Gender

I'm open to words changing meanings. So what does a "woman" mean now? What is the social construct that makes a person a "woman"? It needs to be more than just a feeling, because if a trans person say they "are a woman" what does that even mean if there's no definition of "woman"? Do you see where I'm coming from? For some trans-woman who want the society to acknowledge their "womanhood", what is it that they are trying to achieve if it's purely subjective? What separates then from being a "man"?

@Donald I think when a trans woman says they're a woman, you do understand what they mean. They mean they're following the cultural norms that were once considered the proper way to act if you were assigned female at birth. But I agree the word has become more complex over time because it refers to a set of attributes we've assigned as "feminine" and that's expanding. But in the end I'm happy to call people whatever they want to be called because it doesn't hurt or affect me.

@Kelly So in the example you raised, are these "feminine traits" what defines a "woman"? Are then adult females who do not possess such traits not a "woman" (but also not a "man") now? This isn't about pronouns by the way, it's about how society can't even come to agreement over a word that's quite universal and fundamental to society.

@Donald I guess I don't understand why debating the exact current meaning of this word is fundamental to society. We're all people. We have more in common than different. On top of that, this debate about the definition of woman is being used as a dog whistle by politicians to signify "I'm for traditional moral values and/or have an issue with LGBTQ+". Almost none of the people talking about this know a single trans person on a personal level. That tells you something.

@Donald I include myself by the way. I've known a few trans people but not personally. So I'm making all my statements as someone from the outside looking in.

@Kelly Because we have "safe spaces" for women, many facts of life are segregated by gender (washrooms, changing rooms, prison, sports, shelters, scholarships, etc). Should all the things I listed and more no longer be gender segregated if there's no importance of having a baseline understanding of what makes a woman "woman" and a man "man" (which includes trans people too)?

@Kelly Isn't it also true about the dog whistling in the other side? "I'm for progressive moral values and completely agree with anything the LGBTQ+ community says". Right now I'm seeing the feminist community somewhat at odds with the LGBTQ+ community because of this issue. Also it's only about "women" because being a man actually does give you any privilege or have any resources stolen from because there was none to begin with.

@Donald This entire topic is theoretical for me. I've never encountered any issues with the trans people I've met and volunteered with. Have you? How big is this issue in reality vs just politics? I hear a lot of "what if" scenarios but remarkably few statistics. I do agree it's dog whistling from both sides. The voices of trans people themselves (and people who actually know trans people) never seem to make the news and typically have nuanced positions.

@Donald We have safe spaces for women because some cis men cannot behave or control their primal impulses. Us trans people just wanna pee, change clothes, play and basically live in spaces as the gender we identify as. I'm a trans man btw. While it was hard for me to control my libido and rage on the first doses of testosterone, I could still function normally in public. Self-consciousness is always on alert to keep the libido and rage in check. My trans woman partner on the other hand, whose libido is also off the roof pre-estrogen, is now limp as a noodle on estrogen. No matter how I tried, it's not getting up. Zero libido, but she'd compromise helping me get off. She never had any muscle on her and now has the strength of a twig lol. I bring the groceries, open jars and do heavy stuff for her. What charms me the most is her dainty, womanly demeanor, which definitely is something a man would not have. Meanwhile I'm her gentle, sweet shorty guy. I love me a tall woman. She's my woman and I'm her man. That's just how it is. Don't listen to people who think they know more than actual trans people.

Okay, so are you saying there's no definition for the word "woman" then? Jacob, are you a man or a woman? What makes you a man or a woman?

@Donald I'm a man (to avoid confusion I'm not trans either). I didn't say that there was no definition, just that it is ever changing. To think of an analogy, let's think of the word weapon. In medieval times a weapon may have meant an item held by one person meant to deal significant harm to another person. Weapon was then redefined with the invention of bioweapons or chemicals to something that no longer pertains to an item. And with the invention of the catapult and trebuchet, weapon was also redefined to mean something that could be wielded by multiple people. In this sense weapon was redefined as more evidence and innovative ideas came about. Not because the definition was somehow wrong, because everything prior these inventions fit the category of weapon. In this sense gender is also being redefined through new evidence (I don't mean to say I'm the sense of historical evidence, because these have come around for a long time, but new available information to an individual) such as people changing gender, people being attracted to the same gender, people that believe them to be in between or gender fluid.

