Sorry, but this is important.

Exactly, that is like saying she was born with one leg or some other disfigurement, still a woman regardless.
But your definition was:
Do they menstrate can they give birth, if the answer is yes to either of those questions then they are a female.
Clearly someone born without a womb would not meet your definition of being a woman.
Let me explain it in detail, if your definition of an athlete is someone with two legs and two arms, anyone not meeting that criteria would not be considered an athlete.
So defining a woman as: "(do) menstruate ,can they give birth" means that women who do not or cannot menstruate or cannot give birth are not women.
That is why your are being constantly asked to define what a woman is.
Until you can do that we cannot move forward.

From my view, sex is a spectrum, it is not binary, and simple definitions of what a woman is, are not possible.

Binary means it's either one or the other, i.e. one side or the other. Whereas sex is a spectrum, a continuum:
A continuum is a continuous series, range, or whole where elements transition gradually without abrupt changes, often spanning opposite extremes (e.g., a spectrum from "light" to "dark"). It represents a smooth, unbroken progression, such as in space-time in physics or a, social, or, or measurement range.
I.e. sex covers a range of variations. Only legal and religious definitions deny the existence of sex as a spectrum, a continuum, and insist sex is a choice of only two options.
Like voting and political opinions. On some issues we might agree, on others disagree. But we vote for the option that we prioritise, because we have a limited range of options. So we are forced to choose from that limited range of options., even though none are ideal.
 
A woman can menstrate (normally) a man cannot and does not, a woman can give birth (normally) a man cannot. Then there are the obvious differences. For example, Both me and my wife have amazing bodies and if we stood naked in front of you, you would be able to tell the difference.
So by your definition, people who do not menstruate, or cannot give birth (normally) cannot be considered as women?
That excludes a lot of people (45% of the female population) who currently consider themselves as women.
Morqthana has already given you a long list of reasons why this maybe.
Millions of women worldwide experience conditions that prevent them from menstruating or giving birth naturally.
 
No amount of surgery and science can alter the differences, the only thing that can be altered is the appearance.
Then what is the point of surgery on babies with atypical genitalia?
An estimated 1.7 per cent of babies are born with intersex conditions, although many variations are not apparent at birth. About one in 2,000 newborns have genital differences that involve a sex differentiation specialist being consulted.
 
WRONG
If you were born a female at birth then you are a woman. End of!!!
So it is just the decision of the person in attendance that decides you are either male or you are female.
What characteristics do they consider in order to decide what sex a baby is?
The ability to menstruate or give birth cannot be applied to a baby just a few hours old.
 
So it is just the decision of the person in attendance that decides you are either male or you are female.
What characteristics do they consider in order to decide what sex a baby is?
The ability to menstruate or give birth cannot be applied to a baby just a few hours old.
Given you plenty of examples that I notice you have completely ignored but cherry picked the ones that you feel that you have an argument by twisting the very clear definition and characteristics that I gave. You may struggle to know the differences, I dont, you havent put up a single argument that changes my mind. Therefore you have failed miserably.
 
OMG if you really want to go deeper than the obvious then a woman has two X chromasones and a male has XY chromosones, a woman has larger hips for child birth so you need to look at the skeleton. There is no need to go this far though, it is simple to know the difference. A man may think he is a woman but that is all in his head. The biological differences cannot be hidden.
Sometimes they are not obvious. You can't just deny that out of existence.
What about people where the "obvious differences" are not obvious but are ambiguous. How do you classify them?

people where the "obvious differences" are not obvious but are ambiguous.
 
OMG if you really want to go deeper than the obvious then a woman has two X chromasones and a male has XY chromosones, a woman has larger hips for child birth so you need to look at the skeleton. There is no need to go this far though, it is simple to know the difference. A man may think he is a woman but that is all in his head. The biological differences cannot be hidden.
You can ascertain all that from babies a few hours old?
That seems too far fetched to me.
 
those who make a full transition from one to another by the means of surgery, no half measures though. They may use each others changing and toilet facilities, those who just think that they are the opposit sex may not.
Where do they go during the transitioning process?
Transitioning is a deeply personal, individualized process that generally takes several years, often averaging 2–3 years for, or even up to 5-10 years for, a combination of social, medical, and legal steps.
 
The interests of everybody includes the right of women to have access to spaces and events that people who are not women do not have the right to enter.
If you can't adequately define what a woman is, how can you decide who has the right to use such spaces?
 
It's interesting that this post shows a man who has been carefully contrived with hair and make-up to look rather like a woman, for the purpose of the photo-op. You might notice that he is larger than the other men surrounding him.

The man shown is actually a large, rugby-playing married man, well known to be a man who calls himself a woman.

Late one night, when the corridors of the hospital were largely deserted, a small, middle-aged female nurse went to the women's changing room after suffering an unexpectedly heavy period, wishing to clean herself up and change her clothes in privacy. and found herself alone in there with him. She objected to his presence and they had an altercation. Towering over her, and standing between her and the door, he refused to leave, insisted that he was a woman and ordered her to agree with him.

When she didn't back down, he made an official complaint that she had bullied and disrespected him and was prejudiced against men calling themselves women.

I'm glad to see that morqthana describes him as the reality of men demanding access to women's spaces.
Was that the J K Rowling version of events? :LOL:
 
I see you are familiar with Doctor Upton, a man who calls himself a woman.

I am sure you are already aware of the case.
A woman who was cleared of all allegations.
Dr. Beth Upton was cleared of all allegations made against her in the employment tribunal regarding a, controversial changing room incident at NHS Fife
 
But that's not the swivel-eyed right-wing way, is it.
There might be a correlation on here, of right-wing swivel-eyed people, and those single/divorced gentlemen who now live alone.
It would be interesting to conduct a poll to see if there is a real correlation. ;)
 
Back
Top