本文針對紀傑克對米蒂亞的解讀，探討他的解讀如何造成對於主體性之理解的困難。主體不具有實體的充實性，而是奠基於他的存有之匱乏，主體性即是在主體之中的裂隙，顯示了主體與他自身的非同一。主體的倫理姿態就是去回溯和重複在他自身之中的存有學空無。然而，紀傑克卻悖謬地將米蒂亞的殺子行為拔擢為倫理的高度。他認為米蒂亞創造了她的匱乏、自行進入主體性，使她自己成為倫理的主體。米蒂亞的行為包含了雙重謬誤：殺子絕對是倫理的敗壞；藉由殺子而鑿空自己，也不是關聯於自身主體性的本真方式。本文包含三個主要部分。第一部分說明「假女人」附著於錯誤的同一性，用來填補她的存有之匱乏。假女人掩飾空無並逃避在她之中的主體性。第二部分指出紀傑克對米蒂亞之解讀的錯誤。他認為米蒂亞殺害親生孩子的恐怖行為，使她脫離了假女人狀態，成為值得稱頌的「真女人」。他肯定米蒂亞勇於摧毀對自己最重要的珍貴寶物，藉此鑿空她自身的存有。在這個錯誤的解釋當中，紀傑克遺忘了：根本匱乏早就已經穿透主體，並構成了他的主體性。第三部分闡述的是，必須拒絕以米蒂亞作為主體性之典範。進入主體性並不需要主體去鑿空他自己，而是需要主體去重複他的構成性匱乏。本真的倫理行動是：主體再一次地向著自身的內在裂隙而敞開。早在主體過去與大它者的創傷性遭逢時，內在裂隙就已經被構成了。重複主體的構成性匱乏，突顯了主體性的陰性結構，但紀傑克卻因為被米蒂亞迷惑而忽略了它。

This essay focuses on Zizek's reading of Medea and explicates the difficulty that this reading caused in the understanding of subjectivity. Subject doesn't possess substantial fullness. Subject is founded on its lack of being and subjectivity is the gap within subject. Subjectivity manifests subject's non-identity to itself. The ethical posture of subject is to retrace and repeat the ontological void within itself. However, Zizek paradoxically promotes Medea's infanticide to the ethical height. He thinks that Medea creates her own lack for herself, gains access into subjectivity by herself and becomes ethical subject. Medea's act involves two fallacies: killing her children is absolutely unethical; hollowing out herself through infanticide is not the authentic mode to relate one's own subjectivity. This essay contains three parts. The first part elucidates the ＂fake women＂ who attaches to false identity that is used to fill out her lack of being. Fake woman conceals void and eludes the subjectivity within her. The second part analyzes Zizek's misreading of Medea. Zizek emphasizes that Medea's terrible infanticide removes her illusory status of fake woman and makes her shine with the glory of the ＂true woman＂. Zizek praises Medea for her courage to destroy her most precious treasure and thus hollows herself out. In this erroneous interpretation, Zizek forgets the fundamental lack that already penetrated subject and constituted its subjectivity. The third part elucidates the necessity to refuse to accept the mode of subjectivity that is modeled on Medea. Gaining access to subjectivity doesn't require the subject to hollow itself out, but do require the subject to repeat its constitutive lack. The authentic act consists in the renewed openings toward the intimate gap that originated from subject's traumatic encounter with the other in the past. This repetition manifests the feminine structure of subjectivity that is omitted from Zizek's fascination with Medea.