Birksted-Breen D
Int J Psychoanal. 1996 Aug;77 ( Pt 4):649-57.
In this paper the author suggests that it is insufficient simply to make a distinction, as Laplanche & Pontalis do, between penis to denote the male organ in its bodily reality and phallus to describe the symbolic aspect. She suggests that there is an important symbolic function for which the word phallus is not appropriate and which she calls penis-as-link. She suggests that it is the introjection of the penis-as-link which has a structuring function and promotes mental space and thinking, in that it recognises the full oedipal situation including the parental relationship (and mental bisexuality). With clinical material she shows that the lack of internalisation of the penis-as-link leads to the search for the phallus as a fantasy and she illustrates the relationship between the internalisation of the penis-as-link and mental space and thinking.
在本文中,作者认为,像拉普朗什和庞塔利斯那样,仅仅区分表示身体实在的男性器官的“阴茎”(penis)和描述象征层面的“阳具”(phallus)是不够的。她指出,存在一种重要的象征功能,“阳具”这个词并不适合用来描述它,她将其称为“作为纽带的阴茎”(penis-as-link)。她认为,正是“作为纽带的阴茎”的内摄具有一种结构化功能,并促进心理空间和思维,因为它认识到完整的俄狄浦斯情境,包括亲子关系(以及心理双性恋)。通过临床素材,她表明“作为纽带的阴茎”缺乏内化会导致将阳具作为一种幻想来追寻,并且她阐释了“作为纽带的阴茎”的内化与心理空间和思维之间的关系。