Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Science says there's no simple answer to define 'woman.' USA Today

64 replies

Whatamesssss · 26/03/2022 07:23

Who are these Scientists and can I see their qualifications?

eu.usatoday.com/story/life/health-wellness/2022/03/24/marsha-blackburn-asked-ketanji-jackson-define-woman-science/7152439001/

OP posts:
JoodyBlue · 26/03/2022 18:56

You define a male as a person with a penis. A male is thence the other of the female and not a woman. It should be enough. People can live as they want. But females should be allowed spaces without males. If some people with penises don't like the male socialisation they encounter and it makes them unhappy, then that socialisation should change to accommodate all males, not just those for whom male socialisation works. But people born with penises are not females. Not women. The word is taken by females. People born without penises are not males. It is that simple because they problem is penises and their propensity to cause pregnancy in a female. Any other explanation is sophistry.

Aretina · 26/03/2022 19:12

This has gone beyond ridiculous.

Scientists have no trouble identifying female gametes in all other species. Why would they be incompetent with our own?

Answer: they are not, and this is just nonsense.

Mytholmroyd · 26/03/2022 19:29

I'm a scientist who spends quite a bit of time determining sex in humans - admittedly dead ones - and teaching students to do so - but that's harder and takes more time than doing it in living people which 99.9% of the time takes a second or two IME. Nobody in my University Department would find that difficult to grasp or pretend we can't do it.

I think there has only been two times in my whole fairly long life life where I truly couldn't tell in a living human - both adolescents/young adults and I still distinctly remember the weird feeling of bafflement about it quite clearly!

JustSpeculation · 26/03/2022 21:25

I need to work out for myself what identity is and what it isn’t.

It seems to be that there is a difference between identifying as something and being recognised as something. I identify as being British and also as being English. I am also a Londoner, but I don’t identify as one. I was born and brought up in London, and can trace my London ancestry back to the 18th century, but I don’t feel any sense of being a Londoner more than anyone else living in London, irrespective of where they were born and brought up. This probably has a lot to do with spending so much time out of the country myself. And in some way everyone is a stranger in London. Everyone is just passing through. Your friends are not the local community, they are dotted throughout the city. At least in my case.

So I have a British passport and I identify as British. I don’t have an English passport. My Englishness is not recognised or documented in any way, so far as I can tell. But I still identify as English. The UK government, as well as the governments of all the countries I have visited and lived in, recognise me as a British Citizen. But it does not, to my knowledge, recognise me as being English. When it comes to being a Londoner, I have a 60+ oyster card, as TFL see me as a Londoner, and this gives me most gratefully received rights, but I still don’t really see myself as one.

There are people who identify as British, and have lived here almost all their lives, such as many of the Windrush immigrants, but who the government have (often controversially) decided not to recognise as British. I have met people who identify as being British but who have never lived here. They are descended from British immigrants to their country of birth. The UK does not recognise their nationality, and they do not seek this recognition. They know it, and that’s enough for them. There are also people who have British passports along with one from the country of their birth, but do not see themselves as British. To them it’s the residence document, in practice, which makes their family life here possible.

Clearly, there’s a great difference between identifying as British and being a British Citizen. Between identifying as British and having it recognised. Identity is a personal value, while recognition is an administrative category. And gender identity is a personal value, and we are not really arguing about this. The important aspect administratively is the recognition, the administrative category. That’s the thing that affects other people. For practical purposes, “woman” should be seen as an administrative category. It doesn’t define how people identify and what they see themselves as. It’s how an organised community deals with issues arising from observed sex differences.

To say While traditional notions of sex and gender suggest a simple binary – if you are born with a penis, you are male and identify as a man and if you are born with a vagina, you are female and identify as a woman – the reality, gender experts say, is more complex., as the article reports, is to suggest that we are claiming that identity is mechanically created from sex differences. But this is not the point being made. Identity is not binary, but sex most definitely is. If people want an administrative category based on identity, then they need to define it in more sophisticated terms than just “be kind”!

But I don’t think that’s possible.

Cuck00soup · 26/03/2022 22:09

A very drunk bloke on a Saturday night who has minimal educational qualifications can tell what a woman is.

Why can't these scientists?

Linguini · 26/03/2022 22:25

21:25 JustSpeculation

The nationality analogy is a good and helpful one.
It points to the fact that identity is a function of agreement.

I couldn't just rock up into Italy and say "I identify as Italian", and get an Italian passport and have everyone refer to me as the Italian lady, despite the fact non of my relatives are Italian.

Other people, society, need to agree on a person's identity because it can't be dictated by the individual alone.

Why is gender identity suddenly so neurotically solipsistic?

merrymelodies · 26/03/2022 22:33

More BS.

thinkingaboutLangCleg · 26/03/2022 22:39

People who claim that 'woman' is difficult to define, or unclear, or whatever, clearly consider males to be the default humans, and 'woman' to be some sort of puzzling variance from the norm.

Really good point! It always reminds me of soppy 1950s songs along the lines of "What is a woman? A beautiful dream, a fantasy ..." etc. The song-writers never thought womanhood would literally become a fantasy one day.

But more importantly, you never see TRAs puzzling over "What is a man?"
That's because (a) We all know a man is the standard human being, and (b) Transmen, being female, are not worth thinking about.

