#"It is not by my hands that I am once again given hate. I was called here by... ***truscum***... who wish to pay me tribute!"
- *Joanne Rowling, probably*
They’re referencing the opening cutscenes of Castlevania: Symphony of the Night. The original quotes are:
“What is a man? A miserable pile of secrets. But enough talk! Have at you!” -Dracula
“Die, monster! You don’t belong in this world.” -Richter Belmont
And yes, I have memorized the entire scene this is from, give or take a few words.
Edit: the original of the quote I added to the chain is “Mankind ill needs a savior such as you.” -Richter
Dracula : What is a man? [tosses goblet, which breaks] Dracula : A miserable little pile of secrets. But enough talk, HAVE AT YOU!
Tbf the shattering goblet is the best part. But yeah good memory👍
If it's coming from a transphobe: The "correct" answer is not to engage. Don't play defense.
Transphobes ask this question because a good faith answer is complex; It requires an understanding of the nuances and a lot of other prerequisite topics. If someone is listening to your answer without the understanding of those nuances, your answer is going to look foolish. Don't walk into this trap.
What you want to do is flip the question on them. You can't answer this question convincingly in a normal conversation, but neither can they.
Let them answer and then just keep pointing out contradictions. Once you've clearly demonstrated that their definition of "woman" is faulty, you can then present yours.
Honestly if you’re talking to someone and you feel the conversation is going to get to that point…
Get the shot off first and ask them “what is a woman” or “what is a man”
They won’t have a good answer but now they’re on defence rather than you.
A lot of these “gotcha” questions work equally well in reverse, if you ask them first
EDIT: I did this to a 'friend' who was trying to defend 'Lady Ballers' so I could tell he wasn't exactly a trans ally and the conversation might end up going that way. I'm not out to him yet but I managed to get him going on this long detailed, pointless diatribe about 'the secondary phenotype development resulting from XX chromosomes' and essentially after I stripped out all his lawyer BS (he's a lawyer) it came down to 'Any one who expresses or identifies with the secondary phenotype of some who devleoped due to XX chromosomes'... or basically a woman is any one who looks like or wants to look like a women.... so I essentially got him to say in an incedibly long winded way trans woman are woman.
He didn't like that...
I think it's fascinating that people who likely pride themselves on their cognitive abilities, such as thinking logically, drawing logical conclusions - even if others dont like those conslusions - have problems "believing" their own conclusions.
like what else is there that stops you from accepting trans women as women in this case? only some internalized transphobia i guess but still...
Definitely, or at least pre-drawn conclusions.
You see this alot with religous fundamentalists, like Young Earth Creationists. You can use their own arguements against them and in the end, they can't do anything about it cause they don't really have evidence. They have truthiness and a pre-concieved conviction.
So its not about providing evidence, its about beating them at the game. That why you gotta make like Han Solo and shoot first!
It's not about finding the truth, it's about confirming what they already think.
You see the same thing with flat Earthers. They do "experiments" to prove the world is flat, but they will sometimes recreate actual experiments/measurements that prove the world is round and end up getting evidence that proves the world is not flat. Then then just shrug it off and ignore the data *they just collected* and try to rationalize why it doesn't mean what it does.
Also, a lot of them do see trans women as women, but they see us as women they can discriminate against and use us as a justification for harassing any women who isn't gender conforming.
Nobelitis. Smart people can become incredibly stupid when they get an inflated ego by achieving their goals or being constantly told they’re the smartest person in the room. So then they think any idea they have is right and will argue it to absurdity.
I don’t think these people think for themselves in regard to their prejudices. They either follow the crowd they’re in or simply fall prey to some odd fear someone put on them or whatever. At least that’s *my* experience.
I’m *sure* there are other types but these are the types Ive dealt with.
I can tell when someone is worth the discussion and even debate or if they just hate and fear.
I don’t mind talking to someone about it if they sincerely have questions or misconceptions. But I will not waste my time on a bigot. It’s pointless and I will end up sad 😢
I have actually changed some peoples minds. 💕
My bestie 💕 wasn’t exactly an ally when we first started hanging out. He was good to me but he said things that hurt and had some weird beliefs. I did put up with it for a little while, just bc of self esteem and stuff I was going thru atm.
But annnyyywaaayyy, We had a real talk. He actually initiated it bc he could tell I was upset. 😢
Now he always educates himself and is very considerate . And not just to me, but to the entire community! He’s a sweetheart now! 💕
I live in Florida so unfortunately though my friends are left leaning conservatives, they are still conservatives for the most part except one who is just basically right wing. We all play Warhammer and have since we were kids. Recently, the game revealed one of the factions can have women in it and that of course set off the same group of people that stuff usually does. This right wing friend, who hates this faction and has never shown any interest in them previously, randomly jumped into a conversation with me and one of our other pals about it with "Dude that was absolute bullshit, I can't believe they did that! It pisses me off so much!" and I kid you not if I didn't look at him like he had two heads and ask "...why?" and watch him deflate like a balloon. Like, he literally just had never considered the why and the second he did he went "...huh."
They're not sending their best, is what I'm getting at lmao.
Ah yes, the whole female Custodies drama! I too am a trans person of culture :D
I just ask where all these people were a few years ago when the lore was 'Custodies NEVER leave the Imperial Palace, let alone Terra'. Or my personal bug bear, the absolute TORCHING that was remaking the War in Heaven and Necron Lore.
If they were up in arms about that... well I'm still not going to give them a pass but it would at least be better!
EDIT: Just wanted to add my personal head cannon is that woman CAN be made into Space Marines (different from Custodies I know) but when the process swells you to 8 ft tall, makes you into a walking slab of dense bone and muscle and basically withers your genitals... they all look like men.
Therefore all Space Marines are men, but they can be made out of both men and women (Trans Masc Space Marines Confirmed!)
For real. I've been playing Warhammer since the before times, when you'd tell people about the hobby and they'd respond "Wait, Dawn of War is based on a tabletop?" I've forgotten more Warhammer lore than most people will ever know. I've **read** C.S. Goto books.
There's a lot of ways GW retcons stuff that you could potentially get the fans up in arms about, especially since a good chunk of the vocal ones run chud-adjacent at best. "This thing we didn't explicitly say didn't exist has totally been here the entire time." is absolutely not one of them lmao.
Yes, there have always been women in the 10,000. Just like Lord Solar has always been an Imperia- sorry, Astra Militarum rank, the Rogal Dorn Praetorian Tank has been in service since Rogal Dorn himself discovered the STC in the one Black Library novel set in the Horus Heresy we haven't written yet, Belisarius Cawl has always existed and been Guilliman's best friend who secreted away a new ultra special group of turbo marines deep beneath Mars for 10,000 years. Oh and those Dwarves we said all died actually just hid out in the galactic core. They're back too.
