In my essay, I explore several possibilities of reading the ironic affinity between the title “No Man’s Land” and some of the central concepts underlying feminist discourse. […] One of the defining principles of postmodernism, which builds in many ways on feminist thought, is the transgression of boundaries between different domains and the cancellation of hierarchies between high and low. In this context, the meaning of the term “no man’s land” is inverted, so that it no longer defines a circumscribed, off-limits area but rather represents an open, liberated twilight zone. Recast as an ambivalent, liminal sphere or limbo that contains both this and that, NO MAN’S LAND reflects critical thinking that undermines culturally determined boundaries, classifications and distinctions. As such, it becomes an elastic sphere in which there is no separation between public and private, the personal and the political, or exterior and interior. It is associated with the constant subversion of any agenda that classifies, defines, orders and institutionalizes the plethora of unclassifiable possibilities. This is a sphere that allows for the existence of everything that is unordered and that does not conform to norms – all that is distorted, unusual, irrational, or perceived to threaten the established order.