Alternative Definitions of 'Woman'?

[Dragoncake]

Do you disagree with the definition of 'woman' as 'adult human female'?

If you disagree, what is your own definition of the word?

A woman is....what exactly?

Is there even a definition? Or is 'woman' simply indefinable in your view?

On the 'A Woman is an Adult Human Female' thread I asked those who disagree to provide their alternative definition of the word.

Several people engaged, but nobody seemed able to do this.

If you have one, please post your alternative definition here. Thanks.

I’m not a fan of lived experience TBH, not in this context anyway.

The passing thing is interesting, isn't it? I absolutely agree that it shouldn't be an issue anywhere - your sex is very, very likely to be obvious, however you present yourself to the world, but why do so many approach that as if it a bad thing? Why is 'passing' a goal? I can understand if you have dysphoria that your sexed body is personally troubling, but given the wide nature of the trans umbrella, why is passing being held up as a standard? I find it strange that what is essentially a deception is held up by some people as a goal or even a gotcha moment.

I'd like to underline again how much I believe all humans should be able to present however they wish, in terms of clothes, activities, career choices, even names. This to me is why it is vital to separate sex and gender.
Sex-based exemptions are there because the sexed body is hugely significant in certain circumstances. I'm all for pushing society to change its approach to gender non conformity, but it just isn't relevant to attach this change in attitude to the protections and rights women have to specific segregation.

The culture around trans rights as they currently stand has created a pressure to ‘pass’ IMO.

I believe this to be particularly harmful to trans people but it is also harmful to wider society as it legitimises and perpetuates sexism.

I should clarify I don’t mean the pressure from within the trans community. I mean the pressure to be seen as legitimate which has been put into trans people by society.

your body, you story, your choice.

anyway it is always nice to engage in a morefriendly way with people on the opposite side of the debate. thanks Dragoncake.

I always end up thinking that the solution is to fight for feminine men and masculine women and celebrate them since that would self-evidently make the world a better place

Amen to that. And indeed also to celebrate and support people who are 'gender fluid' to express themselves however they wish when they wish. Just so long as we're clear this makes no difference to their sex and the rights associated with their sex.

I think there may be a problem with the term 'gender critical'. It's critical of the constraints imposed by gender stereotypes. I'm not sure it's always understood that people who are gender critical are by definition 100% supportive of people's right to be gender nonconforming.

@speakingwoman

My definition answers the OPs question.

It doesn't take anything away from anyone and is an inclusive expanded definition. It also works equally for both women and men.

I’m happy with the GC term because it is accurate IMO. It expresses that a person is critical of the application of sexist stereotypes - which is the system of gender.

If someone reads GC as ‘hating people who don’t conform to the system of gender’ then they have got it wrong. It is quite simply being critical of a system that, without any supporting evidence, makes a claim that personality, behaviour, interests, identity etc can and should be categorised as masculine or feminine.

I really wish I had the time right now to properly discuss these issues but I'm working and need to focus on that sorry. It's alway the same when we actually get to properly discuss the issues and I will be sad if later tonight we have gone back to the other stuff I have really appreciated everyone's input in the. Last few pages of this thread and the way it as been conducted. I could easily talk for hours on this

Glitched - your definition takes the word ‘woman’ away from adult human females and ‘man’ away from adult human males....

Now, you might think this is a good thing but you can’t actually state that it doesn’t take anything away from anyone.

If you add males to females and females to males both terms no longer describe material reality and instead describe identity. This means adult human males and adult human females no longer have a word that describes their material reality.

I will be here tonight bespin (I have no life).

It doesn't take anything away from anyone

Other than the option for adult human females to exist separate to adult human males, regardless of their gendered presentation/which set of stereotypes they ascribe to.

I think it just doesn't work Glitched. Not in a political sense but in a more basic logical sense of misusing the word "including".

I will try to show you, apologise for the CAPS.

"Adult human female does not contain transwomen. OK
Woman contains transwomen.OK

Woman = adult human female (including transwomen) I THINK YOU MEAN "PLUS TRANSWOMEN". YOU'VE USED INCLUDING WHERE YOU MEAN PLUS.

