Merriam Webster dictionary changing definition of woman *title edited at requ of OP*

Ok. I'm still suspicious. But less suspicious than I was.

Interesting to note - maybe this will change soon if they're in the process of updating these entries (I don't know whether people are saying that the usage note was just added recently to the word "homosexual" or not) - the word "gay" is defined as "of, relating to, or characterized by sexual or romatic attraction to people of one's same sex" (www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/gay) - not same gender!

Gay 1b is dubious though because it suggests that gay rights automatically include transgender... (1b: "of, relating to, or intended for people who are gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender, etc.") But then again that's probably that's how some Americans use the word.

While I've followed the debate on these forums closely enough to know that there may well be TRAs wanting to get rid of the word "homosexual" because it contains the word "sex", I also think that a certain distaste for the word "homosexual" preceded that. As long ago as 2011 the Guardian carried a column calling for the term to be abandoned www.theguardian.com/media/mind-your-language/2011/nov/18/mind-your-language-word-homosexual

It sounds like a formal medical term and it is rarely the word "gay" people use to describe themselves. The word "homosexual" has to some extent become associated in the public mind with conservative attitudes. "Gay" has become the neutral and everyday term. (In 2004, Burchfield wrote in his edition of Fowler's Modern English Usage that "homosexual" was still the term in formal contexts. But that was 16 years ago. People today don't consider "gay" to be a colloquialism. There are hardly any contexts - be it a broadsheet report, serious factual book, or court judgement - where people would be surprised to encounter the word "gay".)

In theweek.com/articles/556341/why-word-homosexual-offensive it was shown that between 1996 and 2015, US Democrat politicians had used the word "gay" 3 times as often as Republicans - whereas Republicans had used the word "homosexual" 3 times as often as Democrats had (although even Republicans were more likely to use the word "gay" than the word "homosexual").

Women against Hate has this on her Facebook page... soooooo many commenters assuming it is "offensive" because it is "used as a slur" or that it has been changed to pander to the conservative religious types...

I'm pretty sure it's been changed because the concept of homossexuality is "offensive" to the trans lobby? But not sure people who haven't been aware of the debate will have got that!

Hang on, 'disparaging' has gone again. Guys, sort it out?

I checked out lesbian - not specifically defined as same-sex female attraction, but rather:

of, relating to, or characterized by sexual or romantic attraction to other women or between women

Fortunately they are still defining woman as an adult female person.

Their entry on "homosexual" is charming too.

now sometimes disparaging + offensive : of, relating to, or characterized by sexual or romantic attraction to people of one's same sex : GAY

Who on earth could be offended by the word ‘homosexual’?

... don’t answer, I think we all know.

It's changed again?

Disparaging???

www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/homosexuality

The word 'homosexuality' (now sometimes offensive)

I despair.

I know this has pretty much been said but it's worth pointing out.

MW defines transwoman as 'a woman who was identified as male at birth'.

MW defines woman as 'an adult female person'.

MW defines female as 'an individual of the sex that is typically capable of bearing young or producing eggs'.

That means MW has just erased transwomen! Transwomen, apparently, are women - females, 'of the sex capable of bearing young' - who for some reason were identified as male at birth. That means anyone who is biologically male ('an individual of the sex that is typically capable of producing small, usually motile gametes (such as sperm or spermatozoa') can't be a transwoman. The only true transwomen are biological females who were wrongly assigned male at birth!

This is a worry. As others have mentioned, dictionaries describe how language is actually used, rather than telling readers how to use it. If lexicographers believe there are enough instances of people using trans woman to mean woman they will be obliged to change the dictionary definition, although in the OED that would even then probably mean adding a paragraph lower down (I hope).

I'm confident that if somebody carried out a large-scale poll asking the general public what transwoman and transman meant, a high percentage would get them the wrong way round. They are confusing terms and not well understood.

Not much of a response from MW, alas:

'Thank you for contacting Merriam-Webster. We love engaging with our readers, but our feedback has increased so much that we regrettably cannot personally answer every note. We do look at them all, though, and if you're having an issue we need to help with, we will respond shortly.'

Indeed, M-W is little used in the UK and not even particularly widely known here - whereas Oxford is known worldwide.

Incidentally, Oxford's definition of "transwoman" is "a male-to-female transsexual" ( www.lexico.com/definition/transwoman ). This is a somewhat more satisfactory and objective definition.

"Transwoman" is a propagandist term aimed at promulgating the idea that M-W endorse here. After all, usually if a word ends in "woman" then it names a type of women. "Transwomen are women" sounds much like a tautology than a controversial statement, and yet many older people probably don't even know what a transwoman is (for a long time I thought it meant F-to-M).

With the Oxford definition, you can see that TWAW translates to "male-to-female transsexuals are women", and the controversial nature of the statement, and the fact that one ought to have the right to debate it without being considered hateful, become so very clear.

