What Makes A Woman?

Thank you cote

Because I'm pretty sure women are people not forms. The reason why I said form is because it's what we see with our eyes. This is for example what you wear and how you behave ( society socialises or teaches us to behave in a manner that society approve of). These characteristics is what constitutes what group you fall into, being a woman or male under gender. These characteristics are never constant. What you cannot change is person's sex. This biological.

I still stand by the woman being construct and the female being biological.

"A woman cannot be scientifically proven"

Neither can a table, a toothbrush, or a bag.

That is because nouns are not hypotheses.

I haven't RTFT but got far enough to see that Jack made the cheap shot of "But what about women who born without a vagina?". Sorry Jack, but expected more from you.

This and many similar threads would be avoided if only people had the habit of using dictionaries when they are in doubt about the meaning of a word. From any dictionary:

Woman = Adult human female, where...

Female = Of the sex that can bear young or make eggs.

It doesn't matter that some women's reproductive systems are faulty or that a few are born without vaginas. They are still of the sex that can make eggs or bear young (Female). That are not of the sex that can make sperm (Male).

Adult female chicken = Hen
Adult male chicken = Rooster

Adult female cattle = Cow
Adult male cattle = Bull

Adult female horse = Mare
Adult male horse = Stallion

And in exactly the same way and for the same reasons, since we are a sexually dimorphic species like all other mammals...

Adult human female = Woman
Adult human male = Man

And 'girl' is a female child

Wtf quencher? I'm not a socially constructed form, I'm a human as is every other woman on the planet. I definitely exist and can be scientifically proven to fit into the sexclass women, as can 49.1% (roughly) of the worlds population.
Jesus. How rage inducing.

No quenched; a women is an adult female

FEMININE is the gender/social constructed idea of what women should be like

If you want to redefine a word, you at least have to offer an alternitive definition

Is the female form a different thing to a female person?

Because I'm pretty sure women are people not forms.

I have read half the thread.

A woman cannot be scientifically proven. A woman is socially constructed idea of what the female is meant to look like and be. ( social construct of the female form)

I need to RE read it too Bertie.

I hope this thread has been helpful to you Jack

There are some brilliant posts by some brilliant women.

I think delusions of gender is a fantastic book. Angry-making but brilliant. I need to re-read it.

“It's not exactly a surprise that a website used predominantly by mothers, and mothers with feminist viewpoints, would refuse to buy into the idea that womanhood and the subsequent class oppression isn't intimately tied to our reproductive capabilities.”

And indeed, the very reason that many women discover or re-discover feminism, is because it’s when we become mothers that we first experience (or notice) real, deep-seated sexism. Because we are mothers and that means we are treated differently, than when we were not mothers.

Jack, you asked for feminist reading recommendations. I can’t recommend Delusions of Gender, by Cordelia Fine, too highly.

wank the new statesman article is excellent

Hi Jack

I am just finishing my Masters in Gender Studies, and am currently writing my dissertation on this topic. The IOC (2016) policy is a key part of my research.

I don't want to say any more here, but please do PM me if you would like to read any of this research - I'd be happy to send you a copy once it's completed at the end of August.

Hi Jack

I think it's an extremely common experience for women to feel alienated from their own bodies at some point in their lives - perhaps for the whole of their lives in many cases - especially during and after pregnancy. And there is a spectrum of strength of alienation, ranging from women who shrug it off, all the way to those who feel the only way they can fix the feeling is to change their body.

But my analysis of the tortured relationships we have with our bodies is that it's the natural result of the way we are treated for simply having a female body. Why wouldn't we hate our bodies when they are the reason we are treated like shit? Why wouldn't we hate our bodies when we are told from birth that our personality or interests don't match our body, and that we're 'wrong' for having our own passions, ambitions or interests?

So I have some sympathy for women who want to escape this feeling and go to some lengths to do so. But we are all still women, still living in the same bodies. It's the world outside our bodies that needs to be fixed, not ourselves.

A woman is, as stated many times in different ways, a biological fact, not something you can choose to identify as. I don't 'feel like' a woman, I am a woman.

I support the right of anyone to live, dress and behave as they wish (within reason obviously) but you can't argue with fact.

That said I am glad in many ways to be a 43 year old fairly worldly-wise woman. I agree with the posts upthread about the depressing over- sexualised stereotype that seems to be becoming normal the younger generation and can see why some might feel the need to seek an alternative.

XX chromosome.

As well as discomfort with imposed gender stereotypes; I sometimes feel confusion and disconnectedness at being a WC women moving in largely MC circles (predominantly professionally). It's something i often only recognise retrospectively. I don't know if that is something that resonates with you Jack?

Did you have a particularly "feminine" upbringing Jack? Not sure if I've phrased that right! But what I mean is you've spoken about your objections over having to wear dresses or attend a girls' school as a child - both of those things would have upset me too, however my parents saw no problem in me running around in trackie bottoms or jeans like my brother and are firm believers in co-ed schools. I never felt there was anything my brother was allowed to do that I wasn't. Or that I was made to do "girly" things that he didn't have to do. Other posters have said it already but it really feels to me like it's the social construct of femininity that you have a problem with, not the biological fact of being a woman.

Mjingaxx, I think the trans lobby has been very effective at explaining normal disaffection with gender norms as "transgender".

If we were able to stick to biological descriptors of our bodies while being allowed to act/feel as we wished without gender constraints, there would be no need to 'redefine' woman. It's the societal constructs and expectations around 'female/woman' that have been added to our biology that are problematic. And contribute to our continuing oppression because of our biology.

YES YES YES YES YES

But Jack you are doing the opposite of YES to that. You have described yourself as not entirely female and have said you are not a woman because you are gender non-conforming. When you were "A girl called Jack" you were breaking down gender boundaries and saying that as a woman you could have an infinite range of personalities. Now you are reinforcing them by saying because you are gender non-conforming you are not a woman.

It makes me sad because I think you agree with the gender critical feminist perspective. Although I don't know anything about your friendship group, I can see a lot of peer pressure on women to express empathy with trans people by affirming their views of gender or to view transgender as breaking boundaries. However the transgender view of gender only breaks boundaries by saying an individual can break out of their box and move to another box. It doesn't address the effect of the boundaries on women as a class and how to remove the boundaries for all women. In fact, it reinforces the boundaries by saying the boxes exist and are largely correct (cis) but some individuals are in the wrong box. Gender critical feminism looks to dismantle all boundaries to end the oppression of women (gender is a hierarchy, not a spectrum). This will also allow all women and men to express their personalities without having to deny fairly straightforward biological facts.

I am hoping Jack is drinking some gin sitting somewhere and thinking about how she has suddenly come to see that she agrees a bit with those TERFS and how maybe they really aren't all that unreasonable just a bit pissed off that everything is so shit.

Also by the by, this is a really good article on what "terf" really means. I'd love it if all of you could have a look.

www.newstatesman.com/politics/2015/02/are-you-now-or-have-you-ever-been-terf

Yes Hermione, it is

But i do wonder how Jack and others are not aware of this phenomenon amongst women

No, it hasn't kennington. There is no need for confusion.

When people disagree with a definition, there is usually a basis for disagreement and the onus is on that body of people to offer an alternative.

It is highly illogical to discredit the established definition, without offering a credible alternative

mjingaxx. It's appalling isn't it?