn\u00eb t\u00eb nj\u00ebjtin nivel me\u201d gjuh\u00ebn, as mbi t\u00eb (ku do ta vendoste nocioni naiv i agjencis\u00eb) dhe as n\u00ebn t\u00eb (ku do ta poziciononte nj\u00eb nocion determinist i konstruktimit). \u00c7ka mungon, megjithat\u00eb, dhe \u00e7far\u00eb e l\u00eb Butlerin pa mbrojtje p\u00ebrball\u00eb akuz\u00ebs q\u00eb p\u00ebrpiqet t\u00eb shmang\u00eb, \u00ebsht\u00eb nj\u00eb nocion i posa\u00e7\u00ebm i kufirit t\u00eb pakap\u00ebrcyesh\u00ebm, e pamund\u00ebsis\u00eb q\u00eb gjymton \u00e7do praktik\u00eb diskursive. Edhe kur ajo flet p\u00ebr detyrim dhe d\u00ebshtim, ajo thot\u00eb k\u00ebt\u00eb:<\/span><\/span><\/p>

N\u00ebse rregullat q\u00eb qeverisin shenj\u00ebzimin jo vet\u00ebm ngushtojn\u00eb, por edhe mund\u00ebsojn\u00eb pohimin e zonave alternative t\u00eb inteligjibilitetit kulturor, pra, mund\u00ebsi t\u00eb reja p\u00ebr gjinin\u00eb q\u00eb sfidojn\u00eb kodet rigjide t\u00eb binarizmit hierarkik, at\u00ebher\u00eb vet\u00ebm <\/span>brenda<\/span><\/i> praktikave t\u00eb shenj\u00ebzimit p\u00ebrs\u00ebrit\u00ebs b\u00ebhet i mundur nj\u00eb subversion i identitetit. Urdhri p\u00ebr t\u00eb <\/span>qen\u00eb<\/span><\/i> nj\u00eb gjini e caktuar prodhon d\u00ebshtime t\u00eb nevojshme. … Bashkekzistenca ose konvergjenca e urdhrave [t\u00eb ndrysh\u00ebm] diskursiv\u00eb prodhon mund\u00ebsin\u00eb e nj\u00eb ri-konfigurimi dhe ri-vendosje komplekse. (145)<\/span><\/span><\/p>

Ajo q\u00eb kemi k\u00ebtu \u00ebsht\u00eb nj\u00eb p\u00ebrshkrim i <\/span>efektit<\/span><\/i> t\u00eb d\u00ebshtimit t\u00eb brendaqen\u00ebsish\u00ebm t\u00eb diskursit \u2013 nj\u00eb tollovi kuptimesh n\u00eb t\u00eb cilin nj\u00eb kuptim p\u00ebrplaset vazhdimisht me nj\u00eb tjet\u00ebr; nj\u00eb shum\u00ebfishim i mund\u00ebsive t\u00eb kuptimit t\u00eb secilit diskurs \u2013 por pa njohje reale t\u00eb shkakut t\u00eb tij: pamund\u00ebsia p\u00ebr t\u00eb th\u00ebn\u00eb gjith\u00e7ka n\u00eb gjuh\u00eb. Ne p\u00ebrs\u00ebrisim, na m\u00ebson Frojdi, sepse nuk arrijm\u00eb t\u00eb kujtojm\u00eb. Dhe ajo q\u00eb nuk mund t\u00eb kujtojm\u00eb \u00ebsht\u00eb ajo q\u00eb kurr\u00eb nuk e kemi p\u00ebrjetuar, kurr\u00eb nuk kemi pasur mund\u00ebsin\u00eb ta p\u00ebrjetojm\u00eb, meqen\u00ebse nuk ka qen\u00eb kurr\u00eb e pranishme si e till\u00eb. \u00cbsht\u00eb ng\u00ebr\u00e7i i konfliktit t\u00eb gjuh\u00ebs me veten e saj q\u00eb prodhon k\u00ebt\u00eb p\u00ebrjetim t\u00eb t\u00eb pap\u00ebrjetueshmes (q\u00eb as nuk mund t\u00eb kujtohet e as t\u00eb flitet); \u00ebsht\u00eb ky ng\u00ebr\u00e7 q\u00eb k\u00ebsisoj lind nevoj\u00ebn e p\u00ebrs\u00ebritjes. Por shtr\u00ebngimi i posa\u00e7\u00ebm i p\u00ebrs\u00ebritjes err\u00ebsohet n\u00eb fjalit\u00eb e cituara k\u00ebtu dhe po ashtu edhe seksi. Seksi \u00ebsht\u00eb ajo q\u00eb nuk mund t\u00eb flitet nga t\u00eb folurit; nuk \u00ebsht\u00eb asnj\u00ebri nga moria e kuptimeve q\u00eb p\u00ebrpiqen t\u00eb kompensojn\u00eb p\u00ebr k\u00ebt\u00eb pamund\u00ebsi. Duke eliminuar k\u00ebt\u00eb ngecje radikale t\u00eb diskursit, <\/span>Gender Trouble<\/span><\/i>, me gjith\u00eb diskutimet e saj rreth seksit, eliminon vet\u00eb seksin.\u00a0<\/span><\/span><\/p>

