Cambridge dictionary drops new definition of the word ‘woman’

[Coconutmeg]

It’s quite long to get in a t -shirt though.

The definition this dictionary has given would mean that the age old definition - that a woman is an adult female - can no longer stand.

This is because a female is an animal characterised by the reproductive system that can bear young and has relatively larger gametes, and so a transwoman is not and never can be a female or a woman.

Something has therefore gone badly wrong with the definition of woman as given in that dictionary. It is as much to do with science as anything else.

It might be different if they had it as a secondary meaning under ‘legal’ with the explanation that, since the introduction of the Gender Recognition Act 2004, a person can obtain a GR certificate granting them ‘legal fiction’ that they are the opposite gender.

The definition this dictionary has given would mean that the age old definition - that a woman is an adult female - can no longer stand.

I don't think that's true. The addition of a second, counterfactual definition doesn't nullify the primary one which most people understand. Like the second definition of 'literally', people look at it and say, nah, that doesn't make sense.

It is however imperative that legislators clarify that newfangled nonsenses aren't applicable to the interpretation of laws and rights.

ErrolTheDragon · Today 22:04
It is however imperative that legislators clarify that newfangled nonsenses aren't applicable to the interpretation of laws and rights

Hasn’t the ruling of Lady Haldane in the Scottish court just ruled in favour if newfangled nonsense, though?

"By this defintion..."

No one disputes that GC people don't agree and don't like this usage as a result. That's the objection, but it's not the fault of lexicographers or dictionary publishers that it's sufficiently prevelant that it deserves an entry.

Definitions simply aren't about right or wrong. They are about usage.

Every time I see this thread title my heart leaps momentarily- then sinks again.

And I still repeat bollocks.

Endlessly saying something really doesn't make it into a truth. I'm sorry about this, but reality is a bitch and does not care about politics and religion.

@DadJoke

Definitions simply aren't about right or wrong. They are about usage.

I agree in the case of multiple conflicting active definitions of a word it is important to clarify which definition one is using.

This is especially so when one is using the word in question to define legal rights.

That is why this petition, to clarify whether the specific meanings of the words sex, male, female, man & woman used in the Equality Act 2010 mean biological sex and not "sex as modified by a Gender Recognition Certificate", is so important.

I assume you will be signing?

www.mumsnet.com/talk/petitions_noticeboard/4668426-petition-update-the-equality-act-to-make-clear-the-characteristic-sex-is-biological-sex

So, anyone basically. We no longer exist as a distinct class of human 🙄

Except we do.

It's like lying about gravity or the existence of trees. It's possible to dance words around in little circles demonstrating political power to enforce a lot of lies on those you oppress, but eppur si muove.

How does it go again: in the enacting of a belief that a man who says he's a woman is telling the truth while a woman who says he's not is telling a lie? It's made very clear that the enactor knows exactly who is the man and who is the woman.

There is no need to sign the petition. The EA2010 allows women with a GRC to be excluded from single sex spaces under 3:28, because they have the protected characteristic of gender reassignment.

@FlirtsWithRhinos

Here is the quote:

Exception allowing single sex services to discriminate because of gender re-assignment

The third exception (Schedule 3, paragraph 28) allows providers of separate or single-sex services to provide a different service to, or to exclude, someone who has the protected characteristic of gender reassignment. This includes those who have a Gender Recognition Certificate (GRC), as well as someone who does not have a GRC but otherwise meets the definition under the Equality Act 2010.

Source:
publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201719/cmselect/cmwomeq/1470/147010.htm

And as anyone can see who's been paying attention, the law is a cluttered mess, and women have now had enough of being ceaselessly screwed over by all this.

Biological sex needs to be clearly stated for the protection of women's rights and women's spaces. And anyone who does not agree with this is not agreeing because they know it would be bloody inconvenient for males who like being able to shaft women. So to speak.

The EA2010 allows women with a GRC to be excluded from single sex spaces under 3:28, because they have the protected characteristic of gender reassignment.

Well... that's a very odd way of putting it, more that single sex spaces are allowed to remain single sex regardless of gender reassignment status. Transwomen can't be excluded because they have this pc, they can be excluded because they don't have the requisite sex pc. ... they are not women.

But this seems to be so poorly understood that it needs clarifying.

Imagine if they did this for every noun

Carpenter

Someone who once had a splinter

Identified as "Someone who once had a splinter", BIGOT!

I am now thinking that what we are discussing in this thread is really the extreme fragility of women's rights, the kind which our foremothers won for us at great cost and effort. It doesn't really matter if 'man' is altered, because it would still refer to 'masculine' people, i.e., dominant, active, competitive, risk-taking etc. So the natural lords of the universe. But redefining 'woman' as 'feminine' means that we would be passive, submissive, nurturing, and emotional, and that when we choose to be called 'women', that's what we are agreeing to.

FlirtsWithRhinos · 19/12/2022 16:10
That is why this petition, to clarify whether the specific meanings of the words sex, male, female, man & woman used in the Equality Act 2010 mean biological sex and not "sex as modified by a Gender Recognition Certificate", is so important.

I assume you will be signing?
www.mumsnet.com/talk/petitions_noticeboard/4668426-petition-update-the-equality-act-to-make-clear-the-characteristic-sex-is-biological-sex

Good point Flirts.

Absolutely brilliant comment!

Look up and sign the petition
"Take gender ideology out of the Cambridge dictionary"

I saw the title of this thread and thought yay they've got rid of the new definition when I read dropped, then I realised what OP meant!

You are so close to a realisation here! You are right - you can’t control the dictionary.

DadJoke
The Dictionary does not have agency.
A person or persons who believe/sin gender ideology has made up the definitions. They are the person trying to control it.

Has anyone read The Dictionary Of Lost Words? A semi historical novel about the men who decided which words went in the dictionary and how they were defined, and the women whose women-centred words were not included.

LaughingPriest· Today 22:08
Has anyone read The Dictionary Of Lost Words? A semi historical novel about the men who decided which words went in the dictionary and how they were defined, and the women whose women-centred words were not included

No, I haven’t. I’ve just looked it up. At first I thought you’d ironically invented it, it is so apt. Thank you.

What are you on about?

If I get enough people to agree that the pink = the colour of the sky, you think that is a reasonable definition? What utter bollocks.

Dictionaries normally indicate where a definition is merely slang or popular usage rather than correct English. The Cambridge dictionary has not used that rider here.