Psychoanalysis, Culture & Society

, Volume 21, Issue 3, pp 242–248 | Cite as

It’s time: Generation and temporality in psychoanalytic feminism

  • Angie VoelaEmail author
Original Article


In this paper I examine some key aspects of defining one’s generation: transmitting values to younger generations in a way that makes sense to them; cultivating a psychic flexibility that allows us to welcome the future and be prepared for the unexpected whilst not succumbing to the fear of social, political and economic precarity; thinking of generation as both our collective moment in time and as generative potential; reaffirming the value of communication and sharing experience; and maintaining a dialogue between psychoanalytic feminism and other strands of feminist philosophy.


generation Kristeva Ettinger precarity temporality language 


  1. Baraitser, L. (2013) Collecting time: Some reflections on the psychopolitics of belonging. New Formations 72: 8–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Benhabib, S. (1992) Situating the Self: Gender, Community and Postmodernism in Contemporary Ethics. London: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  3. Bosteels, B. (2003) Nonplaces: An anecdoted topography of contemporary French theory. Diacritics 33(3–4): 117–139.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Dean, J. (2013) Complexity as capture: Neoliberalism and the loop of the drive. New Formations 80–81: 138–151.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Dimen, M. (2004) At the crossroads: Feminism, psychoanalysis, politics. Psychotherapy and Politics International 2(1): 32–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Ettinger, B. (1992) Matrix and metramorphosis. Differences: A Journal of Feminist Cultural Studies 4(3): 176–208.Google Scholar
  7. Ferrell, R. (1999) The timing of feminism. Hypatia 14(1): 38–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Hall, S., Massey, D. and Rustin, M. (2013) After neoliberalism: Analysing the present. Soundings 53(15): 8–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Kristeva, J. (1981) Women’s time. Translated by A. Jardine and H. Blake. Journal of Women in Culture and Society 7(11): 13–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Layton, L. (2009) Who’s responsible? Our mutual implication in each other’s suffering. Psychoanalytic Dialogues 19(2): 105–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Layton, L. (2010) Irrational exuberance: Neoliberal subjectivity and the perversion of truth. Subjectivity: International Journal of Critical Psychology 3(3): 303–322.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Le Doeuff, M. (2003) The Sex of Knowing. Translated by K. Hamer and L. Code. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  13. Martin, A. (2002) Report on ‘natality’ in Arendt and Cavarero. Paragraph 25(1): 32–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. McRobbie, A. (2009) Inside and outside the feminist academy. Australian Feminist Studies 24(59): 123–138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Mitchell, J., Rose, J. and Radford, J. (2010) Psychoanalysis, politics, and the future of feminism: A conversation. Women: A Cultural Review 21(1): 75–103.Google Scholar
  16. Nobus, D. and Quinn, M. (2005) Knowing Nothing, Staying Stupid: Elements for a Psychoanalytic Epistemology. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  17. Rajchman, J. (1991) Truth and Eros: Foucault, Lacan and the Question of Ethics. London: Routledge.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Macmillan Publishers Ltd 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Social Sciences, University of East London, Docklands CampusLondonUK

Personalised recommendations