Seksi nuk tundet vendit dhe nuk \u00ebsht\u00eb heteroseksiste ta thuash k\u00ebt\u00eb. N\u00eb fakt, e kund\u00ebrta mbase \u00ebsht\u00eb e v\u00ebrtet\u00eb. Sepse pik\u00ebrisht duke e b\u00ebr\u00eb at\u00eb t\u00eb p\u00ebrputhet me shenjuesin, e detyron seksin t\u00eb konformoj\u00eb me diktatet shoq\u00ebrore, t\u00eb marr\u00eb p\u00ebrmbajtje shoq\u00ebrore. N\u00eb fund, Butler, duke dashur ta vendos\u00eb subjektin n\u00eb t\u00eb nj\u00ebjtin nivel me gjuh\u00ebn, p\u00ebrfundon duke e vendosur at\u00eb <\/span>posht\u00eb<\/span><\/i> saj, si send\u00ebrtim apo realizim i gjuh\u00ebs. Liria, \u201cagjencia,\u201d \u00ebsht\u00eb e pap\u00ebrfytyrueshme brenda nj\u00eb skeme t\u00eb k\u00ebtill\u00eb.<\/span><\/span><\/p>

Funksioni fallik<\/b><\/span><\/p>

Tani le t\u00eb ballafaqohem me kund\u00ebrshtimet q\u00eb e di se m\u00eb presin. Kam qen\u00eb duke paraqitur pozicionin psikoanalitik duke p\u00ebrdorur argumente t\u00eb marra nga filozofia kritike. Dhe megjithat\u00eb, subjekti i parashtruar nga kjo filozofi \u2013 q\u00eb ndonj\u00ebher\u00eb i referohen si subjekti \u201cuniversal\u201d, n\u00eb kontrast me individin konkret \u2013 duket, me p\u00ebrkufizim, se \u00ebsht\u00eb <\/span>asnj\u00eban\u00ebs<\/span><\/i>, se \u00ebsht\u00eb i <\/span>pa<\/span><\/i>seksuar, nd\u00ebrsa subjekti i psikoanaliz\u00ebs \u00ebsht\u00eb, po ashtu me p\u00ebrkufizim, gjithmon\u00eb i seksuar. Si, pra, hyn subjekti i diferencuar seksualisht n\u00eb suaz\u00ebn e filozofis\u00eb kritike? P\u00ebrmes \u00e7far\u00eb shtegu kemi arritur n\u00eb p\u00ebrfundimin q\u00eb padyshim do t\u00eb duket oksimoronik se subjekti \u201cuniversal\u201d \u00ebsht\u00eb medoemos i seksuar?<\/span><\/span><\/p>

Por p\u00ebrse, mund t\u00eb pyesim nga ana jon\u00eb, supozohet kaq leht\u00eb se subjekti filozofik duhet t\u00eb jet\u00eb asnj\u00eban\u00ebs? Nga perspektiva jon\u00eb, pik\u00ebrisht ky supozim duket se \u00ebsht\u00eb i pavend. Ajo q\u00eb e mb\u00ebshtet k\u00ebt\u00eb, mendojn\u00eb ata q\u00eb e mbajn\u00eb k\u00ebt\u00eb supozim, \u00ebsht\u00eb bash p\u00ebrkufizimi i subjektit si themeltarisht i zbrazur nga t\u00eb gjitha karakteristikat pozitive. Nga kjo mund t\u00eb nxjerrim p\u00ebrfundimin se ata q\u00eb deseksualizojn\u00eb subjektin e konsiderojn\u00eb seksin si nj\u00eb karakteristik\u00eb pozitive. Gjith\u00e7ka q\u00eb kemi th\u00ebn\u00eb deri tani p\u00ebrmblidhet n\u00eb mohimin e k\u00ebtij karakterizimi. Kur tham\u00eb, p\u00ebr shembull, se dallimi seksual nuk \u00ebsht\u00eb i barazuesh\u00ebm me lloje t\u00eb tjera dallimi, ne po thoshim se nuk e p\u00ebrshkruan pozitivisht subjektin. Mund ta shprehim k\u00ebshtu: <\/span>mashkull dhe fem\u00ebr, si qenia, nuk jan\u00eb predikate, q\u00eb do t\u00eb thot\u00eb se n\u00eb vend q\u00eb t\u00eb rrisin dijen ton\u00eb p\u00ebr subjektin, ato e kualifikojn\u00eb modalitetin e d\u00ebshtimit t\u00eb dijes son\u00eb<\/span><\/i>.<\/span><\/span><\/p>

Kemi qen\u00eb duke e p\u00ebrkufizuar subjektin si kufi ose mohim t\u00eb brendsh\u00ebm, d\u00ebshtim i gjuh\u00ebs \u2013 kjo p\u00ebr t\u00eb argumentuar se subjekti nuk ka ekzistenc\u00eb substanciale, se nuk \u00ebsht\u00eb nj\u00eb objekt i mundsh\u00ebm p\u00ebrvoje. N\u00ebse ky subjekt mendohet t\u00eb jet\u00eb pa seks, kjo \u00ebsht\u00eb jo vet\u00ebm sepse seksi hamend\u00ebsohet n\u00eb m\u00ebnyr\u00eb naive si karakteristik\u00eb pozitive, por edhe sepse d\u00ebshtimi hamend\u00ebsohet se \u00ebsht\u00eb i vet\u00ebm. N\u00ebse kjo do t\u00eb ishte e v\u00ebrtet\u00eb, n\u00ebse gjuha \u2013 ose arsyeja \u2013 do t\u00eb kishte vet\u00ebm nj\u00eb m\u00ebnyr\u00eb t\u00eb d\u00ebshtimit, at\u00ebher\u00eb subjekti do t\u00eb ishte n\u00eb fakt asnj\u00eban\u00ebs. Por nuk \u00ebsht\u00eb k\u00ebshtu; gjuha dhe arsyeja mund t\u00eb d\u00ebshtojn\u00eb n\u00eb nj\u00eb nga dy m\u00ebnyra t\u00eb ndryshme. Dallimi midis k\u00ebtyre modaliteteve t\u00eb d\u00ebshtimit \u2013 midis dy m\u00ebnyrave n\u00eb t\u00eb cilat arsyeja bie n\u00eb kontradikt\u00eb me vetveten \u2013 u b\u00eb p\u00ebr her\u00eb t\u00eb par\u00eb nga Kanti n\u00eb <\/span>Kritik\u00ebn e arsyes s\u00eb kulluar<\/span><\/i> dhe u p\u00ebrdor s\u00ebrish n\u00eb <\/span>Kritik\u00ebn e gjykimit<\/span><\/i>. N\u00eb t\u00eb dyja veprat, ai demonstroi se d\u00ebshtimi i arsyes nuk ishte i thjesht\u00eb, por p\u00ebrtokej n\u00eb nj\u00eb ng\u00ebr\u00e7 antinomik p\u00ebrmes dy rrug\u00ebve t\u00eb ndara; e para ishte matematikore, e dyta dinamike.<\/span><\/span><\/p>