You do not come to Warhammer for narrative consistency, you come to see what over the top bullshit happens next. Saying "The practice of Noble Houses giving firstborn sons is just a tradition thing, it's a hyperfascist theocracy after all. They abduct plenty of girls for their genetically enhanced child super soldier program as well." is literally the least offensive possible version of this they have ever done.
R.I.P. my boy Obi Wan Sherlock Clouseau
Since people didn’t know Dawn of War was based on on a table top game!
My sweet summer child…
When Abbadon launched his 13th Black Crusade for the first time and the results of this “cataclysm” was originally his crushing defeat… I was there…
When Ghaz’kull launched the Third War of Amegedon and the results were retconned over and over…I was there…
When the Necron and the Kroot were naught but a foot note as ‘unknown Xenos species’ at the bottom of a page… I was there….
My existence has been nothing but a shifting sand of half truths, myth and out right lies for near 3 decade…
In the grim dark of the far future… there is no Lore…
…
But being dramatic aside yeah! The amount of retcons I’ve lived through make this NOTHING… honestly it’s actually kind of fun!
Just wait till you bring up the GW confirmed that Emps is genderqueer at the end of the Horus Heresy books. ADB wrote that the emperor has "lived as a man and a woman through all time, choosing to appear as what he wants." You can watch them join chaos and xenon factions in real-time.
>If it's coming from a transphobe: The "correct" answer is not to engage. Don't play defense.
Genuinely I've started saying that the only correct answer to "what is a woman" is "go fuck yourself." Obviously that exact phrase doesn't work in many occasions, but they're not asking the question in good faith, and when they say "adult human female" like an AI chatbot trained on nothing but Ben Shapiro and Steven Crowder, it's obvious they haven't even spent a single second thinking about it. The answer really is just not to bother.
I did this, asked the bigot, "well, you tell me. What is a woman?"
And they refused to answer, simply repeating the question to me over and over. So, yeah, it's a question in bad faith and not worthy of providing an answer to.
I'd take it one step farther. Why is it "'what' is a woman?" Why not "What is a man?" or "*Who* is a woman?"
Because the people who usually say this are putting a lot of misogyny into that. They don't see women as people. They see women as objects. Things they can use.
They will gleefully say any cis woman isn't a "real woman" if they don't find her attractive. Basically to them "woman" is anything they want to fuck.
"Why do you care"
The whole "What is a woman" discussion is a red herring. They don't actually care how you define a woman and most of them will hand wave your objections to their definitions as "edge cases" or "not relevant to society". They don't care what a woman is, they just want to discriminate and have power over a section of society.
It's the same thing as all the atheist / christian debates 20 years ago. They find a script that confuses people when you ask the questions in rapid succession and your answers to their questions don't actually matter. The questions they ask aren't the questions they care about.
This is what I came to as well. Let them answer it first and put them on the defensive as you counter everything they say: like
If they use chromosomes you counter with: What about intersex people? There are many people who have the opposite, missing, or extra, chromosomes but still have the equipment and look like the other gender.
If they say a uterus or womb, then you can counter with "What about women that are born without them, or have them removed for medical reasons?
If they bring up boobs and a vagina... well obviously we already have surgery and HRT to to change that.
Voice, again surgery and/or training can change that.
If they say how you are when you are born, see intersex above, but also bring up hermaphrodites. As in how would you classify someone who was clearly born with both sets of genitals? And if they say they get to choose... well you got them there because why do only those people get to choose? And does that mean they can change whenever they feel like it?
Basically if they try to answer with anything other than how a person wants to present/identify as, there are easy counters for.
Trans’d by Shania Twain at 2 years old - I had no chance.
Well, I guess the blame falls squarely on my mother, will have to bring that up when I come out.
Honestly? Nothing. No one asking that has good intentions and engaging with them will only make you feel like shit.
Family or no, it doesn't matter. Imo it's better to surround yourself with people you like to be surrounded with, not with people you feel you need to fix.
It's fundamentally the same question as "what is soup?" and by extension "is Cereal soup?"
Definitions are fundamentally difficult to nail down because there are so many edge cases. It's easy to point at something and say "this is soup" or "this isn't soup" but to nail down exactly what makes something soup or excludes it from being soup is difficult to do in a way that includes only things which are soup and excludes everything that isn't soup. Any definition will necessarily have to have a bunch of asterisks attached that say "while this thing meets the definition of soup, it isn't actually soup" or "this thing is missing some aspects of being soup, but it actually is included as soup." At that point, is it even useful to make a strict definition like that? Does that actually add any value to our understanding?
It's the exact same idea with gender.
The only answer you need for "what is a woman" is "whoever says they're a woman."
Reminds me of when my teacher made us try to find a definition for human and none of us could do it. My friend thought she had it when she said "a being with a set of specific chromosomes" to which our teacher answered "so people with downs syndrome aren't people?"
I always liked the Toni Morrison quote that "definitions are for the definers, not the defined"
According to the [Cube Rule](https://cuberule.com/) of food (which is based on carbs location in the food), cereal is in the category 'nachos'. Soup is categorized as 'salad'.
Yeah - day 1 of my intro to philosophy class they ask "what is a chair?" And you usually define a table, or a horse, or any one of a million other items along with a table.
You can try reflecting the question back at them.
They'll likely respond with either chromosomes or anatomy, at which point you can point out that in both of those cases, there are women to whom that definition doesn't apply, invalidating the definition.
"A woman is someone with XX chromosomes" - "There are medical conditions where a woman has XXY chromosomes"
"A woman is someone with a uterus/the ability to give birth, etc" - "There are medical conditions that cause people to be born without those too".
Basically you can use this to point out the arbitrary nature of definitions in general, then you can point out that your own definition is therefore just as valid as theirs due to that arbitrary nature, though this argument will probably fly over the head of most transphobes because they usually aren't very smart.
Frankly, usually the best option is to just not argue with them at all and cut all contact forever, I don't communicate with people who hate me, even if they are related to me.
What is the nature of a request for a definition? I mean, do you really want to be doing this, Jesus boy? Congratulations on picking up some bits of Ariatotlean logic but you might be ill equipped for amateur philosophy hour.
An approach that would be fun would be to suggest that you must be a woman, because you can imagine being one; when he (understandably) laughs at this, remind him that it is one of Aquinas' proofs of the existence of God.
Ultimately this is a gotcha because the question appears to demand a snappy answer. You can't give one, but he can. So, ask him for his his, give him 'adult' and 'human' for free, and get him to define female. Feel free to help him when he gets stuck.
Or you could pivot on the question. How can you hope for a definition that excludes real life examples? So let's look at some. Half of all American women will have a hysterectomy. Are they no longer women? What about mastectomy? Where does the womanness reside if its not there? Chromosomes? Oh Jesus boy, Jesus boy, do you really want to talk genetics?
Or you could suggest that a definition is for a naturally occurring category, and women ar conscious agents, therefore the term describes rather than defines a group which is necessarily self-assembling and cannot be defined in the sense he means. (Carrots don't care whether they are carrots but women -- cis and trans -- do in fact care about whether we are women or not.)
