Traditional Logic of Desire

The Platonic Logic of Desire demands a segregative and biunivocal choice between production and acquisition

Desire as Acquisition (come on dude)

Here, desire becomes kind of gay and stupid:

To acquire "the thing" is to fulfill some end-state wherein you're doing good (being ideal)
To acquire "the thing", you have to consider the alternative of not having the thing (lack), and contrast the two (dialectical)
To consider acquiring "the thing", you can also consider not desiring "the thing" so as to avoid the bad timeline in acquisition, wherein you lack "the thing" (nihilistic)
To frame desire so directly with acquisition is to doom it to the concept of lack, essentializing lack (and kind of miraculating it against desire as a concept?)

Desire as Production of Psychic Reality (gay, Kantian)

It is true that the other side, the "production" side, has not been entirely ignored. Kant, for instance, must be credited with effecting a critical revolution as regards the theory of desire, by attributing to it "the faculty of being, through its representations, the cause of the reality of the objects of these representations."

AO25::1

Kant illustrates an argument for desire as semi-productive, though inspects it more so as to attribute [hallucination::fantasy::unrealness::superstition] to this kind of desire, dooming these desires to a "psychic reality" over anything else.

...as Kant would have it, we are well aware that the real object can be produced only by an external causality and external mechanisms; nonetheless this knowledge does not prevent us from believing in the intrinsic power of desire to create its own object - if only in an unreal, hallucinatory, or delirious form - or from representing this causality as stemming from desire itself.

Ultimately, assigning desire to a psychic reality still contrasts it with the lack of the real object (i.e. the fantasized object as opposed to the real one), which again essentializes lack.

Desire as a production of fantasies (gay, psychoanalytic)

Similarly to Kant, the psychoanalytic conception of the subconscious as a "theater" of projections still relates the real object to an extrinsic natural or social production that is lacking, subjugating desire to producing only imaginary realities, ideal realities, "needed" realities.

In a word, when the theoretician reduces desiring-production to a production of fantasy, he is content to exploit to the fullest the idealist principle that defines desire as a lack, rather than a process of production.
Clément Rosset puts it very well: every time the emphasis is put on a lack that desire supposedly suffers from as a way of defining its object, "the world acquires as its double some other sort of world, in accordance with the following line of argument: there is an object that desire feels the lack of; hence the world does not contain each and every object that exists; there is at least one object missing, the one that desire feels the lack of; hence there exists some other place that contains the kye to desire (missing in this world)."

AO26::0

==> Lack