Chapter 7 Stumbling Blocks of the Feminine, Stumbling Blocks of Psychic Bisexuality1

Analytic work invites us to consider, in all its complexity, the psychic bisexuality that unfolds during the treatment. It assumes various modalities, and a session may be marked by different forms and nuances. Our listening and our countertransference work allow us to appreciate this complexity and to put it to work without reducing it.

I would like to approach this theme by linking it with the question of the stumbling blocks of the feminine in both sexes, given that these hitches can weigh heavily in the organization of psychic bisexuality and in the potential for play that is related to it. A fragmented, split or inoperative bisexuality then seems to dominate the clinical picture more than a silently structuring and organizing psychic bisexuality or than a background of supple bisexuality, with its share of tension and conflicts, but also with the space of psychic play that it sustains. Unless, that is, the individual has yielded to the sirens of the “phantasy of the neuter gender”, as Green conceptualizes it: “neither masculine nor feminine, and dominated by absolute primary narcissism” (1973, p. 161; see also Green, Chapter 12, in this volume).

I shall begin with some general thoughts on the stumbling blocks of the feminine and of psychic bisexuality inspired by clinical material, before moving on to some theoretical considerations. This will lead us finally to compare Freud’s hypothesis concerning the

repudiation of the feminine in both sexes with the opening that emerges from Winnicott’s (1966) text, “The Split-off Male and Female Elements to Be Found Clinically in Men and Women”. Indeed, the latter opens up new perspectives for us precisely where Freud’s hope seemed to falter.

Why is the feminine so important? Why can its stumbling blocks be so devastating? These questions may seem strange. Our answer will vary depending on whether we are referring to the feminine of man or that of woman. It will also depend on whe