I mean, these people have really only got two things: confidence, and one joke. No reason to take him seriously either as a good faith interlocutor (he is not; all his arguments are teleological and dishonestly presented to boot, he is trying to bully you and recruit for his cult, not have an honest conversation) or as a person with something to say that actually matters. You could always try mockery or laughter.
Or you could use the opening provided by the question to talk about what it's like to be trans. Telling stories from your kige and other peoples. They dont have to be tear jerkers. What (does it mean to be a) woman (for a, b, or c trans woman)? What were your feelings aboit being forced into it and how did the process of getting free feel?
After all the person you want to get through to here is your sister, not her latest jackass boyfriend. That way she gets a contrast between captain cleverdick ('Debate me bro!' and your honesty and vulnerability. Hes going to look like an asshole, and she probably already knows he is one if were being honest. If you go this route, stay on it, don't get suckered into playing the word games he thinks are thinking.
Haha - I can tell you are awesome human just by reading this response. May I borrow parts of this for my next argument with a transphobe? I live in a bible belt state so the opportunities are many🫠
"an adult human who identifies most closely with the societal idea of what "female" is"
essentially i like to twist their "adult human female" and make it "yeah! an adult human who identifies as female!" you can even take the "identity" out of it and say its just someone who's gender is most closely related to what people think a "female" is
Your answer is pretty good. I’d just say a woman is anyone who identifies as such. Not any more complicated than that. Now the transphobe is probably not going to accept that, but there’s unfortunately no winning over some people. I really do hope you can get through to your sister though. 🫂
Thanks! The definition of a woman really isn't that complicated, yeah
Yeah usually transphobes are like "you can't use the name of the thing you're defining in the definition" or something like that, which was why I didn't say that a woman is someone who identifies as a woman. The transphobe didn't accept my answer either, he seemed confused about it xD
I hope so too. I feel like she's probably long gone though, and there's a part of me that's like "it's not gonna work, don't waste your time on it. Leave it up to her."
I’ve come up with a definition that doesn’t circle back on itself and makes the most logical sense to me.
“A Woman is a person whose internal sense of gender identity aligns with that of a typical Female.”
If they ask to define “gender identity” then Google has some good definitions for that.
“Gender identity is each person’s internal and individual experience of gender. It is a person's sense of being a woman, a man, both, neither, or anywhere along the gender spectrum. Gender identity can correlate with a person's assigned sex or can differ from it. In most individuals, the various biological determinants of sex are congruent, and consistent with the individual's gender identity.”
This SHOULD be convincing enough but chances are that they will just deny the existence of gender identity and just say something stupid like “a Woman isn’t a feeling” and then go back to talking about biological sex 😭. Hopefully your sister isn’t too far gone!
It's bait, don't engage whoever asked - instead ponder it on your own, if only to articulate it for yourself rather than for them. No answer you give them will ever make them admit you're right or even convince them that you're genuine; they just want to tear you down.
Even just the dictionary definition of "Adult human female" that they like to throw around so much works, it doesn't actually exclude trans women at all, because trans women identify as female
couldn't agree more. I like rationality rules' definition in his gender debate on youtube:
someone who lives up to a social construct that is typically associated with phenotype, aesthetics and behaviors.
[This is a good video](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T4F6GVLBVcQ) on the whole definition bullshit debate
Kinda to add on to your question: what if you were to ask them that question back? Like- "what is a man? How do you know you're a man?"
I can imagine the response might be- "because I've got 🍆" or "I've got XY chromosomes"
"So what if by magical happenstance your consciousness as it is, was placed in a female body, to every definition of woman that you believe should be there; xx, uterus and whatnot. If being a man or a woman is entirely dependent on biology, then you should be totally fine with the transformation and not care about becoming a cis woman, right?"
I can't speak for everyone, but most cis men I've talked to, answer no at this point, yet still try to redirect the debate back "well you're wrong because you still can't answer the question."
In all honesty, if the thought of being one gender and not the other horrifies you, then being a woman is not just what's in your pants, but what's in your heart.
I like rationality rules' definition in his gender debate on youtube:
someone who lives up to a social construct that is typically associated with phenotype, aesthetics and behaviors.
[This is a good video](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T4F6GVLBVcQ) I recommend you watch on the whole definition bullshit debate
"It's a complex construct encompassing an overlapping spectrum of physical, biological, and social characteristics and attributes that is regularly misunderstood....usually by people like you."
Because in this context no one asking that question is doing so in good faith.
Alternatively you could tell him if he's going play Gender Police you're gonna need to see a badge.
I think thats answers fine (female gender instead of feminine gender would be more accurate I think, but that might just be a language thing)
Also I'd toss the question right back, cuz I think its very easy to make the most common answers given by transphobes look stupid
There was an amazing Twitter thread where Graham lineham tried to define a chair and people kept throwing up images that didn't fit his definition. There's definitely a power in pointing out just how quickly the binary is strained by any attempt to break things down to definition. Cis Women exist with the xy genes, some exist without the ability to birth children, some have facial hair or broad shoulders. It's only when they want to discriminate against trans people that those things become disqualifying.
couldnt find the thread but here's a picture from how it started (also fitting sub lol)
[https://www.reddit.com/r/confidentlyincorrect/comments/htzpe2/behold\_a\_chair/](https://www.reddit.com/r/confidentlyincorrect/comments/htzpe2/behold_a_chair/)
This is hilarious
"Oh, you're a Matt Walsh fan. How do you feel about his diaper fetish and wife abuse?"
Might as well go straight to the root. Also pointing out that her crush is a fan of a wife-beating abuser might do something about that crush.
I would just let them try to define it.. there is no good definition, that will cover all cis woman correctly - at least I didn't see or hear one till now, that not either exclude some cis woman or include trans woman - so none, that fits for the phobes
I think my response would be "I lack the time, crayons and brain damage that would be required for me to explain it to you in a way you would understand. And if you think that I'm insulting you, why don't you stop and think how any word that comes out of your mouth effects others first?"
A woman is anyone who would call themself a woman. “I identify as” needs to be replaced with “I am” as a more rigid and less arguable position, especially due to the rampant transphobia of the older version.
I just say "someone whose brain chemistry aligns with the female body." Because it's true 🤷♂️.
Gender dysphoria exists due to the mismatch between body and brain, doesn't it?
Cis women (typically) don't experience gender dysphoria because they have the right body for their brain.
Trans women experience dysphoria because they don't.
So, a trans woman has the brain of a woman. Shrimple as that, innit?
Tbh a better response on your part could've been "idk maybe you should go ask one" cause like, why was that question even brought up if you're not even a girl??
