Anna Clark's "Desire" (Ch. 12)

     Within Chapter 12 of Desire, the main topic of discussion is found in what is called "sexual citizenship." This topic caught me by surprise do to the fact that within the Church and government one's natural sexual desires shifted from a innate humane feeling to a revolutionary movement. It is stated that over time, sex has been glorified and blown out of proportion through the media in order to influence generations. In the eyes of the church, it can be concluded that sex is a natural desire, a bond that should be shared between husband and wife to sanctify the unity of marriage and symbolize the divinity of the God head. However, as it is displayed in the media sex is now a "citizenship" and has been liberated in order for freedom of expression to take place. It's not more of the action of sex but the very desires of sexual pleasures that must be taken into account. Therefore, I pose the question, how strong is desire?
     An excerpt from the chapter reads "...They repudiate Lacan's idea that desire was a lack. If we think of desire as lack, we want to plug this whole by acquiring objects, tapped by capitalism. Instead, Deleuze and Guattari wanted revolutionary desire to flow through one person to another in "desiring machines" formed of "great gregarious masses." In revolutionary love, possessive love would disappear and "persons give way to decoded flows of desire, two lines of vibration." Desire was once again perceived as an abstract force detached from the person." 
     If we are to accept this claim made in the prior sentence above that desire was may be viewed as an abstract force detached from the person, what say we then? Are our lives influence/controlled by an outside force in which we have no control? Are our desires not our own? This idea now questions the very thought of desire being a lack but a force, an entity that can not be obtained. With this in mind, the symbolic elements of Celestina come to mind. Was she not the symbol of a force that flowed from person to person while being detached from each person? In the end Celestina died, however her spirit still lived on. So shall we say that desire is not a "lack" per say but a force that can never truly be tangible and in itself there is no satisfaction? By definition, desire is defined as a longing or craving, as for something that brings satisfaction or enjoyment. This definition supports the claim that desire is wanting what we can not have yet it does not express evidence that in itself desire can be perceived as an abstract force detached from the person.
     One thing is certain, no matter how one perceives desire, whether it be a lack or an abstract force, it can never be satisfied and will always be a product of longing for something that neither exists or is achieved.