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.
DISCUSSION: Dr. M. Donald Coleman emphasized that Dr. Galenson was attempting to relate clinical material from adult patients to the earliest phase of biphasic genital interest, a phase so early that distinct memories seem beyond recall. He felt that the clinical material presented, while strongly suggestive of pregenital derivation, could be better amplified if the author would describe her interpretations in greater detail so as to allow for a more dynamic understanding of their clinical impact. He stressed, however, that his own clinical experience also revealed the tenacity of women's sense of intellectual inferiority. Dr. Harold P. Blum expressed his reservations about the preoedipal "early genital phase" which was described. He felt that the dominant libidinal phase of the fifteen- to eighteen-month-old child is still the anal phase and the dominant anxiety still the fear of loss of the object and the object's love. He stated that for both men and women important examinations would characteristically evoke anxiety, guilt, and regression and that the reactions would depend upon the fixation points, traumas, and individual conflicts of each patient. Dr. Blum suggested the need for more clinical data to corroborate the validity of making a leap from the preoedipal rapprochement subphase to the adult female graduate student. He also wondered if the fact that Dr. Galenson's patients were self-selected or referred to her as a woman analyst might contribute to the cluster of common problems in this group.