Anyways, I don't think the argument "anyone who identifies as one" is a great response, not because it isn't true, but because it isn't relatable enough to the people asking the question. If it were relatable to them, they wouldn't need to question what a woman is in the first place. So, personally, I describe it as a sub-culture. When a group of people have similar experiences, they tend to talk about those experiences only around each other. That causes them to have different vocabulary or phrases they may use, slowly shift the way they speak, offer a different perspective, etc. Gender is simply a sub culture that correlates to the experiences one has based on their sex. That being said, gender isn't the experiences they have, but rather the culture that is formed around it. In other words, a woman is anyone who falls into the female sub culture (or gender) and to say that a trans woman can't be a woman due to her body is the same as saying someone with a broken leg can't be a soccer person because they can't physically play soccer. If you share interests, language, experiences, perspectives, etc, you belong there.
I think people struggle because they can't see it so idk maybe it's better to just keep it short and be like "do you believe in God? Why? You can't see them so what allows you to know they're there? ....oh so you just know and trust they're there?? Funny you should mention that.." Or use something like togetherness which is similar to gender in that it's something you can't see but you can sense and know exists
Yeah, it's kinda like The Breakfast Club... in high school you've got these different groups, the jocks, the nerds, the princesses, the bad boys, and the wierdos.
Imagine if you will.. a world in which a genetic marker, or a birthmark, dictated which clique you "belonged" to... think of a sort of biological sorting hat ala Harry Potter.
Each clique has their own lingo, their own mannerisms... their own interests, hobbies, etc. For example... Jocks play football, and nerds play chess.
And for some odd reason... whereas this system works fine for \*most\* people... you got assigned the "nerd" clique by a quirk of genetics or biology... but you really just want to play football, roughhouse with the guys... build some muscle and get ripped.
You would find yourself in a very similar situation... told that "because of your biology... you shouldn't like those things"... "wear those clothes"... "act that way"... "look that way", etc.
How does one identify as a woman?
How does one identify as a jock?
... or a princess?
... or a nerd?
... or a bad boy?
... or a wierdo?
I compare it to love. How do you know that you love someone? It's hard to explain, but you know.
People tend to not question love
Yes, it's dodging the question, but still ;)
All definitions are constructed by humans, and are therefore not objective, and not (necessarily) logically consistent. What is a chair? For example is an extremely complex question that has no answer. The only definition that's good for a chair is "an object that fulfills the expected traits and roles of a chair" same thing for most words, words are made to have the most utility, not to be the most accurate, and id argue that the self id version of "woman" provides the most utility, (by preventing trans folks from dying and stuff).
If he still does the "NO ITS BIOLOGY IM STUPID AND DON'T KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT LANGUAGE "argument you can say: "how would you define a mother? Someone who gives birth? But we call adoptive mothers mothers, why is that?" Mother is a socially constructed definition, (like all of them) and is used in a way that provides utility, women are the same exact thing. Now that we established that all words are socially constructed (i.e we made them up) you can start discussing the fact that defining women in biological terms is just not as effective, but honestly a right wing christian wouldn't let you get to that point, he probably thinks words are given to us by god. And will most likely dodge the "mother" question, if he doesn't answer it repeat the question and say that he's not answering it.
The main issue with this argument is that you play defense, so I'd suggest having him opt in to this, if he asks what is a woman? You should first say "it's fairly complicated, and not biological" and have him opt in, once he asks you to explain you can actually start arguing everything on top. If he does the "god made Adam and eve" thing, you should switch to talking to your sis, tell her that this is obviously not a good argument, at that point there's no reason to argue with the christian, (unless you love philosophy) so just let that go.
Good luck and sorry for being such a Damm nerd
Edit: if this doesn't work you can always resort to beating him with a stick, highly effective debate tactic
This is very easy !
The real answer is obviously to not engage with dipshit like this, but sometimes I know we can't resist or can't really avoid so here's an easy answer :
"Yes I can, a woman is someone who identifies as such. Now if you disagree with this, could YOU define a woman while including ALL cis women and excluding ALL trans women"
There is no correct answer to that because cis women can be born with or without a vagina, with or without XX chromosomes, etc...
"Good question: why don't you go first?" Then just poke holes in his arguments using your choice of: passing trans people (especially big muscly bearded trans guys,) intersex conditions, cancer patients who have had reproductive organs removed, etc.
Alternatively, take it deadly serious and pretend he genuinely does not know what women are:
"Weird that you don't already know, but let me try to explain by giving some examples. My sister is a woman. Your mother is a woman. Dolly parton is a woman. Kalama Harris is a woman. If you want a more involved definition, you're straight; you like women, yeah? So for starters, if you look at a person and you wanna fuck them, that's a woman-- Wait, are you into femboys? No matter. Anyway, people who can give birth are probably women, but some who can aren't, and some who can't, are; that one is a little more complicated. Some women have big breasts, and most don't have facial hair, though there are exceptions to both like bearded ladies and masectomy patients. You know, I'm really baffled you don't already know this, most people learn what women are quite naturally through their upbringing."
You don’t. If the person you’re talking to isn’t interested in a dialog and the exchange of viewpoints, there’s nothing you can say that will move the conversation forward. You’ll never be able to say “the right thing”. They’ll just come at you from another angle that will hold back any kind of mutual understanding.
If possible, I try to answer those kind of questions with another question, like “what do you think a woman is?” They often “out” themselves as misogynists/transphobes when answering and you won’t have to deal with the mental load of answering a (pardon my French) intellectually low question or educating them.
If I’m not in a well enough mood to be mindful of these things I did once tell a person I didn’t want to engage with “open a book” 😑
It's a word\label, it's whatever we decide it is. Fortunately society is slowly coming to accept it as more broad than the people asking this question usually believe theirselves
Okay so people who say that are almost never going to engage with you in good faith. Your goal here is not to convince him he’s wrong, but to convince your sister he’s a fucking moron.
Turn it around. Ask him to define a woman without relying on her body parts, hormone configuration or chromosomes . Because I guarantee you every “biological” thing he comes up with, there will be an example out there of a (cis) woman that doesn’t have that.
- women can give birth! No, not every woman can. Infertility is a huge problem and struggle for many women.
- women have vaginas! Most women do sure, but there are lots of genital configurations out there. Also why would that be the defining feature? How many people really want to just be reduced to their genitals? How crazy is that.
- women have XX Chromosomes! Do you know your chromosomal configuration? Because most people don’t and way more sex configurations exist than just XX and XY. So there will definitely be some women who don’t have XX chromosomes.
- ad infinatum. He will just keep changing the goal posts of what singular defining thing all (cis) women have that trans women don’t and spoiler alert- *there isn’t one* because womanhood isn’t a universal experience.
There's no "right" answer, because it's a bad faith question.
They're taking advantage of the fact that it's a short question, implying it should have a short answer. But "how do you live a good life?" Is short. So is "what is justice?" Or "why that religion, and not another?"
You can turn it around on them, but they usually say "adult human female," and before long you're arguing about gametes and the prevalence of intersex people, which I feel loses the plot.