Shum\u00eb kan\u00eb tentuar t\u00eb gjejn\u00eb dallimin seksual n\u00eb tekstet e Kantit, por ata n\u00eb fakt k\u00ebrkonin paragjykimet seksuale ose indiferenc\u00ebn seksuale. Disa kan\u00eb pikasur n\u00eb p\u00ebrshkrimet e bukuris\u00eb dhe sublimes, p\u00ebr shembull, nj\u00eb diferencim t\u00eb nj\u00eb lloji seksual. K\u00ebta kritik\u00eb kan\u00eb qen\u00eb \u2013 n\u00ebse m\u00eb lejohet ta them k\u00ebshtu \u2013 duke e k\u00ebrkuar seksin n\u00eb t\u00eb gjitha vendet e gabuara. Un\u00eb po propozoj q\u00eb dallimi seksual mund, n\u00eb fakt, t\u00eb gjendet te Kanti, jo n\u00eb nj\u00eb m\u00ebnyr\u00eb aksidentale, n\u00eb p\u00ebrdorimin e mbiemrave ose shembujve t\u00eb tij, por, n\u00eb m\u00ebnyr\u00eb fundamentale, n\u00eb dallimin e tij midis antinomive matematikore dhe dinamike. Kjo do t\u00eb thot\u00eb se <\/span>Kanti ishte i pari q\u00eb teorizoi, n\u00ebp\u00ebrmjet k\u00ebtij dallimi, dallimin q\u00eb themelon ndarjen nga ana e psikoanaliz\u00ebs s\u00eb t\u00eb gjith\u00eb subjekteve n\u00eb dy klasa nd\u00ebrsjellsh\u00ebm p\u00ebrjashtuese: mashkull dhe fem\u00ebr<\/span><\/i>.<\/span><\/span><\/p>

Un\u00eb synoj, pra, p\u00ebr pjes\u00ebn e mbetur, t\u00eb interpretoj seksuimin e subjektit nga psikoanaliza n\u00eb terma t\u00eb analiz\u00ebs kantiane t\u00eb antinomive t\u00eb arsyes. M\u00eb posa\u00e7\u00ebrisht, fokusi im do t\u00eb jet\u00eb mbi formulat e seksuimit t\u00eb propozuara nga Lacani n\u00eb Seminarin e tij XX: <\/span>Encore<\/span><\/i>. N\u00eb k\u00ebt\u00eb seminar, Lacani p\u00ebrs\u00ebrit q\u00ebndrimin e psikoanaliz\u00ebs lidhur me dallimin seksual: qenia jon\u00eb e seksuar, ai thekson, nuk \u00ebsht\u00eb dukuri biologjike, nuk kalon n\u00ebp\u00ebr trup, por \u201crezulton nga k\u00ebrkesat logjike t\u00eb t\u00eb folur\u00ebs.\u201d4<\/sup><\/span> K\u00ebto k\u00ebrkesa logjike na \u00e7ojn\u00eb n\u00eb nj\u00eb takim me nj\u00eb themel ose ng\u00ebr\u00e7 fundametal kur ne pashmangsh\u00ebm hasim faktin se \u201ct\u2019i thuash t\u00eb gjitha \u00ebsht\u00eb fjal\u00eb p\u00ebr fjal\u00eb e pamundur: fjal\u00ebt d\u00ebshtojn\u00eb.\u201d5<\/sup><\/span> P\u00ebr m\u00eb tep\u00ebr, tani jemi n\u00eb nj\u00eb pozit\u00eb t\u00eb shtojm\u00eb se, ato d\u00ebshtojn\u00eb n\u00eb dy m\u00ebnyra t\u00eb ndryshme, ose, si\u00e7 thot\u00eb Lacan te <\/span>Encore<\/span><\/i>, \u201cKa dy m\u00ebnyra q\u00eb afera, marr\u00ebdh\u00ebnia seksuale, t\u00eb lajthis\u00eb. … \u00cbsht\u00eb m\u00ebnyra mashkullore … [dhe] m\u00ebnyra fem\u00ebrore.\u201d6<\/sup><\/span><\/span><\/p>

Formulat e seksuimit, si\u00e7 jan\u00eb paraqitur n\u00eb \u201cNj\u00eb let\u00ebr dashurie,\u201d sesioni i shtat\u00eb i seminarit, duken k\u00ebshtu7<\/sup>:<\/span><\/p>

