In Feminist Theory, “Lexicon of Debates” Wendy Kolmar and Frances Bartkowski discuss the lexicon that explains the development of the feminist theory throughout the years. Remarkably, I was impacted by the way the authors describe essential women and ant-essential women and the impact of the essentialism approach vs. the social constructive approach, both words have originated in the twentieth centuries. One way to approach the feminist theory is throughout the essentialism position which states that sexual differences are natural, inborn, and persistent, those characteristics are eternal. On the other hand, social constructionist position approaches the feminist theory as a “complex system of cultural, social, physical and historical differences” (39). In other words, essentialism defines women or men based on their natural sexual characteristics. However, the social constructionist position believes that a woman is not born but is socially constructed TO BECOME A WOMAN.  Interestingly, Kolmar and Bartkowski illustrate that essential women were white, middle class, and heterosexual. However, women of color, lesbians have been classified as ant-essentialist women. Based on sexual orientation, race, class, women have been divided to fight against the oppressors. Furthermore, the essentialism approach opens discussions about an inborn characteristic that defines women as essential women but at the same time restricts them from that privilege if they are from a different race, class, and sexual orientation, etc. in other words, different social circumstances define women and their contributions to society. But, essentialists would argue that women naturally are born with characteristics that cannot be change that defines them and their role on society. What and who defines you and the way you contribute to society?