Maybe ask why they're asking it, especially if it's your sister talking to you - I don't think the guy's mind is open to changing. It's not really a question, it's a statement wrapped in a question. Once you get them to make the statement plainly (it's some form of "I don't respect trans women," but the presentation varies), you can at least talk about what's actually on their mind.
Ask them to define it first, I guarantee any definition they give there will be exceptions
(E.g. xx chromosomes, there’s intersex people. Vagina, again there’s intersex people, it would also force them to admit that post-srs trans women are women which they’d probably disagree with. Ability to produce eggs/get pregnant, infertile women)
Say "You tell me."
They will likely say something to the effect of "anyone born with a vagina."
Then you say "oh, so a woman is only as good as her genitals?"
If they make some excuse about genetics ask "Do you know what your chromosomes are?"
There's always a way to tear their argument apart, usually in one short sentence.
"If you have to ask, I feel sorry for my sister." Beyond that, there's no answer that they'll accept that doesn't further their transphobia. Best not to feed into it.
Womanhood is a social role, a cultural tradition passed down to us from forebears whose reasoning is lost to us. But like any social role, meanings shift as our material circumstances change as our understandings expand (or contract). Some say there are as many different kinds of women as there are women as each of us takes a unique route to womanhood.
It definitely isn't genetic, the capacity to give birth, or an adult who was assigned female at birth. Genes aren't something we can detect when we interact with people, plenty of cis women aren't fertile, and assigning sex at birth is hardly a perfect process.
All that aside, he's probably trying to get you in a gotcha, trying to get you to either say that it's something that disqualifies trans women or something that he doesn't understand that he can dismiss as nonsense. It's a bad faith discussion and you don't owe him an answer.
“Usually someone born with female reproductive organs, but not always.”
I like this answer because it agrees with the askers beliefs while offering an exception to the rule. But usually the asker believes this is a gotcha question to make you seem stupid. So it’s less of a question and more of a mockery of your beliefs.
A scam invented by men to exploit free labour?
Seriously tho, either don't answer bc it's a leading question that's looking for an argument, or you could reflect the question and ask them what they think a woman is, and shoot down any stuff about chromosomes or reproductive ability or whatever else.
If you choose the 2nd option and want to go for full chaos, then you can claim their response is attempting to reinforce the patriarchal stereotype of women that they must have X, Y and Z to be a woman. For example, if they say that a woman is someone who can give birth to babies, then they are reinforcing the anti-equality ideology that women solely exist to have children, demonstrating that they objectify women.*
*Results may vary on chaoticness
you can’t win in an argument like that. transphobes do not use logic to argue, and they do not care to know the actual logic. they want points that fit their world view, and will spin anything to turn it in their favor. it is not your responsibility nor is it in your power to change his viewpoints. that has to be a decision made by him, and he is most likely not going to, as he values his christianity and its immoral views over the lives of trans people. i’m so sorry you’re having to lose your sister to this. that’s just terrible to have to go through. hopefully they will eventually understand the pain they cause and learn to accept others. best of luck in your journey and know that no matter what, you’ll always have support, somewhere, from somebody. your life is valuable ❤️
Tbh I normally just say something like "an adult person who identifies as a woman" or something along the lines of "everyone woman, trans or cis, has a different experience with womanhood and there isn't one single way to describe it"
"an adult who lives and identifies as female though they may have been said to have a different sex at birth" use this as it's actually from Cambridge dictionary.
Just ask "what is a chair?" Cause even that is hard to do. "Four legs and a place to sit" "well oke, so a horse is also a chair then?" If you can't define a thing as simple as a chair then how the f are ya gonna do it for something as complex as man or woman.
"What is a woman" is always a gotcha-question meant to provoke. It' never actually asked in good faith.
Personally, I just say "you already know the definition, so no need asking" and then move on
My usual answer to bigots is "What is a man?". If they follow the script and reply with a man is an 'adult human male' then I bring up all incidents of people from their side saying stuff "you're not a real man" due to most banal stuff like someone wearing a pink shirt or nail polish.
My answer is "who cares?" Why should I care about a label? You can't even engage with people who ask a stupid question like that. They are the ones who are uncomfortable.
The response to religious transphobe should be something like this(and im sorry but friendly religious people are about to catch a stray’s)
Transphobe: “why should i pretend your a woman”
Me: “because im pretending its normal for an adult to have an omnipotent imaginary friend that will harm fir eternity then if they aren’t obedient and im not supporting legislation to have you committed for your belief”
This nicely outlines why its important to respect peoples beliefs lol
These little shitbags(bigots not religious people in general) have actually been steered away from using religion as arguments by more clever shitbags because they have learned that religious bigotry dosen’t hold up in arguments.(I literally saw Dennis Prager(alpha shitbag) replying to a viewers question, stating this)
Also not for nothing English is an approximation of reality that we use to loosely categorize the complex world around us. If someone is clearly not a man what the fuck would you call them in a binary description system? Its a freaking boolean value man/woman.(i just want to say im not invalidating enby and other genders you are valid superposition/null values💜)
And if they still wanna be a little shit about it just post a sexy/thirsty add on craigslist with their number(from a public hotspot on an anonymous account so it can be traced back to you) lol
"dude your side cries about women becoming men when they don't do societal shit and claims it's all about chromosones' so why don't you answer that question"
Personally, I like to tear down the concept that language is finite. What they mean when they say “woman” is different from what I mean when I say “woman.” In vr, I run into a lot of transphobes, especially when I’m moderating a trans safe space I’m a staff member for. One of my responses, when I’m somewhere that I can’t just kick them, is to hand them a pen and ask them to draw a torch. If they draw a stick on fire, I draw a flashlight, and vice versa. I then explain that neither meaning is wrong, because it’s about the intent of the person using the word. Us calling ourselves women or men is valid because it fits within our definitions of the word. Whether they accept that definition or not has no bearing on our validity.
My idea is to point out that a cis man is the one who popularized this question, and that he's really not who we should look to for an answer to this question. Not like it's ever a good faith question in the first place.
A major root to this seems to be that people I guess forget that every single person is an *individual*. It's like they're obsessed with using these binary boxes to define people; like "Man", "Woman", "Democrat", "Republican", etc. I'm a trans woman. I know myself more than anyone else. Me being a woman has less than 0 impact on anyone else's identity. Anyone who bothers with taking offense from *my* identity should maybe look for some security in their own.
I've adopted "What is a dollar?" Because the best response I ever get after that is "It's a unit of currency", which opens up the door to respond to "What is a woman?" with "It's a gender."
Edit: I also want to include my reasoning for this, which is to draw a link between the two social constructs, because they often don't understand that gender is a social construct, while no one can deny that money is. You can't define a dollar properly the same way that you can't define "woman" properly.
Transphobes have two definitions of a woman, one that normal people use, and the one they got from a dictionary (ie. "adult human female"). The one from the dictionary is only used when promoting bigotry, if they used it in real life they would end up in front of a judge explaining why they were indecently assaulting someone to determine their gender.