\"\"<\/p>

Secila nga kat\u00ebr formulat \u00ebsht\u00eb nj\u00eb propozim i thjesht\u00eb logjik dhe, si t\u00eb gjitha propozimet, ka si <\/span>sasi<\/span><\/i> ashtu edhe <\/span>cil\u00ebsi<\/span><\/i>. Sasia e nj\u00eb propozimi p\u00ebrcaktohet nga sasia e termit t\u00eb subjetikt t\u00eb tij; simbolet \u201c<\/span>\u2200<\/span>\u201d dhe \u201c<\/span>\u2203<\/span>\u201d jan\u00eb kuantifikues, q\u00eb do t\u00eb thot\u00eb se tregojn\u00eb sasin\u00eb e termit t\u00eb subjektit. \u201c<\/span>\u2200<\/span>,\u201d kuantifikuesi universal, \u00ebsht\u00eb nj\u00eb shkurtes\u00eb p\u00ebr fjal\u00eb t\u00eb tilla si <\/span>\u00e7do<\/span><\/i>, <\/span>t\u00eb gjitha<\/span><\/i>, <\/span>asnj\u00eb<\/span><\/i>; por \u00ebsht\u00eb e r\u00ebnd\u00ebsishme t\u00eb theksohet se emrat e p\u00ebrve\u00e7\u00ebm konsiderohen po ashtu si universal\u00eb. \u201c<\/span>\u2203<\/span>,\u201d kuantifikuesi ekzistencial, p\u00ebrfaq\u00ebson fjal\u00eb t\u00eb tilla si <\/span>disa<\/span><\/i>, <\/span>nj\u00eb<\/span><\/i>, <\/span>t\u00eb pakt\u00ebn nj\u00eb<\/span><\/i>, <\/span>shumica<\/span><\/i>. Cil\u00ebsia e nj\u00eb propozimi p\u00ebrcaktohet nga cil\u00ebsia e k\u00ebpuj\u00ebs s\u00eb tij, qoft\u00eb pohuese ose mohuese. Pohorja nuk ka shenj\u00eb, nd\u00ebrsa mohorja \u00ebsht\u00eb e sh\u00ebnuar me nj\u00eb vij\u00eb t\u00eb thyer (\u201c\u00ac\u201d) para termit t\u00eb predikatit.<\/span><\/span><\/p>

Meq\u00eb simboli \u201c\u03a6\u201d \u00ebsht\u00eb tashm\u00eb i njohur p\u00ebr ne nga tekstet e tjera t\u00eb Lacanit, nj\u00eb p\u00ebrkthim i propozimeve \u00ebsht\u00eb tani i mundur:<\/span><\/p>

\"\"<\/p>

Ana e majt\u00eb e skem\u00ebs \u00ebsht\u00eb p\u00ebrshenjuar si ana mashkullore, nd\u00ebrsa ana e djatht\u00eb \u00ebsht\u00eb fem\u00ebrore. Gj\u00ebja e par\u00eb q\u00eb duhet v\u00ebn\u00eb re \u00ebsht\u00eb se dy propozimet q\u00eb p\u00ebrb\u00ebjn\u00eb secil\u00ebn an\u00eb duket se kan\u00eb nj\u00eb marr\u00ebdh\u00ebnie <\/span>antinomike<\/span><\/i> me nj\u00ebra-tjetr\u00ebn, dometh\u00ebn\u00eb, ato duket se bien n\u00eb kontradikt\u00eb me nj\u00ebra-tjetr\u00ebn. Si jan\u00eb prodhuar k\u00ebto q\u00eb duken si antinomi dhe si vijn\u00eb e p\u00ebrshenjohen nga termat e dallimit seksual? Para se t\u2019u p\u00ebrgjigjemi k\u00ebtyre pyetjeve, duhet t\u00eb dim\u00eb pak m\u00eb shum\u00eb rreth formulave.<\/span><\/span><\/p>

Lacan skarton dy nga termat e logjik\u00ebs klasike q\u00eb p\u00ebrdor\u00ebm n\u00eb p\u00ebrshkrimin e m\u00ebparsh\u00ebm; n\u00eb vend t\u00eb <\/span>subjektit<\/span><\/i> dhe <\/span>predikatit<\/span><\/i>, ai p\u00ebrdor termat <\/span>argument<\/span><\/i> dhe <\/span>funksion<\/span><\/i>. Ky z\u00ebvend\u00ebsim sh\u00ebnon nj\u00eb dallim konceptual: dy klasat, mashkull dhe fem\u00ebr, nuk formohen m\u00eb duke mbledhur s\u00eb bashku subjekte me atribute t\u00eb ngjashme, si\u00e7 ishte rasti me termat e vjet\u00ebr. Parimi i renditjes nuk \u00ebsht\u00eb m\u00eb p\u00ebrshkrues, dometh\u00ebn\u00eb, nuk \u00ebsht\u00eb \u00e7\u00ebshtje e karakteristikave t\u00eb p\u00ebrbashk\u00ebta ose nj\u00eb substance t\u00eb p\u00ebrbashk\u00ebt. N\u00ebse dikush bie n\u00eb klas\u00ebn e meshkujve ose femrave kjo varet, p\u00ebrkundrazi, nga ku e vendos veten si argument n\u00eb lidhje me funksionin, dometh\u00ebn\u00eb, nga cili vend flet, cilin pozicion shqiptimi merr.<\/span><\/span><\/p>

