The hypertext men, I argue, "galvanize" a tradition of writing that assumes the primacy of masculine reason, as instantiated in rhetorics of the "mind," where mind is defined outside of materiality and distinct from embodiment.

But what is Écriture Féminine?

It is impossible to define a feminine practice of writing, and this is an impossibility that will remain, for this practice can never be theorized, enclosed, encoded, coded -- which doesn't mean that it doesn't exist. But it will always surpass the discourse that regulates the phallocentric system: it does and will take place in areas other than those subordinated to philosophical-theoretical domination. It will be conceived of only by subjects who are breakers of automatisms, by peripheral figures that no authority can ever subjugate.

Two propositions: écriture féminine cannot be defined outside of its own terms and that not all women writing may be said to participate in this unique practice.

Discounts "the other voice" created by women authors (King and Rabil): From the fourteenth century on, the volume of women's writings crescendoed. Generally characterized as a development from less formal writing to more formal publication.

Automarginalized by declaring its own social and epistemological rootlessness.