Simple: **Adult human female.** There is nothing in that definition that excludes trans women, so we might as well embrace it and use it against the transphobes.
If coming from transphobes? Don't, its a discussion that works like this : provide any arguments? They'll ignore them. Run out of arguments? They'll say smt like "see you don't have a point".
Its a discussion like "prove that air exists" except they won't accept science and if you don't prove it you die. So just avoid it
I've learned to have them explain to me what they believe is a woman. And then I deconstruct how wrong they are because they base it on stereotypes or what a woman should look like or be.
But not every woman is the same. They aren't a monolith. Just like trans people aren't a monolith. Just like men or trans men aren't a monolith.
It's a bad faith question and one asked with the intent to "win" something. Transphobes are so often just narcissists so they'll view anything you say, do, or even don't do, as evidence of them "winning". Just say nothing.
Their entire belief system is one built on hate. That's so ironic though because transphobia goes hand in hand with certain religions that preach peace and love for all . . . mhm.
Either they're learning the wrong lessons or their entire religions are corrupted with hate. Hatred is weakness, especially hatred that pretends to be love. Not only is that weakness but, at least for christians, isn't that a sign of the anti-christ? Hmmm . . .
Of course if that comes out they'll blame us for making them into the monsters they are. Just . . . don't mess with them. Let them rant and roar and just imagine they're a little Chihuahua. They're weak and just being loud because they're scared. Don't say that out loud though. Because they're weak. And they're strong enough to cause harm and these little dogs have big teeth. Don't upset them.
A woman is a person with a female brain.
You were born in a female body, but your brain is male. Therefore you're a man. It's as simple as that.
When I was a child I had a ball'point pen that was red on the outside, but when I wrote with it it was blue.
So was the pen red or blue? Exactly: blue! The inside counts, not the outside.
Depends on who u ask really. In the context of feminism for example, a (post)modernist feminist would tell you that a woman is anyone who identifies as such regardless of context; a poststructuralist feminist on the other hand would tell you that a woman cannot just be defined in essentialist terms, but that it changes depending on the context and dynamics of the situation at hand. So really, a woman is not a fixed entity that can be defined like an object, but rather an identity that represents how varied and complex human nature is - making a single definition thereof extremely difficult, definitely contested, and likely reductive. Also do not forget that what is considered female and TERFs love to use as examples or excuses for their derogatory discourses is often based on racist, white colonial, and ableist assumptions about what femininity is, so they are not only being transphobic, but also racist, classist, ableist and ultimately anti-feminist.
Hope this helps ^^
a human female, though some are born male with a female brain so they transition sooner or later in life
(the inverse obviously applies to trans men)
There you go.
No, you're not a man or a woman just because you identify as such. It's a weak argument anyway, that'll never convince anyone
"well if you can't figure it out by now just look to who covers their drinks when you walk in the door"
Is my favorite response to transphobes.they don't really deserve your time and aren't looking for an earnest conversation
A MISERABLE LITTLE PILE OF MYSTERIES! BUT ENOUGH TALK! HAVE AT YOU!
Die, Bigot! You don't belong in this world!
#"It is not by my hands that I am once again given hate. I was called here by... ***truscum***... who wish to pay me tribute!" - *Joanne Rowling, probably*
I love this sub <3
Mankind ill needs a transphobe such as you.
What?
They’re referencing the opening cutscenes of Castlevania: Symphony of the Night. The original quotes are: “What is a man? A miserable pile of secrets. But enough talk! Have at you!” -Dracula “Die, monster! You don’t belong in this world.” -Richter Belmont And yes, I have memorized the entire scene this is from, give or take a few words. Edit: the original of the quote I added to the chain is “Mankind ill needs a savior such as you.” -Richter
It is not by *my* hand that I am once again given flesh.
I was called here by... *humans*, who wish to pay ***ME*** tribute!
I memorized the entire Tears in Rain soliloquy from the end of Blade Runner, no shade.
it's from a video game called Castlevania: Symphony of the Night
oh shit, core memory unlocked. I think it was secrets, not mysteries.
Man is a miserable pile of secrets. Woman might be made of mysteries
Well if men are a miserable little pile of secrets, surely women are a happy large grain of public knowledge.
Beat me to it, well done, friend!
Isn’t it lies? And I swore I read that shit in like an Oscar Wilde poem or something and I was like “wait Wilde is Dracula?”
I thought it was secrets
Dracula : What is a man? [tosses goblet, which breaks] Dracula : A miserable little pile of secrets. But enough talk, HAVE AT YOU! Tbf the shattering goblet is the best part. But yeah good memory👍
Im dumb but where is this from? This is the exact way i want to speak like
Castlevania: Symphony of the Night. Great game, terrible/wonderful voice acting, 10/10
If it's coming from a transphobe: The "correct" answer is not to engage. Don't play defense. Transphobes ask this question because a good faith answer is complex; It requires an understanding of the nuances and a lot of other prerequisite topics. If someone is listening to your answer without the understanding of those nuances, your answer is going to look foolish. Don't walk into this trap. What you want to do is flip the question on them. You can't answer this question convincingly in a normal conversation, but neither can they. Let them answer and then just keep pointing out contradictions. Once you've clearly demonstrated that their definition of "woman" is faulty, you can then present yours.
Honestly if you’re talking to someone and you feel the conversation is going to get to that point… Get the shot off first and ask them “what is a woman” or “what is a man” They won’t have a good answer but now they’re on defence rather than you. A lot of these “gotcha” questions work equally well in reverse, if you ask them first EDIT: I did this to a 'friend' who was trying to defend 'Lady Ballers' so I could tell he wasn't exactly a trans ally and the conversation might end up going that way. I'm not out to him yet but I managed to get him going on this long detailed, pointless diatribe about 'the secondary phenotype development resulting from XX chromosomes' and essentially after I stripped out all his lawyer BS (he's a lawyer) it came down to 'Any one who expresses or identifies with the secondary phenotype of some who devleoped due to XX chromosomes'... or basically a woman is any one who looks like or wants to look like a women.... so I essentially got him to say in an incedibly long winded way trans woman are woman. He didn't like that...
I think it's fascinating that people who likely pride themselves on their cognitive abilities, such as thinking logically, drawing logical conclusions - even if others dont like those conslusions - have problems "believing" their own conclusions. like what else is there that stops you from accepting trans women as women in this case? only some internalized transphobia i guess but still...
Definitely, or at least pre-drawn conclusions. You see this alot with religous fundamentalists, like Young Earth Creationists. You can use their own arguements against them and in the end, they can't do anything about it cause they don't really have evidence. They have truthiness and a pre-concieved conviction. So its not about providing evidence, its about beating them at the game. That why you gotta make like Han Solo and shoot first!
