I disagree with the previous review, although I agree that this is an excellent book. Personally, I was glad to have studied Irigaray under the tutelage of an excellent professor, otherwise I would have, and I think many readers could, misread her drastically. Irigaray is simply not a clear and easy writer.
Simply put, Irigaray's writing falls under the category of "difference feminism", rather than egalitarian feminism, like most of the liberal feminists we, particularly in North America, are used to. Instead of trying to subsume male and female experience under the same account, Irigaray plays up the differences between the embodied experiences of men and women-- she is not an essentialist, it is more that she doesn't attempt to separate gender from sex in lived experience.
Her work is provocative-- some find it sexy, some off-putting. She attempts, for example, to redefine the ways males and females experience their sexuality, by challenging the central position of the phallus as an organ of domination. Her psychoanalytic language can be difficult to get through if you aren't, as I'm not, well-versed in that particular method.