@Jacob Seaman I get what you're saying, but that wasn't what I'm asking. What is the current definition (even if it changes tomorrow) in your book?

@Donald Well I would first describe that gender has become a much larger blanket term which needs to be separated into two terms biological and societal. This is because in science and medicine it is still important to identify the biological gender versus the societal gender. And that societal gender or a person's identity is used in a cultural context. However the question was how to describe a women. Which is something that is inherently unanswerable. This is because what we define to be quantifiable feminine characteristics inside America is not reflective of the global consensus. Different cultures have different understandings. And because they have more criteria than we do, doesn't mean their opinion is less important. Because I'm an American with an American culture(blanket American culture does not exist, but I'm referring to my own culture), I view a women as only a social construct. Therefore anyone who actively identified as a women, even in temporary window, are therefore a women. A counterexample that is often used against this definition, is an identified women entered a women's only bath or showerhouse, but are really man seeking to see nudity. However I would argue that in this case the women inside the showerhouse have a right to their own privacy and comfort, no matter the societal gender. This means that society in this situations can create general policies to protect women. Such as let's say a policy where you must be identified as a women or gender fluid for an x amount of time. Or gone through some minimum level of transformations. (I'm sure a truly trans women would be just as uncomfortable in a naked environment if they still looked exactly like a man, so this seems fair). But even then any actions of the identified women, such as I guess leering if we define that to be a punishible action, would be held in the same contempt if a biological women did so. Of course in a general bathroom things are not so dire, and everyone has privacy there, so by this acknowledgement it would not bar identified females from using the women's bathroom. That does not mean it is the right definition, it is just my current view or argument. In fact I'm not super confident about this and am willing to change it if a suitable counterexample is presented.

@Jacob Seaman This is such a controversial issue because there's no "good" answer without someone being marginalized. In your view, if it takes no criteria to have someone identify as a woman (or ethnicity, or even race) because everything is a social construct, would it be right if I, for example, applied for Women of Color scholarships and demand they take my application under consideration? In doing so, it might strip a woman of color's opportunity to pursue a better life. Or can a man identify as a woman 18th birthday to dodge a military draft? Now in your counter example, it is also problematic because now you're setting abstract measurements to define "woman" (and who knows what else will this apply to if precedence has been made). Is it x amount of time? Certain level of estrogen? Required cosmetic surgery? And who gets to decide? The individual or the public? Finally, if trans-women are now simply "women", do we still afford them the protection and consideration we give to the trans community? But remember, they are "women" now, not trans.

@Donald Yes I believe it would be totally fair upon given sufficient evidence you would be subject to the exact same marginalization as a women of color. The easiest way if meeting this criteria would be being a women of color. And who determines you to have sufficient evidence would be up to the individual giving away the scholarship. Or the state in terms of state grants which would be settled in court. I don't think specific racial or sex scholarships are ultimately helpful for racism or sexism because it is under the impression of specifically elevating marginalized groups it would reduce the practice. But that is a seperate belief. The second example of a gendered draft is more likened to prevalent sexism against men. (Not to say men recieve equal sexism to women). In reality all genders should be involved in the draft, even if women are regulated to not as physical exertive roles. (Of course I realize that women are raped by their peers in the military, which is a difficult dilemma but it's hard to argue women should not be drafted under ideal circumstances). However looking at it from the reasons to bar women and draft men into the military then the men in question would not dodge the draft unless they underwent a transformation that reduces their physical strength. assuming the underlying reasoning is that they are physically stronger. I'm not defining abstract measurements. I'm putting criteria which is measurable through comfort of the other part involved. The individual and the public get to decide. The public through company policy or maybe through legal processes. The individual gets to decide what gender they wish to be. (Although this might seem insensitive, there is freedom of choice here). The individual is also part of the public. The fact that they are a women and trans does not conflict with one another. It is possible to be of both identity and have both protections.

That's besides the point.