CompleteGinasaur · 26/03/2022 22:47

I suspect the 'scientists' cited in USA Today have been very carefully screened and selected in the certain knowledge of which side of the debate they are going to come down on - the first 'scientist' referenced, Rebecca Jordan-Young, appears to have done her B.A. in Political science. Not sure how that qualifies her to make judgements about biology.. (Thanks Wikipedia).

MMBaranova · 26/03/2022 23:09

Thank you for your contribution JustSpeculation.

I remember a module on conflicts some 12+ years ago. We were heading towards analysing ethnic cleansing and genocide and there was discussion on identity. The line pushed to us was that it can from two places that were sometimes contradictory: what you say you are and what others say you are. I wonder if it was running today whether one of those would be dropped.

Thewindwhispers · 26/03/2022 23:21

Ugh hate pointless arguments splitting hairs about words.

For as long as we’ve had human history, the man has been the one with the penis and the woman the one with the vulva. (And the occasional hermaphrodite is a hermaphrodite.) It isn’t complicated until some moron starts saying that woman doesn’t mean the one with the vulva but instead is the one with certain chromosomes or levels of testerone or dress sense or hair length or whatever 🤣

But if we just stick to the original definition it’s pretty simple stuff.

These ‘scientists’ are just scared for their careers / trying to please everyone while getting more research funding to study sex 🙄

BootsAndRoots · 26/03/2022 23:51

Considering that people knew what one was long before science was studied, how long will it take for us to realise that scientists believe more in this religion than reality?

How many legs does a human have? Well I'm not a biologist! Scientists say it's not a simple question, etc, etc.

CompleteGinasaur · 26/03/2022 23:57

USA Today is not neutral on this issue, it just made transwoman Rachel Levine its Woman of the Year..

LittleWhingingWoman · 27/03/2022 00:59

How do they define "science"?

Are they speaking for the whole of the scientific community in the world or for one 19 year old gender studies student with blue hair who identifies as "Science."?

5zeds · 27/03/2022 02:09

Do they have problems defining men, or elephants or a lioness? What nonsense.

Pawtriarchal · 27/03/2022 02:14

A good measure of whether you’re a woman, is whether answering the question of what a woman is with the words: ‘Adult Human Female,’ is likely a career ending action.

Delphinium20 · 27/03/2022 03:29

@nepeta

I wonder what Emma Hilton would say here.
She was recently heard speaking about the absolute fuckwittery of bullshitting. I think that works.
Delphinium20 · 27/03/2022 03:31

Maybe they are scientists of fiction. Wink

JustSpeculation · 27/03/2022 07:17

@linguini

I couldn't just rock up into Italy and say "I identify as Italian", and get an Italian passport and have everyone refer to me as the Italian lady, despite the fact non of my relatives are Italian.

No, you couldn't. But you could live in Croydon as the Italian lady, if you wanted to. Because it wouldn't affect anyone else, then. There would be no administrative knock on effects.

Igneococcus · 27/03/2022 07:43

I wonder if some of these scientists, who aren't actually biologists, don't understand how classifications in biology work (I also don't believe they are really arguing in good faith).
Biological definitions in systematics aim to provide the lowest common denominator not an all encompassing description. Like if I say mammals give birth to live offspring, lactate, have body hair and are warmblooded, then this includes everything from naked mole rats to Amur tigers and the Highland cows two fields from my house, but you couldn't picture any of them in detail based on that definition. So, a definition of women as a human who at some point in their live will make eggs (with a proviso to DSDs) catches all adult human females but it tells you nothing else about them, their looks, their presentation, their likes and dislikes. For a systematicists this is really all that is needed or wanted.

PiratePetespajamas · 27/03/2022 09:30

@Alltheprettyseahorses

They're sitting there alive and born and everything and they don't know what a woman is. Sure, Jan. They presumably sprang fully formed from Zeus' head or magic seafoam or something.
GrinGrinGrin

This is brilliant!

flyingbuttress43 · 27/03/2022 12:43

People who claim it is difficult to define what a woman is should maybe given an IQ test.

CarbonelCat · 27/03/2022 13:48

And yet,

There is no debate in Ukraine as to who gets to leave at the border. There's no endless discussion and musing over what definition of man and woman they're using.

There's no debate in Afghanistan who is denied education. Who has to stay home and who can walk around freely.

There's no confusion in a packed bar on a Friday night. Some people get leered at and their bum pinched and arms put round their shoulders at the bar, and some don't. Some people do the pinching and the leering and the groping and others never do.

How do football leagues work out who to pay millions a week to? And who to not even bother featuring on the TV?

There's no mistakes at a termination clinic or a maternity ward. No one is there by accident.

Only some secondary school pupils carry spare underwear, sanitary products and painkillers in preparation for managing their first period when it comes.

Hasselhoffsheadband · 27/03/2022 13:55

@Agrona

If no one can define what a woman is, how can anyone identify as a woman?

If you cannot define something (and a 'feeling' is not a definition of a sexed body) clearly then would it not be impossible to identify as and then attempt to live as a nebulous concept?

Good question.

The answer is, of course, because the whole thing is a load of sexist, stereotypical BOLLOCKS.

GingerPCatt · 27/03/2022 14:07

@Mytholmroyd Your job sounds really interesting. Do you test the chromosomes to tell the difference between the men and women? What was the difference from the ones you couldn't easily identify?
I'm assuming you're a forensic anthropologist. I've always been fascinated by that.

Swipe left for the next trending thread