what is a woman ?

[zazen]

Conflating gender identity with biological sex muddies the waters and the discussion unnecessarily. We can acknowledge the reality of biological sex while recognising the validity and complexity of gender identity. 

Nature loves exceptions. Acknowledging these exceptions doesn't negate the broader reality of biological sex dimorphism. The reason hominids or we even exist is thanks to dimorphism. 

 It's not an either/or situation. Just acknowledge that sex is typically binary while also accepting that there are individuals who don't fit neatly into those categories and are their own. Respecting these exceptions isn't about denying biology. 

Dimorphism runs deep. It's not just about genitals or secondary sex characteristics. It's in our bones, muscles and brains, right down to the cellular level. These differences aren't trivial - they've been crucial to our survival and evolution as a species.

Yes, psychology plays a significant role in our sense of identity, no argument there. But to dismiss the role of biology is to willfully ignore the very foundation of what makes us human. You can't reduce "being a woman" to just what's in your head any more than you can reduce it to just what's between your legs. Both matter, interact and are inseparable parts of the whole.

The extreme hypothetical of transplanting a female head on a male body isn’t currently even possible. Even then, that brain developed in a body, a body shaped by chromosomes, hormones, and even reproductive organs. To act like these biological realities are somehow secondary or optional is to engage in a kind of magical thinking that ignores how deeply interconnected our minds and bodies truly are.

Edited August 12 by zazen

[Gennadiy1981]

6 hours ago, gambler said:

Hmm. I always thought in the Bible God created man first and from the man he created the woman? 

Nope, in the first chapter of Genesis and you can check out, on the sixth day of creation it says “He created them man and a woman”. Also if you can read further and you read original text after the seventh day of creation then it further goes to a more male pronounce where God separated Adam and out of his rib made Eve, only after that point the words then break into masculine and feminine. But on the sixth day of creation along with animals, the first human was both and neither.

[Something Funny]

14 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

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

Contemplate!

I think you should atill be considered human as long as you have human consciousness. If your consciousness gets altered and you lose you identity, then you are something else now.

 

[Something Funny]

14 minutes ago, Davino said:

Yes they exist as imaginary. Reality is imagined.

How do you know that?

[Davino]

24 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

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

Contemplate!

My identity is a communality of factors without any inherent existence. A crafted illusion with no center. I am unfindable as I am already everywhere. There is really no me because everything is creating me at every instant.

There are infinite permutations of being, still I AM, while my form is ever changing and my current form creates my identity; my form in essence is all that I hold dear in this world.

 

Meanwhile my kangaroo mommy:

 

It's tricky stuff, I'll definitely be contemplating this for the weeks to come.

Edited August 12 by Davino

[Nemra]

@Bobby_2021

If you say that psychology is predominantly dependent on biology, then why do trans people want to change their body parts?

[Leo Gura]

6 minutes ago, zazen said:

to engage in a kind of magical thinking that ignores how deeply interconnected our minds and bodies truly are.

That's exactly what conservatives do on the trans issue.

[Davino]

2 minutes ago, Something Funny said:

How do you know that?

I'm seeing it with my own eye right now. I'm fully conscious of how I'm dreaming Reality right now.

Existence is a dream of consciousness, I'm dreaming this shit up as I'm talking. Reality is a dream of consciousness.

First comes Understanding.

Afterwards Awakenings.

Finally there is Abidance.

[Leo Gura]

The kangaroo Abides.

Edited August 12 by Leo Gura

[Something Funny]

1 minute ago, Davino said:

I'm seeing it with my own eye right now. I'm fully conscious of how I'm dreaming Reality right now.

Good for you, but that's not a really helpful answer, tbh.

[Davino]

2 minutes ago, Something Funny said:

Good for you, but that's not a really helpful answer, tbh.

You asked how do I know, I told you.

Are you asking me how can you know in your direct experience? 

That I cannot tell, although I can give general advice if that is your inquiry.

[Nemra]

34 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

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

Contemplate!

I think, a human kangaroo. Well, you would have the previous experience of a human with the body of a kangaroo, which will change how you perceive the outside world. If we assume we can really put a human brain in a kangaroo skull. We would have to put it in a way that the brain is connected to the body, like how kangaroo brains are.

Edited August 12 by Nemra

[Something Funny]

6 minutes ago, Davino said:

Are you asking me how can you know in your direct experience? 

That I cannot tell, although I can give general advice if that is your inquiry.

Well, yeah. 

[Consept]

I think there are issues on both sides in the common discourse, in basic terms one side says a trans-woman is a woman and the other says its not a woman, lets call them left and right. 

The left side seems to not acknowledge that biologically a person born with a male body that transitions or identifies as a female, is biologically male. I dont see the issue with saying this person is a trans-woman which is distinct from a cis-woman because the experience and the biology is very different, however there are certain things that group them together as women. 

On the right they dont seem to be able to acknowledge that you can be born with a different gender, psychologically to your biological body. This is something that has always existed. If they could bend on this point then there isnt really an argument to be had on either side. 

In reality this should have very little impact on society, the only things that are slight sticking points are how do we categorise sports and how do we navigate gendered spaces like public bathrooms?

With sports it wouldnt be hard to put in place if you were born male you shouldnt be allowed to compete in womens sports. This may feel unfair to trans people but the advantage is just too much. But it is unfortunate that they might not be able to compete where they feel comfortable. THe only options for this is having a trans league or competing with cis-males. What i would liken it to is being born with a disability where you maybe really competitive but physically you cant compete at the top level. This will happen in the future with prosthetics, Pistorius, before his off the rails incident, ran the 400m at the olympics with 2 prosthetics blade runners instead of legs, no one really questioned it at the time and he didnt win but it could be seen as an advantage because he wont get the same injuries, he wont have lactic acid build up, so in theory this could be advantage and maybe an advantage in the future with further development, so i dont think that would be fair for him to compete with non-disabled athletes, this is the same for trans competitors. 

The bathroom issue seems to be a logistic one, there are many places with unisex bathrooms, or where you just have the cubicle. I also think some self awareness could be helpful, like if they are female passing it makes more sense for them to use a female bathroom because it may make males uncomfortable if they use a male one. If theyre not really female passing, then i guess using the male one makes more sense but that is a bit of a tricky one granted.

 

[questionreality]

11 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

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

 

Why do you think that only conservatives disagree with this idea (or nonsense)? 

There are many of us who are liberals, but who are not woke, who think this is an issue of common sense.

ignoring biology and the basic fundamentals, and unable to answer a question what is a woman, is just insane.

If you want to identity yourself as a woman when you are not, that's cool. But don't expect others to accept your definition of what is a woman and treat you as a woman. And don't push this shit onto our kids.

Instead of focusing on more important things, people are having trouble answering a question what is a woman? 

 

If you want to call it just a "construct", then why just stop there? Your whole life is a construct in that regard - but how is that going to do you or society any good in practical sense?

I think what you fail to understand, is that your metaphysical contemplations are only good in theory, in practical sense they have no benefit and can be even dangerous.

[Nemra]

@questionreality

From where did you get the biology and the basic fundamentals, may I ask?

[Leo Gura]

How did you know what a woman was before you learned biology?

[PurpleTree]

1 minute ago, Leo Gura said:

How did you know what a woman was before you learned biology?

Someone probably taught you when you were a baby

[Leo Gura]

9 minutes ago, PurpleTree said:

Someone probably taught you when you were a baby

Taught you how to distinguish chromosomes?

[PurpleTree]

2 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

Taught you how to distinguish chromosomes?

No what a woman and a man is

what blue and black is

what the sun and the moon are