what is a woman ?

[Majed]

@Leo Gura leo am i correct in my assessment of what is a woman in the first post of this thread ? 

[emptiness dancing]

Good video on the recent Imane Khelif controversy, I think in the future, sports will be the first to scrutinize gender more deeply.
 

 

[Leo Gura]

14 minutes ago, Majed said:

@Leo Gura leo am i correct in my assessment of what is a woman in the first post of this thread ? 

It's in the right direction.

But you also have to be careful not to treat being a woman as "anything goes" or "it's just whatever I think or want it to be".

[Something Funny]

14 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

But you also have to be careful not to treat being a woman as "anything goes" or "it's just whatever I think or want it to be".

Why? Where do you draw a line?

[Leo Gura]

5 minutes ago, Something Funny said:

Why? Where do you draw a line?

There is not a clear line but you can get an intuitive understanding and have insight into the nature of women. This insight is not "anything goes". There are clear patterns to how women operate.

Edited August 12 by Leo Gura

[Something Funny]

2 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

There is not a clear line but you can get an intuitive understanding and have insight into the nature of women. This insight is not "anything goes". There are clear patterns to how women operate.

I see, thanks.

How it relates to what you were talking about in the gender video though? The whole identity being completely made up. Not just man/woman, but also being human.

You've mentioned that there is no such thing as a human in real reality it's just a label that we put on what we see. 

If there are clear patterns to how something is, than that means that the category is not completely made up?

I understand that you can talk from different perspectives, but still.

[Leo Gura]

6 minutes ago, Something Funny said:

You've mentioned that there is no such thing as a human in real reality it's just a label that we put on what we see. 

Being human is more than just a label. It's a very loaded label that points to a state of consciousness. You inhabit a "human" state of consciousness, which dictates your whole life. You can stop labeling yourself human but you will still be stuck in your usual state. Likewise, you could say you aren't a man or woman, but your sexual desires will not change one bit. And those sexual desires run half your life.

But it's also possible to transcend holding yourself as a human, which is different from just not using a label or adopting a silly belief like that you are a unicorn.

Edited August 12 by Leo Gura

[mattm33]

17 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

But the whole trans issue is that some people are born as legit edge-cases where their psychology does not match their biology.

I've never understood this line of thinking. What does it even mean to feel like you are a man or a woman on the inside? I've always just felt like a me. Never really understood or fit in with either. Does being attracted to female bodies make me a man? Does wanting to protect my family make me a man? Could "women" not also feel this way? What set of psychological data points make a man a man. Man and woman should be an issue of "what's" and not "who's". What my body is, is not who I am. Who I am on the inside should be irrelevant to that. Isn't who I am just ego in this context? If you have a male body and feel like you are a "woman" on the inside, can't you just accept that truth. In my eyes self acceptance should not equal surgery, hormones and pretending.

[Something Funny]

1 minute ago, Leo Gura said:

Being human is more than just a label. It's a very loaded label that points to a state of consciousness. You inhabit a "human" state of consciousness, which dictates your whole life. You can stop labeling yourself human but you will still be stuck in your usual state. Likewise, you could say you aren't a man or woman, but your sexual desires will not change one bit. And those sexual desires run half your life.

I see. But that's more of a practical point of view.

What's a metaphysical significance of noticing differences between different beings / phenomena? How real are they and why do those differences exist if everything is God in the end? Do they actually exist?

That's what I don't really get.

[Bobby_2021]

2 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

That's not clear at all.

You are biasing baby-making over female psychology. There is no reason why one is above the other. In fact, most of your sense of being a man/woman is in your head, not your genitals.

If that's the case, what's so hard about accepting that a man has a woman's psychology and we as a society can treat them as a woman for all intends and purposes.

It's totally fine if you are a man and you have a woman's psychology. We totally agree to treat you as a woman, if you are comfortable with it.

That's a much more sane position than making the claim that a trans woman is literally a woman. 

A woman's psychology will not make you a woman. But we can treat you as a woman. 

[Something Funny]

3 minutes ago, Bobby_2021 said:

A woman's psychology will not make you a woman. But we can treat you as a woman

Why? Who decided that psychology is not a deciding factor but body is?

Also, in this example, what about women who were born in a female body, but cannot have kids? Are they not real women?

[jakee]

2 minutes ago, Something Funny said:

Why? Where do you draw a line?

IMO the line drawing has to do with some kind of integration of different perspectives. Green/postmodernism tends to just dissociate "objective" or biological dimensions in reaction against (pre)modernist tendency to reduce and ground everything to external dimensions or harmful hierarchical social regimes. 

