Why is the definition of a woman so confusing these days?

[Fairenuff]

I know it's probably been done to death but it used to be so simple.

There were men and women. All kinds of different people but two sexes.

But now no-one can define what a woman is.

We know it's not clothes, hair or make-up
We're being told it's not having a vagina, periods or child bearing
It's nothing to do with the male/female brain

So what is it? Is it purely down to chromosones?

And if it is, how can people without female chromosones still say that they are a woman?

It's because men want to be women, so we have to change the whole world to make them feel good about themselves.

We all know what a woman is, every single one of us, but it's fashionable to pretend that we don't so men feel better.

A woman is an adult human female.

Simples.

All the rest is pandering to men.

Also simples.

It is as simple as it always has been. Adult human female.

Trans women or Trans Identifying Males are a subset of men, not women.

Well no, there is a perfectly good definition of woman, adult human female, but some people just don't want to accept it because it's not helpful for them.

'Women' is the same definition as it was last year, as defined in The Equality Act. We are defined by our sex.
Thats our biological sex = adult human female.

The number of people willing to throw away human rights legislation is really shocking.

A woman is a member of the class of human that produces eggs. A man is a member of the class of human that produces sperm.

But why is it illegal to say that a transwoman is not a woman? For example, the whole India Willoughby thing on CBB. She is shouting 'I am a REAL woman' in women's faces and they are just looking baffled.

If any one of them had said 'No you're not' they would have been branded transphobic, thrown off the show in disgrace and possibly ruined their careers.

Great tweet from HopePink (a gender critical transwoman who happily calls himself "he").

Well, it's not illegal to say it. But it will be, which is why we are shouting about it so much.

Isn't it funny how the definition of 'man' gets to retain a tight parameter, yet the definition of 'woman' has to be opened up and determined nebulous, ethereal and ambiguous? It's almost as if that control were replicated in how those respective classes were treated in society and the political system...

Honestly, I'm not confused despite all the gaslighting.

Nor do I think that Owen Jones, Jeremy Corbyn, Wes Streeting et al. believe that men can become women, either. Heaven alone knows why they are going along with all this nonsense.

I was a Corbyn supporter until very recently. My God, have the scales fallen from my eyes!

People have taken the word 'woman' and redefined it, given it a circular definition: anyone who identifies as a woman. They have then insisted that everyone else goes along with their meaningless 'definition'.

The shocking thing is that people in power (politicians, journalists etc) have gone along with this without question. Although perhaps it's not all that shocking as so many of the people in power are men.

We are really living in an Orwellian society and we (women) no longer have the right to define ourselves as a separate group.

Well we know little OJ doesn't actually believe it, because he totally threw his toys out the pram when someone suggested that if he really did believe it, as a gay man he would be prepared to go down on a pre-op transman's vulva. He screamed homophobia very loudly at that point.

Funnily enough, when lesbians object to lady penises, they are accused of being TERFs. When little OJ objects to manly-cunt, he remains a darling of the Graun-reading classes. Now, what could possibly be the salient difference between the two situations? Hmm, I wonder.

Well, it's not illegal to say it. But it will be, which is why we are shouting about it so much

What will the definition be. For example, what will be in the Oxford English Dictionary?

I can't understand how or why law makers would want to take something so simple and make it so complicated.

Also, if it's not law yet, why can't it be challenged as in my previous example of CBB.

Why would those people have been condemned for contradicting a transwoman saying she was a 'real' woman?

A woman is someone who is not a man, she is an adult female.

She has or has had a womb, ovaries, produced eggs, monthly periods, the constant battle between caring for children and having a career, been overlooked as she isn't a man, has not got and never has had a penis.

Think that covers it but there may be more...

These answers aren't helping me people

This is not what I am hearing in general life. We are being told that it's NOT ok to say that a woman is a person who never had a penis, etc.

We have to acknowledge that a transwoman, born with male genitals, is a woman, always was and always will be.

Or do we? What's the current legal/moral obligation? Is there one? Does anyone know?

Aaargh

If I asked some TRAs or “trans allies” why they consider me a woman, what would they say? That I am a woman because I “feel like” or “identify as” a woman?

Because personally I find that bloody offensive (like many people on this board). I don’t “feel” like a woman. I have spent more of my life feeling frustrated and confined by the expectations placed on me because of my gender than I have spent embracing them. My biology is just an accident of birth. I don’t “identify” with it - it is just what I have been born with and what I have dealt with through the potential for pregnancy, abortions, periods, feeling physically weaker and more vulnerable etc.

The definition is nonsensical for the vast majority of people if it is not about biology. It is why I get so frustrated with people parroting “transwomen are women” (and demanding we all declare our belief in that mantra) without ever explaining what is actually meant by it.

We are being told... By whom, one wonders?

I get so frustrated with people parroting “transwomen are women” (and demanding we all declare our belief in that mantra) without ever explaining what is actually meant by it

Yes! That's how I'm feeling. And added to that I feel like I need to find a 'safe' space to express that feeling.

Can't talk to friends in case I offend someone or they think I'm transphobic. I'm not. I'm really not, I just want to know what the definitions are.

It's like me insisting that I can draw a pension now because I identify with being 68 years old when I'm only 48 years old. My birth certificate, the age of my cells, none of that is relevant. I just announce that I'm 68 and expect the Government to cough up my £30 a week (or whatever it is).

We need definitions to work effectively as a society.

We have to acknowledge that a transwoman, born with male genitals, is a woman, always was and always will be.

Unless they detransistion and then they were never a woman at all, ever.

We are being told... By whom, one wonders?

Good question.

Where is it written?

That's what I want to know.

For example, on the CBB thread, HQ came onto the thread to say that if anyone referred to India Willoughby as 'he', their post would be deleted because India identified as a woman (or, sorry should that be, is a woman).

But where is that written? Why do HQ feel the need to do that? The pressure is everywhere but where has it come from?

So anyone can be a woman then, depending how they're feeling at any given time?

Can I be a tree? I feel rooted and like my hair/leaves blowing in the wind. So therefore I will identify as a tree.

Pootles I'll happily sign your petition to have a tree preservation order granted on you. Trans trees are trees! Those cis trees can STFU, we need to get over the bigoted idea that trees don't have legs!