What is the biological definition of a woman (and man)?

[Wombat2WombatCombat]

I understand the argument for single sex spaces, but just for the avoidance of any doubt, does anyone have an exact, biological definition of a woman (or man) that we can hold people to? If we want to enforce the idea of single-sex spaces, we will need an exact criteria to determine who is or isn’t a ‘real’ woman, so I was wondering if anyone could tell me exactly what that is?

@BernardBlackMissesLangCleg

Are you generally confused by easily established things OP?

‘But this ceramic receptacle doesn’t have a handle. Can it be considered to be a cup?’

"This piece of furniture has a seat, a back but only 3 legs. Is it a stool or a chair? Can you still sit on it if you're not sure which it is?"

If it wasn't for some biological men demanding access to female only safe spaces, sports places, shortlists and young people being over enthusiastically encouraged to begin transition journeys very early, we would not even have to be debating this as vocally as is happening.

I can look back at my 40+ years on this planet and even from very early on, see hundreds of moments where it was bloody obvious to myself and society that I was female and disadvantaged for it.

That people really need to have a definition makes my eyes roll so hard I'm surprised they still work.

X posted with you life

@lifeissweet

It is a sad state of affairs that people now feel the need to 'police' single sex spaces. We shouldn't need to. It's a social contract. People know whether they are male or female. People with a DSD also know - and they are the only, tiny minority who, in the past, may have been assigned a sex and may not know what the biologically are.

Everyone else knows unequivocally whether they are male or female and should accept that some spaces are for them and some are not.

If people weren't trying to pretend to be the opposite sex, we wouldn't need to 'police' anything. We just agree, as a society, that this is right and proper and respect one another.

No one is expecting genital inspections or chromosome checks for single sex spaces. We just want an agreement that we stick to our own spaces. That's it.

I completely agree that we shouldn’t need to police such spaces. However, I though the reason these while debates were starting was because people who were born with penises were entering (or wanting to enter) women’s single sex spaces?

If we spend all this time arguing about what is a woman we don't have time to talk about women's rights. A very clever trick.

///

Yes, this is the worst part.

Surely "adult homo sapiens without a Y chromosome" would cover it?

The reason I brought up biological definitions rather than appearance is because it seems to me like in the modern age, appearance is much harder to judge. We seem to be moving away from gender/sex norms, which while I think we can all agree it is a good thing, does mean that we can no longer rely on things like ‘men wear trousers’ and ‘women wear skirts’ as ways of identifying people’s sex.

As opposed to historically when long hair, make up, and high heels denoted men? Or other cultures where there may be a complete absence of any significant clothing? How do they cope? But why do you think we are moving away from sex stereotypes? Gender ideology relies on then and reinforces them.

As for your point that we must have some way to police sex specific spaces because men will force themselves into those spaces, ignoring any boundaries set by women or the law. Don't you think it rather transphobic to suggest that men who identify as women are incapable of following the law?

I completely agree that we shouldn’t need to police such spaces. However, I though the reason these while debates were starting was because people who were born with penises were entering (or wanting to enter) women’s single sex spaces?

You are on the wrong forum. Go talk to the penis havers. The penis havers are the people causing the problem. Interrogate the penis havers who insist on entering female spaces. Ask the penis havers why they think they should be given free rein to make women uncomfortable.

Dresses, trousers, makeup and wigs are not flesh and blood bodies.

OP, are you a penis haver yourself?

There IS a significant percentage of men, however they "identify", who will "ignore boundaries set by women". The percentage of women who wuill do this is negligible.

I though the reason these while debates were starting was because people who were born with penises were entering (or wanting to enter) women’s single sex spaces?

Doesn't mean that "What is a woman, anyway?" is the correct debate topic.

That's just a ruse to divert attention from the appropriate question, which is "What are the motives of those male individuals who are determined to ignore social boundaries in order to enter female single-sex spaces?"

It isn't the specifics of the definitions that matter, so much as the lack of logic in the way the arguments are implied.

• an exception to a rule does not invalidate a rule. The fact some people have 3 fingers on a hand and some 6 does not invalidate the fact that the human hand has five.

• that some people do not fit the rule and might need special consideration does not logically mean that all the many people who do fit the rule (but don't like that they do) should also get this consideration.

• it is deeply unpleasant to exploit the fact that some people have medical conditions to support a group that don't have these conditions to do what they want

@Lovelyricepudding

"Don't you think it rather transphobic to suggest that men who identify as women are incapable of following the law?"

No, not transphobic, but highly concerning as it's already happening.

Don't you think it sexist to women to ignore the current levels of male violence towards women, and the cases like Karen White where women have been lied to?

Wow! I last looked at this thread at 8.30 this morning, and it's still going!
Hasn't OP got it yet? Perhaps read some biology books and stop using our brains?....

in the modern era, appearance is much harder to judge.

An interesting thing about these TRA arguments is that they always seem to imagine human interaction isn’t a thing. You notice it especially with the arguments about sexual attraction, where attraction is seen as (ironically) binary and based purely on appearance, and the possibility of becoming more or less attracted to a person based on actually talking to them and getting to know more about them is never acknowledged.