Ajo q\u00eb legjitimon braktisjen nga Lacani t\u00eb disa prej termave dhe madje disa prej premisave t\u00eb logjik\u00ebs klasike \u00ebsht\u00eb funksioni \u2013 funksioni fallik \u2013 q\u00eb shfaqet n\u00eb secil\u00ebn prej kat\u00ebr propozimeve. Ky funksion \u2013 dhe sidomos fakti q\u00eb shfaqet n\u00eb t\u00eb dy an\u00ebt e tabel\u00ebs \u2013 ka qen\u00eb n\u00eb qend\u00ebr t\u00eb polemikave q\u00eb kur Frojdi filloi t\u00eb shtjellonte teorin\u00eb e tij t\u00eb seksualitetit fem\u00ebror. Feminist\u00ebt gjithmon\u00eb jan\u00eb rebeluar kund\u00ebr ides\u00eb q\u00eb fallusi duhet t\u00eb shpjegoj\u00eb ekzistenc\u00ebn e t\u00eb dy sekseve, q\u00eb dallimi mes tyre duhet t\u00eb p\u00ebrcaktohet me referenc\u00eb ndaj k\u00ebtij termi t\u00eb vet\u00ebm. Ata e kan\u00eb d\u00ebnuar k\u00ebt\u00eb t\u00eb cil\u00ebn e kan\u00eb kuptuar si reduktim t\u00eb dallimit n\u00eb nj\u00eb pohim apo mohim t\u00eb thjesht\u00eb: t\u00eb kesh apo mos t\u00eb kesh fallusin. Por kjo ankes\u00eb godet sh\u00ebnjestr\u00ebn e gabuar, sepse ve\u00e7antia, ose singulariteti, i shenjuesit fallik \u00ebsht\u00eb pik\u00ebrisht n\u00eb saje t\u00eb faktit q\u00eb ai d\u00ebrmon mund\u00ebsin\u00eb e \u00e7far\u00ebdo pohimi apo mohimi t\u00eb thjesht\u00eb. \u00cbsht\u00eb shenjuesi fallik q\u00eb \u00ebsht\u00eb p\u00ebrgjegj\u00ebs p\u00ebr prodhimin n\u00eb secil\u00ebn an\u00eb t\u00eb tabel\u00ebs jo t\u00eb nj\u00eb deklarate t\u00eb thjesht\u00eb, por t\u00eb dy deklaratave q\u00eb jan\u00eb kontradiktore. Secila an\u00eb p\u00ebrkufizohet si nga nj\u00eb pohim, ashtu edhe nga nj\u00eb mohim i funksionit fallik, nj\u00eb p\u00ebrfshirje dhe p\u00ebrjashtim t\u00eb <\/span>jouissance<\/span><\/i>-s absolute (jo-fallike). Jo vet\u00ebm q\u00eb i famshmi \u201cjo t\u00eb gjith\u00eb\u201d i an\u00ebs fem\u00ebrore \u2013 jo t\u00eb gjith\u00eb jan\u00eb t\u00eb n\u00ebnshtruar ndaj funksionit fallik \u2013 p\u00ebrkufizohet nga nj\u00eb pavendosm\u00ebri themelore n\u00eb lidhje me vendndodhjen e gruas brenda klas\u00ebs s\u00eb gj\u00ebrave t\u00eb n\u00ebnshtruara ndaj sundimit fallik, por edhe ana mashkullore p\u00ebrmban nj\u00eb pavendosm\u00ebri t\u00eb ngjashme: p\u00ebrfshirja e <\/span>t\u00eb gjith\u00eb<\/span><\/i> burrave brenda sfer\u00ebs t\u00eb sundimit fallik kusht\u00ebzohet nga fakti q\u00eb <\/span>t\u00eb pakt\u00ebn nj\u00eb<\/span><\/i> i shp\u00ebton atij. A e num\u00ebrojm\u00eb k\u00ebt\u00eb \u201cburr\u00eb t\u00eb shp\u00ebtuar\u201d nd\u00ebr t\u00eb gjith\u00eb, apo nuk e num\u00ebrojm\u00eb? \u00c7far\u00eb lloj \u201cburri\u201d \u00ebsht\u00eb ai q\u00eb, <\/span>jouissance<\/span><\/i>-a e t\u00eb cilit nuk kufizohet n\u00eb varietetin mashkullor; dhe \u00e7far\u00eb \u00ebsht\u00eb ky demek \u201ct\u00eb gjith\u00eb\u201d q\u00eb i mungon nj\u00eb nga elementet e tij?<\/span><\/span><\/p>

Pra, e shihni, \u00ebsht\u00eb e kot\u00eb t\u00eb p\u00ebrpiqeni t\u2019i m\u00ebsoni psikoanaliz\u00ebs p\u00ebr pavendosm\u00ebrin\u00eb, p\u00ebr m\u00ebnyr\u00ebn se si shenjuesit seksual\u00eb refuzojn\u00eb t\u00eb radhiten n\u00eb dy klasa t\u00eb ndara. Nuk ka kuptim t\u2019i predikoni dekonstruksionin psikoanaliz\u00ebs sepse ajo tashm\u00eb di gjith\u00e7ka p\u00ebr t\u00eb. Biseksualiteti ka qen\u00eb prej koh\u00ebsh koncept psikoanalitik para se t\u00eb b\u00ebhej nj\u00eb koncept dekonstruktivist. <\/span>Por dallimi midis dekonstruksionit dhe psikoanaliz\u00ebs \u00ebsht\u00eb se kjo e fundit nuk e ngat\u00ebrron faktin e biseksualitetit \u2013 dometh\u00ebn\u00eb, faktin q\u00eb shenjuesit mashkullor dhe fem\u00ebror nuk mund t\u00eb dallohen absolutisht \u2013 me nj\u00eb mohim t\u00eb dallimit seksual.<\/span><\/i> Dekonstruksioni bie n\u00eb k\u00ebt\u00eb ngat\u00ebrres\u00eb vet\u00ebm duke shp\u00ebrfillur dallimin midis m\u00ebnyrave n\u00eb t\u00eb cilat ndodh ky d\u00ebshtim. Duke e konsideruar d\u00ebshtimin si t\u00eb nj\u00ebtrajtsh\u00ebm, dekonstruksioni p\u00ebrfundon duke e kolapsuar dallimin seksual n\u00eb nj\u00eb paqart\u00ebsi seksuale. Kjo \u00ebsht\u00eb p\u00ebrve\u00e7 faktit q\u00eb, t\u00eb pakt\u00ebn p\u00ebr k\u00ebt\u00eb pik\u00eb, dekonstruksioni duket se \u00ebsht\u00eb b\u00ebr\u00eb sylesh nga pretendimi i gjuh\u00ebs p\u00ebr t\u00eb folur qenien, pasi e barazon nj\u00eb ngat\u00ebrrim t\u00eb shenjuesve seksual\u00eb me nj\u00eb ngat\u00ebrrim t\u00eb vet\u00eb seksit.<\/span><\/span><\/p>

