to think that Ian Huntley is most definitely not a woman?

[ATeardropExplodes]

www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/02/15/call-lian-child-killer-ian-huntley-has-told-inmates-call-feminine/

If anyone has any evidence to convince me otherwise please do enlighten me, thanks in advance.

JAPAB, give me a definition of "woman" that includes all women who were born female, AND transwomen, but excludes men. And doesn't use the word woman.

I'll help you by giving you the current definition of "woman" as "adult human female" - thus excluding male people.

So Caitlyn Jenner and Kate Middleton would be classed equally as women by all sections of society

Ye

Or one section (and very small minority) and the rest CJ would be a seen as a trans woman Kate Middleton a woman

Have used as examples as both CJ and KM are in the public eye

You seem to know an awful lot about what each all think.

That's because I read. A lot.

I know that people feel very strongly about trans-rights, however this isn’t about the rights of men who identify as women, is it? This is about a manipulative child rapist and murderer who wants an easier ride in prison. He’s seen other men do it and thinks he can too.

Either men are going around raping women because they have some deep seated resentment and need for power over the gender they’d like to be, or they’ve caught onto a way to work the system and intimidate women, even on the inside, because this happens more than is believable.

I’ll say it again, this should be a non-issue whilst serving time for any violent crime. And if these men become depressed/suicidal, well that’s just tough. It’ll be nothing compared to what their victims’ families are suffering.

It is also about the extreme logical consequences of self identification.

I realize that hard cases make bad law, but surely before we make fundamental changes to the structure of our society, we need to make sure that we’ve looked at all the ramifications, both likely and unlikely.

Japab if trans women are women, why any need for a qualifier at all?

I wouldn't bother, Lovesagain.

JAPAB knows full well that he is playing silly buggers. He thinks he is being clever. His tautological twaddle is just tedious though.

As someone said earlier... he probably practised torturing a sibling during long car journeys!

Oh I k ow curious, I just like his answers sometimes, reminds me of that episode of friends where Joey consults a thesaurus for every single word

There is that! The happy accident of unintended added value!

JAPAB, you have made me chuckle this morning with you post at around half 10 last night.

You managed to clearly communicate how to describe a plague that only affected/effected cats with hair without the use of an introduced label for cats with hair. QED no need for the term ‘cis’.

The key difference between trans women and women is biology. Plagues/disease etc does differ according to sex, so in that respect your analogy highlighted a reason for differentiating between natal males and natal females. However, in the case of trans women, they can acquire disease or illness that women cannot get (e.g prostate cancer) and cannot acquire disease that only women acquire.

Again, I think you have made the case for the term ‘woman’ not having qualifiers.

I use people’s preferred pronouns and names. When talking about trans people I usually use the term ‘trans people’ as this is far more inclusive as it accommodates those with non binary and fluid identities.

However, in our society, the terms ‘woman’ and ‘man’ are widely held to refer to natal sex so it is disingenuous and misleading to use it for trans people. I think trans people should be encouraged to accept their ‘transness’ and the rest of society should not be encouraged to pretend it doesn’t exist.

That is an ideology one section subscribes to. Other sections subscribe to a different one.

No. Saying that women are adult females who were born with vaginas and not penises is not ‘ideology’ it’s actual fact. Cold, hard, scientific fact. You can’t decide that science doesn’t suit you.

It’s not like believing in god, or fairies or even homeopathy. It’s like believing the moon is made of green cheese. It simply isn’t. You can stamp your feet and demand it all you like but you won’t change the simple fact that a person with a penis is male.

@Datun Because he's practised in the art of the innocent wind up.

Innocent ?

Innocent ? hmm

Oh, I agree. That's why he reminds me of siblings fighting. One sibling absolutely knows full well what the other one is doing.

It’s so transaparent as to be laughable. And if not a wind up merchant he’s an actual idiot. So either way he’s not very clever. And not worth too much effort.

faux-innocent?

I really do just see Joey and his thesaurus whenever japab posts.

SimonBridges No. Saying that women are adult females who were born with vaginas and not penises is not ‘ideology’ it’s actual fact. Cold, hard, scientific fact.

It is an institutional scientific fact. The word only means that because some humans decided that those elements woulds make up the term. Do you remember the move many years ago to get chimps reclassified as being of the homo genus? It failed but there is nothing in principle to preclude such changes. Because that is the thing about institutional facts, they are only facts for as long as humans agree that they are. But by all means believe that there is an "objective reality" to say that a woman IS an adult human female.

MsBeaujangles You managed to clearly communicate how to describe a plague that only affected/effected cats with hair without the use of an introduced label for cats with hair. QED no need for the term ‘cis’.

Except that the qualifiers "haired" or "non-hairless" were needed. Those were the "cis"/"non trans" of this example. So not sure why you think this proves the point that such is not needed.

Datun That's because I read. A lot.

And extrapolate a lot, it seems :)

Haired or hairless describes two types of cat. So thats a red herring, as cis or trans do not describe two types of women.

it’s a biological fact that male and female bodies are different

And that is why we use the terms male/female

Or have I got to retake GCSE biology

The word only means that because some humans decided that those elements woulds make up the term

Stop the press. Words have meanings.

Try communicating anything at all if words do not remain attached to their meanings.

Would you like banana in your coffee?
Penguin tabling for jam
Motorway ram cow, I housed!

See? It's a bit difficult to understand what I'm saying when I randomly assign different meanings to words.

It's a non argument.

Well, JAPAB, an adult human female is a thing distinct from an adult human male, in several easily described ways. Why not have a word for it? It's hardly an arbitrary point on a sliding scale.

Despite there being many institutions, societal formats and languages worldwide, most of them have decided to have a word for adult human female that is separate from their word for adult human male.

But by all means believe that there is an "objective reality" to say that a woman IS an adult human female.

There is, we all came out of one. Unless you came out of something else?

It's a game to JAPAB, that's all. It doesn't affect him personally. It's just a load of words.

Wonder why that might be?

I'll repeat my question:

JAPAB, give me a definition of "woman" that includes all women who were born female, AND transwomen, but excludes men. And doesn't use the word woman.

Or are you saying there is no definition of the word woman, because it can mean whatever the person saying it means at the time?

In which case the entire undermining of women's spaces has already gone. Anyone, anytime, can go anywhere they want. No more women's sports for starters.

Since we are defining words, and they can mean whatever a group want them to mean, I'm redefining the word dickhead.

From now on every time I want to say dickhead I'm going to say JAPAB.