The programme notes give an indication but if that's a good reflection of her thinking, it's not exactly illuminating or persuasive, even supposing the question had merit to begin with.
' "Zoe Strimpel asks the seemingly simple question 'what is a woman', but finds no simple answer as she explores the question through a brief history of feminist thought.
She explores the ongoing controversy over trans women in women's competitive sport, and the reluctance of public figures to define what a woman is. while revealing her own views on the issue.
"As the history of feminism itself makes clear, gender and sex are genuinely complicated. That overconfident or oversimplified definitions of woman - which apparently we're all supposed to be able to produce - can be limiting and crude. Not just in relation to trans women but biological women too," she writes.
She continues: "The bitter debate about trans women versus women is a debate about the meaning and realness of biology. And yes, biological difference matters, sometimes hugely. It is certainly real. But there is room for nuance: indeed, there is a necessity for it. Without it, I fear a relapse into arguing that women are defined by their biology beyond the swimming pool or the cycling track or the locker room." '
We have words and assertions that appear to be saying something meaningful but don't actually make a lot of sense. As I'm not on iPlayer I can't listen to it to see whether it takes on any better sense when you hear the whole thing.