Ky, me pak fjal\u00eb, \u00ebsht\u00eb m\u00ebsimi i formulave t\u00eb seksuimit; \u00ebsht\u00eb nj\u00eb m\u00ebsim i m\u00ebsuar prej Kantit, si\u00e7 do t\u00eb p\u00ebrpiqem tani t\u00eb tregoj m\u00eb me holl\u00ebsi. S\u00eb pari, megjithat\u00eb, duhet t\u00eb themi pak m\u00eb shum\u00eb p\u00ebr funksionin fallik q\u00eb \u00ebsht\u00eb burimi i gjith\u00eb k\u00ebsaj pavendosm\u00ebrie. Shfaqja e tij \u2013 n\u00eb <\/span>t\u00eb dyja<\/span><\/i> an\u00ebt e tabel\u00ebs \u2013 tregon se ne kemi t\u00eb b\u00ebjm\u00eb me qenie q\u00eb flasin, qenie q\u00eb, sipas p\u00ebrkthimit lakanian t\u00eb konceptit frojdian t\u00eb kastrimit, heqin dor\u00eb nga qasja e tyre n\u00eb <\/span>jouissance<\/span><\/i> me t\u00eb hyr\u00eb n\u00eb gjuh\u00eb. Kjo jo vet\u00ebm q\u00eb riformulon at\u00eb q\u00eb kemi argumentuar gjat\u00eb gjith\u00eb koh\u00ebs \u2013 jan\u00eb ng\u00ebr\u00e7et e <\/span>gjuh\u00ebs<\/span><\/i> q\u00eb krijojn\u00eb p\u00ebrvoj\u00ebn e t\u00eb pap\u00ebrjetueshmes, t\u00eb t\u00eb pafolshmes \u2013 por edhe ekspozon marr\u00ebzin\u00eb e atij leximi t\u00eb teoris\u00eb s\u00eb dallimit seksual t\u00eb Lacan-it q\u00eb pohon se kjo e l\u00eb gruan n\u00eb nj\u00eb kontinent t\u00eb err\u00ebt, jasht\u00eb gjuh\u00ebs. Secila an\u00eb e tabel\u00ebs p\u00ebrshkruan nj\u00eb ng\u00ebr\u00e7 t\u00eb ndrysh\u00ebm me an\u00eb t\u00eb t\u00eb cilit kjo \u00e7\u00ebshtje e t\u00eb jashtmes s\u00eb gjuh\u00ebs ngrihet, nj\u00eb m\u00ebnyr\u00eb t\u00eb ndryshme p\u00ebr t\u00eb zbuluar pafuqin\u00eb thelb\u00ebsore t\u00eb t\u00eb folurit. Por, nd\u00ebrsa funksioni fallik prodhon n\u00eb secil\u00ebn an\u00eb nj\u00eb d\u00ebshtim, ai nuk prodhon nj\u00eb simetri midis an\u00ebve.<\/span><\/span><\/p>\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t

\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/i><\/span>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/i><\/span>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/span>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\tPjesa e par\u00eb<\/a>\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\n\t\t\t\t\t

Lexom\u00eb d\u00ebshir\u00ebn: Seksi dhe euthanazia e arsyes (I)\u00a0<\/b><\/a><\/span><\/p><\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t

\n\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/i><\/span>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/i><\/span>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/span>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\tPjesa e tret\u00eb<\/a>\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\n\t\t\t\t\t

Lexom\u00eb d\u00ebshir\u00ebn: Seksi dhe euthanazia e arsyes (III)\u00a0<\/b><\/a><\/span><\/p><\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t

\n\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/i><\/span>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/i><\/span>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/span>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\tPjesa e kat\u00ebrt<\/a>\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\n\t\t\t\t\t

Lexom\u00eb d\u00ebshir\u00ebn: Seksi dhe euthanazia e arsyes (IV)\u00a0<\/b><\/a><\/span><\/p><\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t

\n\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/i><\/span>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/i><\/span>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/span>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\tTeksti i plot\u00eb<\/a>\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\n\t\t\t\t\t

Lexom\u00eb d\u00ebshir\u00ebn: Seksi dhe euthanazia e arsyes (E plot\u00eb)<\/a><\/span><\/span><\/h2><\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/span>\n\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t

