what is a woman ?

[Majed]

remined me of the one of jordan peterson:

for me one way to answer what is a woman is what has been historically associated with what a woman is. but yeah it's a complex question first of all with surgery we can take a man and make him have a vagina and tits. so that's not really a solid answer. well i think if you go down to the bottom of the question it's all God. so there are no women, in fact a women is just a construct, it's imaginary: both the concept and the "physical" woman is also imaginary. 

[ici]

An adult female human being.

[zazen]

If we’re talking social roles then that can be more malleable - such as what is woman hood or man hood.

But if we’re talking biology then it’s clear. We can’t identify our way out of biological reality any more than we can identify our way out of the laws of gravity.

If I identify as a balloon, will I defy gravity and start floating? Sounds nice, but it’ll never happen.

This stems from a ideology not based in reality, but attempting to impose itself upon reality. There’s a difference between the quicksand of subjective reality and the solidity of object reality.

 

[Hatfort]

This was the title of Matt Walsh's documentary.

I've seen some clips, one of his interviewees tried to explain to him the distinction between biological sex, and gender as a social construct or identity, but he totally ignored it. He wasn't willing to even listen to anything that would explain the nature of trans people.

52 minutes ago, ici said:

An adult female human being.

This a pretty good one-line short answer anyway.

[Forestluv]

The men on the panel don't have the cognitive capacity to comprehend relativity and totally lack construct awareness. As well, they have zero curiosity. . . The men start of defining what 'woman' means as the authoritative truth. Their definition has some value and truth, yet it is also very contracted and limited. 

They have an audience of females, yet the men have zero interest in expanding their understanding. If one of the females supported the men's definition, the men would validate her. Yet if a female went outside their definition, the men corrected her and pulled her back in. . .

I kinda remember what those contracted mindsets are like. . . yet it seems bizarre to me when a mind cannot zoom out and see a larger map. 

Edited August 11 by Forestluv

[ryandesreu]

There are endless answers to this question, each revealing a perspective of something bigger.

[PurpleTree]

it’s just a word

[gambler]

Biological construct, even if we can't see the chromosomes.

[Leo Gura]

2 hours ago, zazen said:

But if we’re talking biology then it’s clear.

No.

Nothing is clear.

Edited August 11 by Leo Gura

[Scholar]

The truth is, the essence of a woman cannot be translated into propositional statements, because the perception of women is grounded in a non-propositional system.

We are talking about neural networks, which solve for problems in a fundamentally different way than a propositional computational system might. This should be obvious, given that we don't arrive at the idea of womanhood through rational categorization, but rather attempt to rationally categorize an already present perception.

[Forestluv]

--Even reduced to biology, it's not clear. 

-- I spend less than 1% of my life consciously aware of my penis. For all I know, my penis disappears 99% of my life. Yet I would have no idea because the essence of "me" is fully present and those around me continue to treat me as me.

[Scholar]

Trying to answer the question as it was framed is futile.

It is similar to attempting to describe subjective preferences (morality) in a strict propositional form. it will never work because the mind, and therefore subjectivity, including preferences, aren't grounded in propositional systems.

You will always arrive at contradictions if you try to translate non-propositional computation into a propositional computation. It is the difference between intuitive, subconscious processing and conscious, rational processing.

 

There is a reductionism that occurs, the translation necessarily breaks the nature of the object attempted to be described.

[Leo Gura]

Think about this:

How many bits of DNA would I have to change about you to turn you into the opposite sex, or a third sex? And then realize that will be an arbitrary number and could be done in many different ways and does not need to conform to any one chromosome configuration.

Edited August 12 by Leo Gura

[Buck Edwards]

Strange. 

[Karmadhi]

18 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

hink about this:

How many bits of DNA would I have to change about you to turn you into the opposite sex, or a third sex? And then realize that will be an arbitrary number and could be done in many different ways and does not need to conform to any one chromosome configuration.

Why basically all of the world agrees that there are 2 genders.

Male and women.

Males have XY chromosomes and women have XX chromosomes.

How did this line of thought win the entire world so well?

I have not seen the whole world agreeing on anything, why this?

[gambler]

30 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

Think about this:

How many bits of DNA would I have to change about you to turn you into the opposite sex, or a third sex? And then realize that will be an arbitrary number and could be done in many different ways and does not need to conform to any one chromosome configuration.

Leo, I have a thought experiment for you.

Imagine you had a daughter who had the ability to change her appearance at will, exactly like Mystique from X-Men. If she transformed into another woman, seduced you, and later you discovered her true identity, would you say you had sex with your daughter or someone else?

Edited August 12 by gambler

[Leo Gura]

26 minutes ago, Karmadhi said:

Why basically all of the world agrees that there are 2 genders.

They don't.

If there was agreement then why are conservatives freaking out about these queations?

Quote

Males have XY chromosomes and women have XX chromosomes.

A construct within a construct.

Quote

How did this line of thought win the entire world so well?

That's the power of the myth of "science".

19 minutes ago, gambler said:

Leo, I have a thought experiment for you.

Imagine you had a daughter who had the ability to change her appearance at will, exactly like Mystique from X-Men. If she transformed into another woman, seduced you, and later you discovered her true identity, would you say you had sex with your daughter or someone else?

I only ever have sex with myself

Edited August 12 by Leo Gura

[Bobby_2021]

Use common sense. You can justify anything you want. Just about anything. 

[Gennadiy1981]

@Majed on the meta level, once you post such a question, you already start with a bias and separation. On the most highest level, there is no separation and everything is one. Think of yourself for example, and just only yourself, you can define your masculine character and feminine character and good and bad, kind and evil and etc, but it’s still you. Remember you are the only one who started to draw the boundaries and once you start drawing the boundaries you start to find differences in anything you want.

On another note, long time ago I was into science, when I studied biology since you speak of DNA, there is such a minuscule difference between male and female that those who truly study and examine DNA would not even find a difference.  

[gambler]

6 minutes ago, Gennadiy1981 said:

@Majed on the meta level, once you post such a question, you already start with a bias and separation. On the most highest level, there is no separation and everything is one. Think of yourself for example, and just only yourself, you can define your masculine character and feminine character and good and bad, kind and evil and etc, but it’s still you. Remember you are the only one who started to draw the boundaries and once you start drawing the boundaries you start to find differences in anything you want.

On another note, long time ago I was into science, when I studied biology since you speak of DNA, there is such a minuscule difference between male and female that those who truly study and examine DNA would not even find a difference.  

On the note of DNA, this is even true between chimp and human. White and black people. And so on and so forth. But it's in those small differences that meaningful differences are found.

Edited August 12 by gambler