Merriam-Webster is a US dictionary. US English is different than UK English.

'For more than 150 years, in print and now online, Merriam-Webster has been America's leading and most-trusted provider of language information.

Each month, our Web sites offer guidance to more than 40 million visitors. In print, our publications include Merriam-Webster's Collegiate Dictionary (among the best-selling books in American history) and newly published dictionaries for English-language learners.

All Merriam-Webster products and services are backed by the largest team of professional dictionary editors and writers in America, and one of the largest in the world.'

Pressed post too quickly.

Should read

I thought MiT wanted trans woman (space) so they (male) were - in their minds- comparative to women I.e white woman, small woman etc. Not that it meant a trans identifying female.

I thought they objected to Transwoman because it is distinctly different to woman. As a compound word it means something else - hotdog - not a dog

This is incredible that wordsmiths can debunk words with such illogical gymnastics. Clearly the thought police of 1984 or the red book is their real dictionary.

Trans woman means a woman who is trans. Transwoman means transwoman = not a woman.

I did not know that.

I thought MiT wanted trans woman (space) so they (male) were - in their minds- comparative to women I.e white woman, small woman etc. Not

I thought they objected to Transwoman because it is distinctly different to woman not that it meant a trans identifying female. As a compound word it means something else - hotdog - not a dog

That's why the space is so important. Trans woman means a woman who is trans. Transwoman means transwoman = not a woman. By listing it as two words the dictionary is ready including transwoman in the definition of what a woman is.

I thought I remembered an earlier thread re definitions, and I did!

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/a3645989-Wikipedia-definitions-of-Woman-and-Transwoman?

It was Wiki we were talking about a year ago this month, and I notice how we were sure that it was only Wiki and they were woke and dictionary’s would never be so dull.

Guess we were wrong.

Slightly off topic now so this was just me digging around after re-reading the old thread.

The first post stated “UK Equality Act 2010 defines the two sexes thus:
Man is a male of any age
Woman is a female of any age.”

So I went to www.gov.uk/guidance/equality-act-2010-guidance to try and find their current definitions. It’s not obvious, and I’m not sure that’s a good thing.

www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2010/15/section/11

11Sex

In relation to the protected characteristic of sex—
(a)a reference to a person who has a particular protected characteristic is a reference to a man or to a woman;

(b)a reference to persons who share a protected characteristic is a reference to persons of the same sex

www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2010/15/notes/division/3/2/1/8

Section 11: Sex

Effect

54.This section is a new provision which explains that references in the Act to people having the protected characteristic of sex are to mean being a man or a woman, and that men share this characteristic with other men, and women with other women.

www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2010/15/notes/division/3/2/1/4

Section 7: Gender reassignment

Effect

41.This section defines the protected characteristic of gender reassignment for the purposes of the Act as where a person has proposed, started or completed a process to change his or her sex. A transsexual person has the protected characteristic of gender reassignment.
42.The section also explains that a reference to people who have or share the common characteristic of gender reassignment is a reference to all transsexual people. A woman making the transition to being a man and a man making the transition to being a woman both share the characteristic of gender reassignment, as does a person who has only just started out on the process of changing his or her sex and a person who has completed the process.
Background

43.This section replaces similar provisions in the Sex Discrimination Act 1975 but changes the definition by no longer requiring a person to be under medical supervision to come within it.
Examples

A person who was born physically male decides to spend the rest of his life living as a woman. He declares his intention to his manager at work, who makes appropriate arrangements, and she then starts life at work and home as a woman. After discussion with her doctor and a Gender Identity Clinic, she starts hormone treatment and after several years she goes through gender reassignment surgery. She would have the protected characteristic of gender reassignment for the purposes of the Act.

A person who was born physically female decides to spend the rest of her life as a man. He starts and continues to live as a man. He decides not to seek medical advice as he successfully ‘passes’ as a man without the need for any medical intervention. He would have the protected characteristic of gender reassignment for the purposes of the Act.

It’s a mistake to think dictionaries are neutral observers of language - they reflect, even in subtle ways, the culture which produces them.

In this case what appears to be a deliberate obfuscation is a reflection of the ways in which language is being manipulated.

The definition is not meaningful and not useful, which tells us quite a lot about the publishers and the culture.

A transwoman is a woman who was identified as male at birth

This makes it sound as if rather a lot of midwives and doctors are making schoolboy errors in the delivery room

Utter lunacy

This is appalling. I take comfort in the fact, however, that even if these new definitions make it into dictionaries, they can't get rid of the old ones - the word "woman" has been used billions of times in writing to mean adult human female since time began and if we can't burn all those books and delete all those webpages the meaning has to be recorded.

Hahaha. Define a woman then OP

Me too. It’s just bonkers

How can a baby identify as anything