The prominent French feminist theoreticians, namely Hélène Cixous and Luce Irigaray, challenge male discourse and
argue that it does not provide women with freedom of expression. Irigaray suggests the invention of “parler femme” as
a new dialect for challenging the social stereotypes assigned to women and reshaping female subjectivity. Irigaray’s
view is supported by Cixous, who believes that women should have a language of their own and that they should
subvert the phallocentric language through the intermediary of “l’ecriture feminine.” This new type of female discourse
is expected to deconstruct the symbolic order and to establish a new order based on a better representation of women.
Cixous’s “ecriture feminine” raises female revolutionary voices against male dialect and its misrepresentation of the
female plight. Susan Glaspell’s dramatic text in Trifles can be classified as an example of “l’ectiture feminine” because
it invites the audience to analyze female silences, puns, and new images. Indeed, the French feminist lines of thought
assist in the endeavor of comparing the differences between male and female discourses in Trifles. Unlike the male
characters who use an authoritarian style and look for concrete proof to uncover the identity of the murderer, the female
characters rely on symbols, images, intuition, metaphors, silence, tone, mood, and psychology to interpret the homicide.
Glaspell’s female characters succeed at finding out the identity of the murderer, and their investigative style is more
constructive because they dig deep into female silence, and they understand the unspoken words of Minnie Wright. On
the other hand, the male discourse fails at examining the motives of homicide because it is based on stereotypes,
authority, and repression. “Parler femme” is achieved in the play through the solidarity of Mrs. Hale and Mrs. Peters,
through their sympathy with Minnie Foster, and through their belief that domestic violence is the unjust outcome of
patriarchal oppression.
Some feminist stylisticians who analyze female style in a specific social context argue that male and female modes of
expression are different, but equal. In her “genderlect theory,” Deborah Tannen affirms that differences are sources of
richness, and “both men and women could benefit from learning each other’s styles” ( 298). This present research
focuses on the intersection between French feminism and feminist stylistics, thematic concerns, textual analysis, and
theatrical props and objects to understand the differences between male and female discourse, where, for instance,
Glaspell’s female characters choose social exile instead of duplicitous, phallocentric communication. As members of
Glaspell’s audience, we must evaluate the importance of female discourse, study Glaspell’s ideas about the richness of
female discourse and the necessity of establishing a smooth dialogue between male and female discourses, and
recognize the female playwright’s call for dismantling marginal spaces and liberating modern American women.