Here, it’s similar. TRAs never seem to think of the reality that actually happens all the time according to some masculine-looking women: they notice another woman looking nervous, or (rarely) they are actually challenged, they speak to the other woman or smile at her and all is well.

(A variant of this is “well if a rapist wants to go in the women’s changing rooms he will” and there’s never any acknowledgement that before the social terrorism perpetrated by TRAs women were able to tell men to get out of the changing rooms and get help if they didn’t leave.)

I’ve always assumed that this is because they don’t think women are people with agency so the possibility of us taking action to inform our decisions and resolve our problems is unfathomable to them.

But maybe it’s just a more general cluelessness about social interaction? Other people as static props.

However, I though the reason these while debates were starting was because people who were born with penises were entering (or wanting to enter) women’s single sex spaces?

Your faux naive question has nothing whatsoever to do with this issue though. It contributes nothing, adds nothing, provides no solution, encourages no reflective thinking. Nothing. Nada. It is a false argument popular with those with agendas.

No one needs a definition. If you're a male - and everyone knows what sex they are - stay out of women's spaces.

We don't need scientific definitions. Everyone knows what sex they are.

We need it to be entirely socially acceptable for a feminine male to be in male spaces without feeling threatened (a problem for penis havers to solve). It needs to be entirely socially unacceptable for men to be in women's spaces.

Yes, there have always been and always will be transgressors, but it is not for women to police and throw men out of our spaces. Why would we want to put ourselves in that situation?

It just needs to be as it always has been - you use spaces for your own sex and that is IT.

If you are in the wrong space, don't expect people to be kind about it or accept it. Certainly don't legislate for people to be kind about it or accept it.

It needs a re-establishment of the social rules we have always lived by.

The problem is that those rules have slipped and people feel entitled as a result.

Everyone knows what sex they are

Yes indeed

If you’re male, stay out of the Ladies

Simple innit?

@lifeissweet

We don't need scientific definitions. Everyone knows what sex they are.

We need it to be entirely socially acceptable for a feminine male to be in male spaces without feeling threatened (a problem for penis havers to solve). It needs to be entirely socially unacceptable for men to be in women's spaces.

Yes, there have always been and always will be transgressors, but it is not for women to police and throw men out of our spaces. Why would we want to put ourselves in that situation?

It just needs to be as it always has been - you use spaces for your own sex and that is IT.

If you are in the wrong space, don't expect people to be kind about it or accept it. Certainly don't legislate for people to be kind about it or accept it.

It needs a re-establishment of the social rules we have always lived by.

The problem is that those rules have slipped and people feel entitled as a result.

So if one person accuses someone in a female toilet as being male, and they say they are female, what criteria do we use to tell who is right? Sorry if I seem like I’m being obtuse, it’s just a lot of stuff has been said which I don’t fully understand

Seems like the right thread to repost this - a classic from all the way back in 2019.

An Open Letter To the Guy on Twitter Who Wonders if Biological Sex is Real

(Original author on Medium had his account suspended - this is the original URL if you want to look it up in an archive - it had better formatting than the currently-live copy. Although bloomin' Mumsnet messes up the link - remove the asterisks).

@Ncwinc

We’ve managed to figure it out pretty well for years!

THIS

The new laws are disrespectful to loving and respectful transpeople who knew when to start using the other bathroom

How has it got to this - where a presumably adult person doesn't understand the difference between men and women.
Also how stupid do you have to be?

[quote Enough4me]@Lovelyricepudding

"Don't you think it rather transphobic to suggest that men who identify as women are incapable of following the law?"

No, not transphobic, but highly concerning as it's already happening.

Don't you think it sexist to women to ignore the current levels of male violence towards women, and the cases like Karen White where women have been lied to?[/quote]
I was being tongue-in-cheek. I know many transwomen do ignore the law. That half of TW prisoners are sex offenders. That TW have the same rate of offending as other men. But it is more than that - trans lobby groups are ignoring the law and telling men they have the right to demand entry into women's spaces whilst also campaigning for the removal is single sex exemptions. We have the a tribunal judge saying it is lawful to put male prisoners in women's jails even though it discriminates against women. We know that these judges are also being secretly trained by those same trans lobbyists. We are now in a situation where men either believe they have the right to destroy women's spaces or think they are justified in forcing entry because they should have that right, and organisations have either been led to think they are right or are too scared to say no. Most of this has happened in the last ten years.

So if one person accuses someone in a female toilet as being male, and they say they are female, what criteria do we use to tell who is right? Sorry if I seem like I’m being obtuse, it’s just a lot of stuff has been said which I don’t fully understand

What do you think would happen here? Why would a definition be necessary? We are not going to ask them to pull down their trousers or have a blood test, no.

Butch lesbians have reported this happening to them and, after a very short conversation it is glaringly obvious they are female and no harm is done.

If the person being challenged is male, then they will know they have transgressed. They may claim to be a woman, but they know they aren't. Maybe they will think better of it next time?

The police would only be called if they were doing something illegal or threatening - and that's a different situation entirely.

The problem is that women are being told not to challenge at all - and that just allows those who transgress to think they have passed unnoticed and that it's all fine. It's not fine. Being challenged might make them realise it's not fine and they might think twice next time.