A deriva cabe aos que ainda se revoltam. It is as if the lover alone were sexed, as if it were the lover who conferred the opposite sex on the beloved; moreover, it is as if there were no essential difference between habitual love and homosexuality. Phenomenology must be a phenomenology of the beloved. Woman, however, is completely different. In vain would we seek the expression of an absent external world on the face of this woman. In her, everything is presence. Woman does not express a possible world; or rather, the possibility she expresses is not an external world, it is she herself.
Woman expresses only herself: One could say that she lies at an intermediary position between the pure object, which expresses nothing, and the male-Other, which expresses something other than itself, an external world.
With woman, we are made to witness the genesis of the Other: On the other hand, she can clearly be distinguished from the male-Other. I can, in my own eyes, ridicule the Other, gravely insult him, deny the possibility of the world he expresses — that is, I can reduce the Other to a pure, absurd, and mechanical comportment. Comportment is the expressing cut off from the expressed.
Certainly, in the case of the male-Other, the expressed is absent, but it Sou hetera ou heterosexual meaning nonetheless that toward which the expressing tends in its entirety. Closed in on itself, cut off from its own overcoming, the Other takes on an absurd air, reduced to incoherent Sou hetera ou heterosexual meaning.
Woman, on the contrary, in her enormous presence, is impossible to deny or insult; with her, it is impossible to effect this cutting-off. It is as if there were no external world; the expressed is the expressing. Woman is given in an un-decomposable block, she simply appears, and in her the internal is the external, the external the internal.
The coincidence of the expressing the expressed is consciousness. Her consciousness is defined objectively from the outside, but as such it is very particular: Such is her mystery, her grace.
It has not been emphasized enough that grace is defined by a mixture of heaviness and lightness, such that heaviness is what is most light, and lightness is what is most heavy. The body of woman is the overflowing triumph of the flesh, of materiality. A sun, Sou hetera ou heterosexual meaning made your blood swarm and then again two big lights on her body, the throat, and above, this face where she was wearing her thick mouth always closed — oh!
Woman is essentially incarnated; but the more she is ensconced in materiality, the more she makes herself immaterial and is taken up by the expression of herself, by becoming the very possibility of being that she herself is. As a thing, she is conscious; and in being conscious, she is a thing.
She is indissolvably the possibility of being and the being of the possible, the flesh of the possible — in other words, the lightness of heaviness and the heaviness of lightness. This is what grace is: Woman is conscious of her own heaviness, her immersion in the world, her own weight. Let us be clear here: A softness of the abdomen, as Giono says.
And the danger that weighs down on woman like a weight of disgrace is that she loses this consciousness, that she is no longer anything but an abdomen, an overflowing materiality, a make-up that is running: Let us not speak of it: For her being is this unbelievable unity of consciousness and flesh. She is thing and consciousness, thing in consciousness, consciousness in thing. And pure consciousness, a consciousness of itself, that pushes the matter it affects to a cosmic coefficient, and twists it in a return to the self.
The consciousness of woman does not open itself to a plurality of absent external worlds, or close itself on the matter that it possibilizes or universalizes. Woman is a concrete universal, she is a world — not an external world, but the underworld of the world, a tepid interiority of the world, a compress of the internalized world.
Hence the prodigious sexual success of woman: May "Sou hetera ou heterosexual meaning" young men and women renounce hypocritical theories.
Friendship is the realization of the external possible offered to us by the male-Other. But woman has no external world to offer us. In her essence, she is simply that which has the power to dis-interest me in everything else, because she is herself a thing without relation to other things, because she is a world without exteriority. It is not me who desires her, it is she who appears to me as desirable. But in this very world centered around the woman, my friend can, on the contrary, find her to be contemptible and ugly: Sou hetera ou heterosexual meaning the famous conflict between love and friendship.
Let us therefore retain this opposition between the woman and the male-Other. Nonetheless, cannot the woman express a possible external world? Can she not, like the male-Other, propose a tired world, or a non-tired world, and so on? Once and for all, this is not the role of woman, for she would then lose her essence.
The man who experiences pleasure in seeing woman express an external world is what I call a sadist from inoffensive forms of sadism to the most subtle and most evolved forms, in which a mask of suffering and fear is imposed on the woman, the expression of a world of pain.
The sadist said to the woman: But there is a devil within. It seems that women want a philosophy of the asexual Other. It is women themselves who run to their ruin: But in doing so they lose their essence.
A double danger weighs on woman, quite apart from any Sou hetera ou heterosexual meaning of age. Once again, we must be simplistic: The life of the interior and the interior life — the word is the same. Woman is her own possible: Or rather, the inner life is this identity of the material and the immaterial, which constitutes the very essence of woman. Whereas the male-Other is defined above all by exteriority, woman is an interiority — enormous, hot, and full of life.
We have seen how the consciousness of self dematerializes and interiorizes the matter it affects. And we must not forget that we have constantly defined this consciousness by the outside. From this point Sou hetera ou heterosexual meaning view, make-up appears not as a mask, which is applied to a face in order to cover its expression, but as the feminine Persona itself, instituting a supernatural order, that is to say, internalizing nature.
We know now that what maintains this accord between nature and the Persona is the very act of internalizing nature in the form of the Persona, it is consciousness itself. This consciousness is essentially localized in the neck and the ankles — these are the places of grace …. The noumenon is truly the symbol of the interior on the exterior which, beyond its exteriority, maintains its being as interior. Moreover, it lies at the limit of make-up in its entirety, which tends to become noumenal: Interiority is inviolable.
By contrast, one should mistrust the beauty mark, which has a certain thickness, allows itself to be played with, and is not noumenal.
Moreover, the beauty mark stands alone, it does not come in groups, it lies there like an accused black spot. The secret is nothing but a hidden interiority.
Situated at the summit of the interior life, this is nonetheless not its most interesting aspect: There is a great difference between timidity before woman, and this other timidity that inspires the male-Other, of which we have already spoken.
Woman is not like the Other, she does not reveal a new world. She simply looks at me, she thinks something about me, and her thoughts make her laugh.
Seeing myself as the effect of innuendos, of interpretations, of secrets I Sou hetera ou heterosexual meaning never know, of whisperings against my honor, I am seized with confusion. And my attempts at seduction were nothing more than a will to impress the woman, to reduce her interpretation to a pure expression, to a mirror in which I will find myself as I want to be, as in fact I believed myself to be.
At the other pole, sadism is a violent seduction, it is a matter of destroying in the woman the secrets that she has, and thereby destroying the secret that she is…. For if the woman has secrets insofar as she is a subject, she is the object of the Secret itself, and of the Innuendo. The secret is itself a category of things — it is something one does not say aloud, which by its very nature must be understood by half-words.