A few more things from Judy B.

"a disruptive movement" between poles. --Butler

Butler refers to the Chora and Irigaray's reading of it as not just a space, but an "inscriptional space"

Plato first refers to the Chora as "a mother, and the source or spring to a father, and the intermediate nature of a child" (50d) and later calls it "a nurse" (40b) and then as "the universal nature which receives all bodies" (55a).
--> These multiple names all under the same name, Chora, seem to echo the rhetorical issues in post-modern discourse. Situation, Ecology, etc are all terms that aim to get at the same thing. These definitions of the Chora however all stand on equal plane and instead of fighting for dominance, there's a way in which they might all suffice, offering something productive. Similarly, Rhetorical discourses many "discourses" too offer new angles of examining rhetorical action and in such a way the Chora offers a paradigm for how different, even diametric terms, might work together. Chora is about connections (RICKERT)The Chora opens things up, rather than working through exclusion and abjection, as the abject itself, it works through inclusion.
-->As Butler rights "In effect, the receiving principle potentially includes all bodies and so applies universally" (40).

Butler brings up perhaps the most important point about the Chora. Plato, who says that the Chora is undesignatable, names that which he claims cannot be named. Butler offers one crucial interpretation: "Is it that the receptacle, designated as the undesignatable, cannot be designated, or is it rather that the "cannot" functions as an "out not to be? /.../Out we not to conclude that Plato means to prohibit the very proliferation of nominative possibilities that the undesignatable might produce? Perhaps this is a representation within discourse that functions to prohibit from discourse any further representation, one which represents After all, Plato posits that which he claims cannot be posited. And he further contradicts himself when he claim that that which cannot be posited out to be posited in only one way. In this sense, this authoritative naming of the receptacle as the unnameable constitutes ta primary or founding inscription that secures this place as an inscriptional space. This naming of what cannot be named is itself a penetration into this receptacle which is at once a violent erasure, one that establishes it as an impossible yet necessary site for all further inscriptions" (44) In other words, Butler seems to be suggesting that Plato's argument is performative. that the Chora and the discourse and designations around it, are meant to show that singular designations can be dangerous. Thus the very telling of the story about the Chora, of the site of genesis, enacts and becomes an allegory of its own procedure. In other words, had Plato assigned ONE designation to the Chora, he would have given it deifnite form and thus made it stagnate, confined to those designations.