You do not currently have permission to view the full text for this document. Please sign in to an account with an active subscription or contact support.
During a symposium on countertransference, Donald Winnicott said to Michael Fordham:
Incidentally, may I remind Dr Fordham that some of the terms he uses are not of any value to me because they belong to the jargon of Jungian conversation. He in turn can tell me which of my words are useless to him. I refer to: transpersonal, transpersonal unconscious, transpersonal analytic ideal, archetypal, the contra-sexual components of the psyche, the animus and anima, animus—anima conjunction.
I cannot be communicated with in this language. For some in this hall these are household words, and for the rest they have no precise meaning (Winnicott, 1960, p. 159)
A few years later, Winnicott said:
In our theory it is necessary to allow for both a male and a female element in boys and men and girls and women … These considerations have involved me then in a curious statement about the pure male and the pure female aspects of the infant boy or girl (Winnicott, 1966, pp. 93, 96)