The Anal Drive and the Phallus

This is a classic lecanian dialectic that I want you to have in mind. It's not between appearance and being, the philosophical distinction that Lacan works. It's at the level of having versus being. These are his two big ontological buckets. You see this when he talks about the phallus, for instance. Not the oral drive, not the anal drive, but if you talk about the phallic drive,. Is it better to have the phalaxus or be the phlassus?