The preceding quote very explicitly identifies several forms of essentialism, those being biological, social and cognitive essentialism, and holds as universal to all women. In other words, gender is not just an inherently biological characteristic but it is equally so a matter of cognitive perception and social attribute. Grosz’s definition or understanding of feminism emerges from within her understanding of essentialism and its correlation to gender.
Equality feminism is somewhat at odds with the essentialist representations of the female gender. As Genovese (1996) explains, this feminist ideology highlights the similarities between men and women, irrespective of biological differences, and argues gender equality on the basis of the similarities. This stance may be interpreted as a negation of essentialism, insofar as it only concedes to biological differences but does not acknowledge the inherent importance of social and cognitive essentialism.
In direct comparison to equality feminism, feminism of difference emphasizes the differences between the genders. As Ebert (1993) explains, difference feminism argues that the sexes are fundamentally different but that differences, whether cognitive or social, do not negate the equality of the sexes, or make one more equal than the other. This feminist ideology is reflective of essentialism.
In the final analysis, and speaking from a subjective viewpoint, essentialism is an inescapable reality. The sexes are not just different because of biology but because of cognitive and societal perceptions. Equality feminism, insofar as it fails to acknowledge the aforementioned, is weak. Its weakness is rooted in its assumption that equality is only applicable to those, or that, which are alike. Difference feminism, on the other hand, draws its strength from its recognition of essentialism and its understanding of the fact that equality does not have