<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: &#8220;Something impossible&#8211; else I shall suffocate.&#8221;</title>
	<atom:link href="http://looktouch.wordpress.com/2008/06/21/something-impossible-else-i-shall-suffocate/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://looktouch.wordpress.com/2008/06/21/something-impossible-else-i-shall-suffocate/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 08 Dec 2009 16:00:31 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Jessica Smith</title>
		<link>http://looktouch.wordpress.com/2008/06/21/something-impossible-else-i-shall-suffocate/#comment-3889</link>
		<dc:creator>Jessica Smith</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 24 Jun 2008 02:15:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://looktouch.wordpress.com/?p=1212#comment-3889</guid>
		<description>I think that Lacan&#039;s analysis of why women cannot attain the same linguistic aptitude as men is, in fact, &quot;idiotic&quot; (def. 1).  Lacan would be using essentially the second definition you&#039;ve provided to characterize womens&#039; writing (and their access to language/higher thought in general).  He used Duras as an example of how this was the case and his analysis of women&#039;s thought/writing grew into the essentialist doctrine of &quot;ecriture feminine.&quot;  You are welcome to read my thesis on the subject which is available &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.lulu.com/content/370530&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think that Lacan&#8217;s analysis of why women cannot attain the same linguistic aptitude as men is, in fact, &#8220;idiotic&#8221; (def. 1).  Lacan would be using essentially the second definition you&#8217;ve provided to characterize womens&#8217; writing (and their access to language/higher thought in general).  He used Duras as an example of how this was the case and his analysis of women&#8217;s thought/writing grew into the essentialist doctrine of &#8220;ecriture feminine.&#8221;  You are welcome to read my thesis on the subject which is available <a href="http://www.lulu.com/content/370530" rel="nofollow">here</a>.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
