QT (but anyone who can answer): is there a consensus within the trans movement/liberal feminism on the definition of 'woman'? And what is the source of said definition?

submitted by SnowAssMan from (self.GCdebatesQT)

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]tuesday 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

but we create definitions of words and then write the dictionary afterward.

and yet, we don't just randomly assign arbitrary meaning to words tho. Classes of things can only considered to be in the same class as long as everything in that class possess the same characteristics.

The only way anybody could classify "penises" and "vaginas" as belonging in the same category is if they were describing "mammals". As soon as you start differentiating on the basis of "who's got the penises" and "who's got the vagina" then transwomen belong to group "male".

[–]transwomanHesitantly QT? 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

But now you're conflating sex with gender. Did I ever say that someone with a penis isn't male, trans or not?

While it seems counter-intuitive to redefine gender from "sex roles" to be based on self identification (as this makes gender seem arbitrary and unclear), it is the exact direction we should go in to abolish gender. If we want to get rid of something, we need to make sure nobody can find any pragmatic value in that thing. If gender is based solely on self identification, and we have pickles and ice cream genders, then evidently society will come to a point where there is no need for gender to exist.

In this redefining of gender, biological sex remains what it is today. I never proposed any changes to this. If you'd like to argue about how we classify biological sex and how we should do so, I think that would require a completely different thread, as we are strictly talking about redefining gender and gender abolition.