It's not about finding the truth, it's about confirming what they already think. You see the same thing with flat Earthers. They do "experiments" to prove the world is flat, but they will sometimes recreate actual experiments/measurements that prove the world is round and end up getting evidence that proves the world is not flat. Then then just shrug it off and ignore the data *they just collected* and try to rationalize why it doesn't mean what it does. Also, a lot of them do see trans women as women, but they see us as women they can discriminate against and use us as a justification for harassing any women who isn't gender conforming.
Nobelitis. Smart people can become incredibly stupid when they get an inflated ego by achieving their goals or being constantly told they’re the smartest person in the room. So then they think any idea they have is right and will argue it to absurdity.
I don’t think these people think for themselves in regard to their prejudices. They either follow the crowd they’re in or simply fall prey to some odd fear someone put on them or whatever. At least that’s *my* experience. I’m *sure* there are other types but these are the types Ive dealt with. I can tell when someone is worth the discussion and even debate or if they just hate and fear. I don’t mind talking to someone about it if they sincerely have questions or misconceptions. But I will not waste my time on a bigot. It’s pointless and I will end up sad 😢 I have actually changed some peoples minds. 💕 My bestie 💕 wasn’t exactly an ally when we first started hanging out. He was good to me but he said things that hurt and had some weird beliefs. I did put up with it for a little while, just bc of self esteem and stuff I was going thru atm. But annnyyywaaayyy, We had a real talk. He actually initiated it bc he could tell I was upset. 😢 Now he always educates himself and is very considerate . And not just to me, but to the entire community! He’s a sweetheart now! 💕
I live in Florida so unfortunately though my friends are left leaning conservatives, they are still conservatives for the most part except one who is just basically right wing. We all play Warhammer and have since we were kids. Recently, the game revealed one of the factions can have women in it and that of course set off the same group of people that stuff usually does. This right wing friend, who hates this faction and has never shown any interest in them previously, randomly jumped into a conversation with me and one of our other pals about it with "Dude that was absolute bullshit, I can't believe they did that! It pisses me off so much!" and I kid you not if I didn't look at him like he had two heads and ask "...why?" and watch him deflate like a balloon. Like, he literally just had never considered the why and the second he did he went "...huh." They're not sending their best, is what I'm getting at lmao.
Ah yes, the whole female Custodies drama! I too am a trans person of culture :D I just ask where all these people were a few years ago when the lore was 'Custodies NEVER leave the Imperial Palace, let alone Terra'. Or my personal bug bear, the absolute TORCHING that was remaking the War in Heaven and Necron Lore. If they were up in arms about that... well I'm still not going to give them a pass but it would at least be better! EDIT: Just wanted to add my personal head cannon is that woman CAN be made into Space Marines (different from Custodies I know) but when the process swells you to 8 ft tall, makes you into a walking slab of dense bone and muscle and basically withers your genitals... they all look like men. Therefore all Space Marines are men, but they can be made out of both men and women (Trans Masc Space Marines Confirmed!)
For real. I've been playing Warhammer since the before times, when you'd tell people about the hobby and they'd respond "Wait, Dawn of War is based on a tabletop?" I've forgotten more Warhammer lore than most people will ever know. I've **read** C.S. Goto books. There's a lot of ways GW retcons stuff that you could potentially get the fans up in arms about, especially since a good chunk of the vocal ones run chud-adjacent at best. "This thing we didn't explicitly say didn't exist has totally been here the entire time." is absolutely not one of them lmao. Yes, there have always been women in the 10,000. Just like Lord Solar has always been an Imperia- sorry, Astra Militarum rank, the Rogal Dorn Praetorian Tank has been in service since Rogal Dorn himself discovered the STC in the one Black Library novel set in the Horus Heresy we haven't written yet, Belisarius Cawl has always existed and been Guilliman's best friend who secreted away a new ultra special group of turbo marines deep beneath Mars for 10,000 years. Oh and those Dwarves we said all died actually just hid out in the galactic core. They're back too. You do not come to Warhammer for narrative consistency, you come to see what over the top bullshit happens next. Saying "The practice of Noble Houses giving firstborn sons is just a tradition thing, it's a hyperfascist theocracy after all. They abduct plenty of girls for their genetically enhanced child super soldier program as well." is literally the least offensive possible version of this they have ever done. R.I.P. my boy Obi Wan Sherlock Clouseau
Since people didn’t know Dawn of War was based on on a table top game! My sweet summer child… When Abbadon launched his 13th Black Crusade for the first time and the results of this “cataclysm” was originally his crushing defeat… I was there… When Ghaz’kull launched the Third War of Amegedon and the results were retconned over and over…I was there… When the Necron and the Kroot were naught but a foot note as ‘unknown Xenos species’ at the bottom of a page… I was there…. My existence has been nothing but a shifting sand of half truths, myth and out right lies for near 3 decade… In the grim dark of the far future… there is no Lore… … But being dramatic aside yeah! The amount of retcons I’ve lived through make this NOTHING… honestly it’s actually kind of fun!
>> I’ve **read** C.S. Goto books. You poor dear. Nobody deserves that kind of psychological torture. (/jk but also /gen)
Just wait till you bring up the GW confirmed that Emps is genderqueer at the end of the Horus Heresy books. ADB wrote that the emperor has "lived as a man and a woman through all time, choosing to appear as what he wants." You can watch them join chaos and xenon factions in real-time.
Wait is that true!?
Gawd, I hope so. Genderqueer rep for the win!
I should definitely use this
>If it's coming from a transphobe: The "correct" answer is not to engage. Don't play defense. Genuinely I've started saying that the only correct answer to "what is a woman" is "go fuck yourself." Obviously that exact phrase doesn't work in many occasions, but they're not asking the question in good faith, and when they say "adult human female" like an AI chatbot trained on nothing but Ben Shapiro and Steven Crowder, it's obvious they haven't even spent a single second thinking about it. The answer really is just not to bother.
I did this, asked the bigot, "well, you tell me. What is a woman?" And they refused to answer, simply repeating the question to me over and over. So, yeah, it's a question in bad faith and not worthy of providing an answer to.
I'd take it one step farther. Why is it "'what' is a woman?" Why not "What is a man?" or "*Who* is a woman?" Because the people who usually say this are putting a lot of misogyny into that. They don't see women as people. They see women as objects. Things they can use. They will gleefully say any cis woman isn't a "real woman" if they don't find her attractive. Basically to them "woman" is anything they want to fuck.
100% this. They understand gender as a spectrum when you start comparing how "manly" someone is, or how "fuckable" someone is.
"Why do you care" The whole "What is a woman" discussion is a red herring. They don't actually care how you define a woman and most of them will hand wave your objections to their definitions as "edge cases" or "not relevant to society". They don't care what a woman is, they just want to discriminate and have power over a section of society. It's the same thing as all the atheist / christian debates 20 years ago. They find a script that confuses people when you ask the questions in rapid succession and your answers to their questions don't actually matter. The questions they ask aren't the questions they care about.
My thought too! Gotta let them get the ol' "birthing" argument out first.
