>>1716252but a mother; the was assigned to her by mythologies long ago. Granting her a certain social power to the extent that she is reduced, with her own complicity, to sexual impotence.
(Re-)discovering herself, for a woman, thus could only signi fy the possibility of sacrificing no one of her pleasures to an-other, of identifying herself with none of them in particular, of never being simply one. A sort ofexpanding universe to which no limits could be fixed and which would not be incoherence nonetheless-nor that polymorphous perversion of the child in which the erogenous zones would lie waiting to be regrouped under the primacy of the phallus.
Woman always remains several, but she is kept from disper sion because the other is already within her and is autoerotically familiar to her. Which 'is not to that she appropriates the other for herself, that she reduces it to her own property. Ownership and property are doubtless quite foreign to the fem inine. At least sexually. But not nearness. Nearness so pro nounced that it makes all discrimination ofidentity, and thus all forms of property, impossible. Woman derives pleasure from what
is so near that she cannot have it, nor have herse~f She herself enters into a ceaseless exchange of herself with the other with out any possibility ofidentifying either. This puts into question all prevailing economies:
