Another area where the feminine style of writing differs from the masculine style is in the possible location of expression. Cixous discusses the existing limitations on where women can express themselves within the male discourse. Throughout her essay Cixous attempts to illustrate how women, when trying to speak their thoughts, are at an extreme disadvantage. This disadvantage results from the fact that they are forced to speak in a language that is not representative of and does not account for feminine experiences and a feminist perspective. Because a feminine style can never be theorized, enclosed, or encoded, a result of the boundries created by a male discourse, "it is impossible to define a feminine practice of writing." However Cixous explains that while women may encounter difficulty when trying to effectively use a male language, there is no absolute outside for women from this language. By this Cixous means that feminine writing "will always surpass the discourse that regulates the phallocentric system; it does and will take place in areas other than those subordinated to philosophico-theoretical domination. It will be conceived of only by those who are breakers of automatisms." Cixous believes that while women may be forced to the exterior boundaries of a phallocentric discourse, they are in fact able to enter the masculine language in small gaps that exist within phallocentrism. It is from within these gaps that women have the opportunity to inject new ideas concerning the current ideologies that pose as challenges to women.

Introduction to the Myths
Why the Myths Were Created
How to Uncover and Conquer the Myths
The Myths and Their Faults
Derrida's Theory of Deconstruction
Applied to Cixous
Obstacles Faced in Conquering the Myths
How the Medusa Became a Monster
and the Woman Became Inadequate
A Critique of Cixous' Use
of Deconstruction
Cixous' Proposed Results and
My Proposed Results

Back to "Medusa's Orgasm" Main Page

Back to Helene Cixous' Research Page