Integrative way would be to see and accept all perspectives (subjective, objective, intersubjective & interobjective etc.) contextually as a valid and important domains. There are areas in which exterior features matter more than the interior ones, and vice versa. It remains open to discussion that what perspective(s) should be privileged and in which context. I don't think there are clear lines in this matter. The adequacy of notions of gender/identity/sex are dependent on the cultural and developmental context.

 

[Something Funny]

3 minutes ago, jakee said:

The adequacy of notions of gender/identity/sex are dependent on the cultural and developmental context.

I don't really care about that. I am more curious about how it actually is.

[Leo Gura]

9 minutes ago, mattm33 said:

I've never understood this line of thinking. What does it even mean to feel like you are a man or a woman on the inside?

That's the whole problem. You are not even conceiving of the trans situation. For you it is purely theoretical. Like you cannot understand what it's like to have multiple personality disorder.

9 minutes ago, mattm33 said:

I've always just felt like a me.

Hence why you're not trans, as 99% of folks are not.

9 minutes ago, mattm33 said:

What set of psychological data points make a man a man.

There are many. This is a super complex question.

At the very least you need to have the self-image of yourself as a man. But that's not guaranteed. You take it for granted.

9 minutes ago, mattm33 said:

Man and woman should be an issue of "what's" and not "who's".

Who said so?

Man and woman is critically not merely an issue of whats but whos.

9 minutes ago, mattm33 said:

What my body is, is not who I am. Who I am on the inside should be irrelevant to that.

But you are overlooking that your body IS who and what you are -- also.

Who you are on the inside is dictated by what you are on the outside. Because inside and outside is a relative distinction.

If you had the body of a baboon your whole sense of self and life would be different.

[jakee]

7 minutes ago, Something Funny said:

I don't really care about that. I am more curious about how it actually is.

How it "actually" is, I'd say, is the integration or inclusion of everything you ultimately are, which some might say is Infinity.  (or negation of everything you aren't, which is also Infinity) But I'm not really qualified to talk about that.

But in the relative domain, no symbol or concept represents how/what anything actually is. So there is no escaping the relative nature of defining sex & gender. 

[Bobby_2021]

27 minutes ago, Something Funny said:

Who decided that psychology is not a deciding factor but body is?

Listen, if you want to talk about women's psychology you have to make it clear what you mean by a woman. Who's psychology are you talking about?

Women's psychology is the psychology associated with biological women.

Psychology is not the differentiating favor because psychology is predominantly dependent on biology. 

We can accept the exceptional nature of trans and biological men with biological women's psychology or vice versa.

You cannot escape from biological definitions. 

32 minutes ago, Something Funny said:

Also, in this example, what about women who were born in a female body, but cannot have kids? Are they not real women?

Incomplete information for me to give an answer.

Are you talking about biological women?

[Davino]

I was contemplating the following the other day:

Imagine I took my whole software, mind ego memories persona, everything, and put it inside a feminine body with its biochemistry and period. Would that make me a woman? What would I be?

The answer is irrelevant for now, the point is the mind jogging and outside the box thinking. Contemplate!

[Davino]

9 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

I only ever have sex with myself

Oh no! Solipsistic sex is just self-masturbation

Wait a minute?

How beautiful it is in fact!

So united no prior sex could deliver...

[Leo Gura]

17 minutes ago, Davino said:

I was contemplating the following the other day:

Imagine I took my whole software, mind ego memories persona, everything, and put it inside a feminine body with its biochemistry and period. Would that make me a woman? What would I be?

The answer is irrelevant for now, the point is the mind jogging and outside the box thinking. Contemplate!

If we put your brain in a kangaroo body, would you be a kangaroo?

Contemplate!

[Davino]

1 hour ago, Something Funny said:

What's a metaphysical significance of noticing differences between different beings / phenomena?

Literally it creats It our of nothingness/oneness as polar opposite definitions that define each other. Like up and down are created at the same strike. To make a distinction means to make form, to create it, it will shapeshift with certain systematic barriers and it will dissolve, that's that's the metaphysics of differences.

1 hour ago, Something Funny said:

How real are they and why do those differences exist if everything is God in the end? Do they actually exist?

Yes they exist as imaginary. Reality is imagined.

Imagination is what makes reality Real. Being imagined all properties, what distinguishes the real from the unreal, isn't that another distinction?

The Realization of Imagination doesn't change an inch the nature of existence and its realness, it's as real as ever, you just realize that what you called real is actually being imagined by consciousness. A dream of Consciousness you might say, that's life and it's as real as it gets.