Psychoanalysis and feminism has kept an awkward relation both as allies and enemies. In my paper, I will focus on the phenomena of the two fields` animosity agaist each other, by dealing with how `the theological fathers` such as Freud and Lacan exploit female patients` psyche in construction and maintenance of their own theoris on female hysteria and how the feminists react to their phallogocentric readings of the female patients. I showed mainly how a young girl named Dora by Freud suffers from Freud`s apptication of his main theory of overdetermination and Oedipus complex on her stories. Freud interprets words and behaviors, not to mention, her dreams as proving her desire for Mr. K and her father in an overdetermined way. For example, Freud interprets her physical illness of catarrh in four different ways, all pointing to her sexual desire for Mr. K In interpreting her symptoms in this overdetermined way, Freud burdens her with heavily sexual contents, such as fellatio, by accusing her of having the fantasy of fellatio which she imagines her father enjoying with Mrs. K On the other hand, Lacan who proclaims himself to be the true inheritor of Freud and his theological legacy further puts Dora in chains, by making her dependent on man to gain her own identity as a woman. While revising Freud`s view of Dora, Lacan defines Dora as somebody who needs to identify herself with man in order to gain her femininity. This view of Lacan can be explained in his own theological idea of "alienating vell". In Dora`s case, she is bound by the alienating vell, "subject or(vell) femininity". This means that if she chooses subject, her feminity is excluded by her choice and if she chooses femininity, she is not able to keep herself as a subject, either because she has to identify herself as a man for her pursuit of feminity or because her subject is exclued by her choice. The reaction to these patriarchal readings of Dora can be divided into the reading of "the dutiful daughters" and that of "resistant daughters." The former reading of Dora is represented by Jacqueline Rose who reads Dora in conforminty of Lacan`s alienating vell and the latter reading of Dora is represented by He´le｀ne Cixous who regards Dora as confoundging the patrarchal system and shows her defiant spirit against Frued. Considering the two readings, it is proved that the latter reading is more constructive and healthy to feministic issues and the former reading produces no peculiar creative effect other than an update post-feminist reading which professes that we don`t no need definite female subjectivity for the purpose of feminism. In conclusion, this paper claims the need to take up the position of the defiant daughters to the patriarchal theorists in psychoanalysis and the need to produce a sister(companion) reading of Freud`s reading of Dora, by devling into Freud`s diaries and letters in the early 2000 years when the materials will be released from Frued`s archive and see why Freud read Dora in such an overdetermined and patriarahchal way.