By using the body as a metaphor for women's writing, Cixous attempts to recoup all (women, race, gender, ect.) that has been devalued by Western culture. This way of writing "is a political act, a writing through the body that would sweep away syntax." While it may seem that the absence of structure advocated and employed by Cixous would promote the feminine goal of an individual voice, philosophically an absense of structure simply reinforces the impossibility of such a thing. This is because by writing in a structureless manner (contradictions, tangents, ect.), Cixous shows that while women may be able to improve their place in language, they are essentially trapped forever within the structures of a phallocentric discourse. The self-awareness that women gain from the knowledge of the existing limitations gives, in my opinion, women freedom within the discourse however, not from the discourse. If women capitalize on existing gaps they can break inside of the phallocentric realm. Even if their entrance is only minimal, through perseverance and allegiance to a common goal women can expand on even the smallest entrances gained. Over time, women as a group could grow as a group within the male discourse, gaining continuous strength and respect. We could possibly strengthen the feminine voice to the extent that it becomes a sub-discourse and then later, a discourse of its own, one that recognizes its phallocentric origin but uses this history not to define itself but rather to redefine itself.