Joan Copjec \u00ebsht\u00eb nj\u00eb teoriciene dhe kritike e njohur n\u00eb fush\u00ebn e teoris\u00eb filmike dhe studimeve kulturore, me ndikim t\u00eb ve\u00e7ant\u00eb n\u00eb teorin\u00eb feministe dhe psikoanaliz\u00ebn lakaniane. Ajo \u00ebsht\u00eb profesoresh\u00eb n\u00eb Universitetin Brown n\u00eb New York dhe \u00ebsht\u00eb autore e disa librave t\u00eb r\u00ebnd\u00ebsish\u00ebm, p\u00ebrfshir\u00eb <\/span>Read My Desire: Lacan Against the Historicists<\/span> dhe <\/span>Imagine There’s No Woman: Ethics and Sublimation<\/span>. Copjec \u00ebsht\u00eb e njohur p\u00ebr analizat e saj t\u00eb thella dhe t\u00eb sofistikuara, ku kombinon filozofin\u00eb, psikoanaliz\u00ebn dhe teorin\u00eb sociale p\u00ebr t\u00eb sfiduar kuptimet konvencionale dhe p\u00ebr t\u00eb ofruar perspektiva t\u00eb reja mbi subjektin dhe d\u00ebshir\u00ebn njer\u00ebzore. Ajo gjithashtu \u00ebsht\u00eb nj\u00eb nga figurat kryesore q\u00eb ka ndihmuar n\u00eb p\u00ebrhapjen dhe zhvillimin e teoris\u00eb lakaniane n\u00eb kontekstin anglo-amerikan, duke kontribuar n\u00eb diskutimet akademike dhe kritike mbi identitetin, gjinin\u00eb dhe politik\u00ebn kulturore.<\/span><\/span><\/p>\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t

\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/span>\n\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t

\u00a01. <\/span><\/span>Freud, “On the History of the Psycho-Analytic Movement” (1914), SE, v\u00ebll. 14, fq. 62.<\/span><\/p>

2. <\/span>Ky pohim nuk duhet t\u00eb merret si p\u00ebr\u00e7mues ndaj dekonstruksionit, i cili nuk do t\u00eb pretendonte vet\u00eb se di\u00e7ka tjet\u00ebr p\u00ebrve\u00e7 nj\u00eb shenjuesi \u00ebsht\u00eb \u201ce dekonstruktueshme,\u201d ose e mohueshme. N\u00eb fakt, \u00ebsht\u00eb vet\u00ebm sepse tjetri i shenjuesit nuk tundet vendit, nuk mund t\u00eb mohohet, q\u00eb dekonstruksioni \u00ebsht\u00eb i mundur fare.<\/span><\/span><\/p>

3.<\/span><\/span>\u00a0(Sh\u00ebnim i p\u00ebrkth.) <\/span>P\u00ebrmbarim<\/span><\/i> p\u00ebrkthen k\u00ebtu termin <\/span>foreclosure<\/span><\/i> i cili nga ana e vet \u00ebsht\u00eb b\u00ebr\u00eb p\u00ebrkthimi standard i <\/span>Verwerfung<\/span><\/i> n\u00eb anglisht dhe q\u00eb n\u00eb terminologjin\u00eb psikoanalitike kuptohet si mohimi i posa\u00e7\u00ebm psikotik (n\u00eb dallim nga ndrydhja, <\/span>repression<\/span><\/i>, <\/span>Verdr\u00e4ngung<\/span><\/i> q\u00eb \u00ebsht\u00eb mohimi i posa\u00e7\u00ebm neurotik dhe me hash\u00ebn, <\/span>disavowal<\/span><\/i>, <\/span>Verleugnung<\/span><\/i>, q\u00eb \u00ebsht\u00eb mohimi fetishist, mohimi i posa\u00e7\u00ebm pervers).\u00a0<\/span><\/span><\/p>

4. <\/span>Jacques Lacan, <\/span>Encore<\/span><\/i> (Paris, Seuil, 1975), fq. 15.<\/span><\/span><\/p>

5. <\/span>\u00a0Jacques Lacan, <\/span>Television\/A Challenge to the Psychoanalytic Establishment<\/span><\/i>, red. Joan Copjec, p\u00ebrkthyer nga Denis Hollier, Rosalind Krauss dhe Annette Michelson (New York: W. W. Norton, 1990), fq. 3.<\/span><\/span><\/p>

6. <\/span>Lacan, <\/span>Encore<\/span><\/i>, fq. 53-54.<\/span><\/span><\/p>

7. <\/span><\/span>Ibid., fq. 73. Kjo tabel\u00eb shfaqet edhe n\u00eb faqen 149 t\u00eb p\u00ebrkthimit t\u00eb k\u00ebsaj seance t\u00eb seminarit q\u00eb \u00ebsht\u00eb p\u00ebrfshir\u00eb n\u00eb botimin e Mitchell dhe Rose, <\/span>Feminine Sexuality<\/span><\/i>.<\/span><\/span><\/p>\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t

\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/span>\n\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t

Imazhi i ballin\u00ebs:<\/strong><\/em><\/span>\u00a0Sasha Matveeva<\/a> n\u00eb<\/span>\u00a0Unsplash<\/a><\/span><\/p>\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