I haven't taken anything away.

The definition has been expanded slightly, not reduced.

......You can lead a horse to water but you can't make it drink.

Glitched can you genuinely not see disadvantages to women in 'expanding' the definition to something so nebulous as the be largely meaningless?

That’s an easy mistake to make I think glitched but if woman means adult human female and it is changed to include ‘and some men who identify this way’ then it no longer exclusively describes adult human females.

As I said, you may think this is a good thing, but you can’t deny that it is taking something away...

The culture around trans rights as they currently stand has created a pressure to ‘pass’ IMO.

Why should a woman have to "pass" to be treated as a woman? But if she doesn't, many here will treat her as a man so what choice does a trans woman have?

But there's double standards here. If a woman wears a pretty dress or has a boob job she is expressing her womanhood. If a trans woman does the same things she is criticised for seeking affirmation or trying to pass. It's terribly unfair.

If a transwoman doesn’t pass and uses female toilets and changing rooms she contributes to a climate where men can enter those spaces unchallenged making them unsafe for everyone

My answer to the OPs question is not nebulous or meaningless.

It maintains the current definition of woman as an adult human female but also includes transwomen. I am not erasing biology or reducing anything.

In this way transwomen are women.

My definition may not sit comfortably with you but it succinctly and adequately answers the OPs question.

RatRolyPoly

"How does one 'identify as a woman'?

It's really easy actually, someone says "who here is a woman?", and you say "I am!"

Voila. you just identified yourself as a woman"

That is not going to be sufficient for understanding how to define 'woman'. When Rochester disguises himself as a woman to trick Jane, had she asked, "Are you a woman?", he could have responded "I am", without thereby being a woman.

What you presumably want to say is that someone is a woman if they respond to questions like "Are you a woman?" by sincerely and accurately asserting "I am". But then the question arises of what are the sincerity and accuracy conditions of saying things like, "I am a woman". Presumably, you need to identify as a woman to sincerely and accurately say "I am a woman", but now we've just circled back to the initial problem of what it means to identify as a woman.

We're nearing 500 messages now and we're still no closer to an alternative non-circular definition. Perhaps the best thing for the TRA to do is just to bite the bullet and say that the conditions for womanhood are just ineffable.

Alternatively you might go down the "'woman = person with 'female brain'" route. I'm not qualified to say how good that is but I found this article on the subject to be quite interesting www.psychologytoday.com/gb/blog/laugh-cry-live/201509/are-transgender-women-just-reinforcing-sexist-stereotypes

Thank you Bespin for your posts on this thread - I've found them very interesting. My personal opinion is that the issue of "passing" is deeply unfair.

If, being gender critical, one believes that a person born male remains male, then "looking female", "being feminine" or "passing" makes no difference.

If one starts from the pov that TWAW, then it should not be necessary for a transwoman to "pass", to "look feminine" or to "look female" - however they look is irrelevatn to whether they have (apparently) some sort of inner sense of "being a woman".

Accepting someone as a woman based on the fact that they were lucky to be born physically smaller then the average man, having smaller hands and feet, having a less prominent Adam's apple, being less hairy etc etc it so obviously unfair that "passing" shouldn't come into the equation at all.

It's obviously socially easier for a trans person if they "pass" - but laws shouldn't be based around this.

"But there's double standards here. If a woman wears a pretty dress or has a boob job she is expressing her womanhood."
No she isn't. She is expressing a stereotyped view of womanhood.

Snappity, a woman wearing a dress is not 'expressing her womanhood'. She is a person wearing a dress. Just as a man wearing a dress is a person wearing a dress. If I'm wearing trousers and my partner's t shirt, am I expressing my manhood?

I'm another person who sees 'woman' as a social construct. I also see that some people are attempting to change the way 'woman' is constructed in society via other social constructs (e.g. law). I am concerned that some of these changes to the social construction of 'woman' will have detrimental effects. I don't think that 'pomo' itself is contrary to feminism, but some people use it in ways I find profoundly inappropriate (e.g. those who suggest the construction of a penis as female while issuing rape threats - which is, of course, literal violence but not acknowledged as such).