'I'm not interested in defining what a woman is: the patriarchy has been doing that for long enough.' (smug smiles, thinks she has been Very Clever).
How can you be that thick?! Seriously, that is a really, really thick thing to say.
No, hard of thinking person who we apparently can't identify as a woman. What you are doing is compounding sexist stereotypes with being a woman. Sexist stereotypes have been imposed onto women by the patriarchy. But women actually objectively exist independently of sexist stereotypes.
The patriarchy was able to impose sexist stereotypes onto women precisely because it was easy for the patriarchy to identify which half of the population were women. They could not have imposed sexist stereotypes onto women if women did not objectively exist independently of the sexist stereotypes.
Or does she think the Patriarchy, just randomly imposed sexist stereotypes onto half of the human population and those people became women? Is she really that ontologically confused?
Was she from the Fawcett society? Shameful lack of analytical and critical thinking.
Her comment is such a classic example of the thought termination needed to follow this ridiculous ideology.