T\u00eb thuash se subjekti \u00ebsht\u00eb n\u00eb t\u00eb nj\u00ebjtin nivel me ligjin nuk \u00ebsht\u00eb e barasvlershme me pretendimin se ajo \u00ebsht\u00eb ligji, pasi \u00e7do shkrirje e subjektit me ligjin vet\u00ebm e redukton at\u00eb, e n\u00ebnshtron at\u00eb absolutisht ndaj ligjit. N\u00eb t\u00eb nj\u00ebjtin nivel me dhe prap\u00eb jo ligji, subjekti mund t\u00eb konceptohet vet\u00ebm si d\u00ebshtim i ligjit, i gjuh\u00ebs. N\u00eb gjuh\u00eb dhe prap\u00eb m\u00eb shum\u00eb se gjuh\u00eb, subjekti \u00ebsht\u00eb nj\u00eb shkak t\u00eb cilin asnj\u00eb shenjues nuk mund ta shpjegoj\u00eb. Jo sepse ajo e tejkalon shenjuesin, por sepse ajo banon n\u00eb t\u00eb si kufi…<\/p>","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":23812,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"elementor_header_footer","format":"standard","meta":{"episode_type":"","audio_file":"","podmotor_file_id":"","podmotor_episode_id":"","cover_image":"","cover_image_id":"","duration":"","filesize":"","filesize_raw":"","date_recorded":"","explicit":"","block":"","ocean_post_layout":"","ocean_both_sidebars_style":"","ocean_both_sidebars_content_width":0,"ocean_both_sidebars_sidebars_width":0,"ocean_sidebar":"ocs-kendveshtrim-category-post-sidebar","ocean_second_sidebar":"0","ocean_disable_margins":"enable","ocean_add_body_class":"","ocean_shortcode_before_top_bar":"","ocean_shortcode_after_top_bar":"","ocean_shortcode_before_header":"","ocean_shortcode_after_header":"","ocean_has_shortcode":"","ocean_shortcode_after_title":"","ocean_shortcode_before_footer_widgets":"","ocean_shortcode_after_footer_widgets":"","ocean_shortcode_before_footer_bottom":"","ocean_shortcode_after_footer_bottom":"","ocean_display_top_bar":"default","ocean_display_header":"default","ocean_header_style":"","ocean_center_header_left_menu":"0","ocean_custom_header_template":"0","ocean_custom_logo":0,"ocean_custom_retina_logo":0,"ocean_custom_logo_max_width":0,"ocean_custom_logo_tablet_max_width":0,"ocean_custom_logo_mobile_max_width":0,"ocean_custom_logo_max_height":0,"ocean_custom_logo_tablet_max_height":0,"ocean_custom_logo_mobile_max_height":0,"ocean_header_custom_menu":"0","ocean_menu_typo_font_family":"0","ocean_menu_typo_font_subset":"","ocean_menu_typo_font_size":0,"ocean_menu_typo_font_size_tablet":0,"ocean_menu_typo_font_size_mobile":0,"ocean_menu_typo_font_size_unit":"px","ocean_menu_typo_font_weight":"","ocean_menu_typo_font_weight_tablet":"","ocean_menu_typo_font_weight_mobile":"","ocean_menu_typo_transform":"","ocean_menu_typo_transform_tablet":"","ocean_menu_typo_transform_mobile":"","ocean_menu_typo_line_height":0,"ocean_menu_typo_line_height_tablet":0,"ocean_menu_typo_line_height_mobile":0,"ocean_menu_typo_line_height_unit":"","ocean_menu_typo_spacing":0,"ocean_menu_typo_spacing_tablet":0,"ocean_menu_typo_spacing_mobile":0,"ocean_menu_typo_spacing_unit":"","ocean_menu_link_color":"","ocean_menu_link_color_hover":"","ocean_menu_link_color_active":"","ocean_menu_link_background":"","ocean_menu_link_hover_background":"","ocean_menu_link_active_background":"","ocean_menu_social_links_bg":"","ocean_menu_social_hover_links_bg":"","ocean_menu_social_links_color":"","ocean_menu_social_hover_links_color":"","ocean_disable_title":"default","ocean_disable_heading":"on","ocean_post_title":"","ocean_post_subheading":"","ocean_post_title_style":"","ocean_post_title_background_color":"","ocean_post_title_background":0,"ocean_post_title_bg_image_position":"","ocean_post_title_bg_image_attachment":"","ocean_post_title_bg_image_repeat":"","ocean_post_title_bg_image_size":"","ocean_post_title_height":0,"ocean_post_title_bg_overlay":0.5,"ocean_post_title_bg_overlay_color":"","ocean_disable_breadcrumbs":"default","ocean_breadcrumbs_color":"","ocean_breadcrumbs_separator_color":"","ocean_breadcrumbs_links_color":"","ocean_breadcrumbs_links_hover_color":"","ocean_display_footer_widgets":"default","ocean_display_footer_bottom":"default","ocean_custom_footer_template":"0","ocean_post_oembed":"","ocean_post_self_hosted_media":"","ocean_post_video_embed":"","ocean_link_format":"","ocean_link_format_target":"self","ocean_quote_format":"","ocean_quote_format_link":"post","ocean_gallery_link_images":"off","ocean_gallery_id":[],"footnotes":""},"categories":[5,4,829],"tags":[99,529,825,826,237,828,827],"class_list":["post-23766","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-kulture","category-kryenyje","category-perkthime","tag-feminizem","tag-genc-shehu","tag-joan-copjec","tag-lexome-deshiren-seksi-dhe-euthanazia-e-arsyes","tag-perkthim","tag-seksi","tag-teori-feministe","entry","has-media"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/nyje.al\/sq\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/23766","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/nyje.al\/sq\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/nyje.al\/sq\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/nyje.al\/sq\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/nyje.al\/sq\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=23766"}],"version-history":[{"count":9,"href":"https:\/\/nyje.al\/sq\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/23766\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":23814,"href":"https:\/\/nyje.al\/sq\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/23766\/revisions\/23814"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/nyje.al\/sq\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/23812"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/nyje.al\/sq\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=23766"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/nyje.al\/sq\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=23766"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/nyje.al\/sq\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=23766"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}