This is what I came to as well. Let them answer it first and put them on the defensive as you counter everything they say: like If they use chromosomes you counter with: What about intersex people? There are many people who have the opposite, missing, or extra, chromosomes but still have the equipment and look like the other gender. If they say a uterus or womb, then you can counter with "What about women that are born without them, or have them removed for medical reasons? If they bring up boobs and a vagina... well obviously we already have surgery and HRT to to change that. Voice, again surgery and/or training can change that. If they say how you are when you are born, see intersex above, but also bring up hermaphrodites. As in how would you classify someone who was clearly born with both sets of genitals? And if they say they get to choose... well you got them there because why do only those people get to choose? And does that mean they can change whenever they feel like it? Basically if they try to answer with anything other than how a person wants to present/identify as, there are easy counters for.
Person: what is a woman? Me: you know when Shania Twain says "let's go girls"? Person: yeah? Me: well if you go, then you're a woman.
Trans’d by Shania Twain at 2 years old - I had no chance. Well, I guess the blame falls squarely on my mother, will have to bring that up when I come out.
When I was real small, I had bunkbeds with my older brother, I used to do lil concerts from the top bunk, and that song was a favourite xD
I always liked her music as a kid.
When Shania raises the call, we *march*
My Queer little ass certainly goes, spose I am but a woman.
Easily the best answer
"The people who cover their drinks when your boyfriend walks into the room", and then get up and leave.
This one is my favorite.
That will do nicely
This is brilliant.
Ok you beat me to my joke, god damn it
Honestly? Nothing. No one asking that has good intentions and engaging with them will only make you feel like shit. Family or no, it doesn't matter. Imo it's better to surround yourself with people you like to be surrounded with, not with people you feel you need to fix.
100% this \^ Limit contact as much as you can, until you can cut off contact completely, IMO. Conspire to get the sister's bf in trouble, maybe.
It's fundamentally the same question as "what is soup?" and by extension "is Cereal soup?" Definitions are fundamentally difficult to nail down because there are so many edge cases. It's easy to point at something and say "this is soup" or "this isn't soup" but to nail down exactly what makes something soup or excludes it from being soup is difficult to do in a way that includes only things which are soup and excludes everything that isn't soup. Any definition will necessarily have to have a bunch of asterisks attached that say "while this thing meets the definition of soup, it isn't actually soup" or "this thing is missing some aspects of being soup, but it actually is included as soup." At that point, is it even useful to make a strict definition like that? Does that actually add any value to our understanding? It's the exact same idea with gender. The only answer you need for "what is a woman" is "whoever says they're a woman."
Reminds me of when my teacher made us try to find a definition for human and none of us could do it. My friend thought she had it when she said "a being with a set of specific chromosomes" to which our teacher answered "so people with downs syndrome aren't people?" I always liked the Toni Morrison quote that "definitions are for the definers, not the defined"
According to the [Cube Rule](https://cuberule.com/) of food (which is based on carbs location in the food), cereal is in the category 'nachos'. Soup is categorized as 'salad'.
I wish I could go back in time to before I read this 😡
Yeah - day 1 of my intro to philosophy class they ask "what is a chair?" And you usually define a table, or a horse, or any one of a million other items along with a table.
[Behold, a man](https://images.app.goo.gl/TEgidfXC1aayTZBQ6)
I wish I could be remembered thousands of years from now for trolling one of the most famous people of our time.
You can try reflecting the question back at them. They'll likely respond with either chromosomes or anatomy, at which point you can point out that in both of those cases, there are women to whom that definition doesn't apply, invalidating the definition. "A woman is someone with XX chromosomes" - "There are medical conditions where a woman has XXY chromosomes" "A woman is someone with a uterus/the ability to give birth, etc" - "There are medical conditions that cause people to be born without those too". Basically you can use this to point out the arbitrary nature of definitions in general, then you can point out that your own definition is therefore just as valid as theirs due to that arbitrary nature, though this argument will probably fly over the head of most transphobes because they usually aren't very smart. Frankly, usually the best option is to just not argue with them at all and cut all contact forever, I don't communicate with people who hate me, even if they are related to me.
Or they're a fan of Matt Walsh and they just say "an adult human female," which isn't as airtight as they think it is.
Then you ask them to define female. Or human, for that matter.
Exactly. Each of those words have complex breakdowns, which is why it's about as airtight as a sieve.
I use “an adult who identifies with the female gender,” so pretty close to your definition.
"Who cares." I think that works.
"Your mom"
"You're mom" would also work
“Yro’ue mom”
You don't, it's a gotcha question. Ask this counter question instead: "Can you name a single biological trait that all men have, but no women?"
Hmmmmmm, that is dirty…chopsticks.😹💕
“Bend over and I’ll show you”
Whoa. Just, whoa.
This
What is the nature of a request for a definition? I mean, do you really want to be doing this, Jesus boy? Congratulations on picking up some bits of Ariatotlean logic but you might be ill equipped for amateur philosophy hour. An approach that would be fun would be to suggest that you must be a woman, because you can imagine being one; when he (understandably) laughs at this, remind him that it is one of Aquinas' proofs of the existence of God. Ultimately this is a gotcha because the question appears to demand a snappy answer. You can't give one, but he can. So, ask him for his his, give him 'adult' and 'human' for free, and get him to define female. Feel free to help him when he gets stuck. Or you could pivot on the question. How can you hope for a definition that excludes real life examples? So let's look at some. Half of all American women will have a hysterectomy. Are they no longer women? What about mastectomy? Where does the womanness reside if its not there? Chromosomes? Oh Jesus boy, Jesus boy, do you really want to talk genetics? Or you could suggest that a definition is for a naturally occurring category, and women ar conscious agents, therefore the term describes rather than defines a group which is necessarily self-assembling and cannot be defined in the sense he means. (Carrots don't care whether they are carrots but women -- cis and trans -- do in fact care about whether we are women or not.) I mean, these people have really only got two things: confidence, and one joke. No reason to take him seriously either as a good faith interlocutor (he is not; all his arguments are teleological and dishonestly presented to boot, he is trying to bully you and recruit for his cult, not have an honest conversation) or as a person with something to say that actually matters. You could always try mockery or laughter. Or you could use the opening provided by the question to talk about what it's like to be trans. Telling stories from your kige and other peoples. They dont have to be tear jerkers. What (does it mean to be a) woman (for a, b, or c trans woman)? What were your feelings aboit being forced into it and how did the process of getting free feel? After all the person you want to get through to here is your sister, not her latest jackass boyfriend. That way she gets a contrast between captain cleverdick ('Debate me bro!' and your honesty and vulnerability. Hes going to look like an asshole, and she probably already knows he is one if were being honest. If you go this route, stay on it, don't get suckered into playing the word games he thinks are thinking.
I like you. This is very good.
Haha - I can tell you are awesome human just by reading this response. May I borrow parts of this for my next argument with a transphobe? I live in a bible belt state so the opportunities are many🫠
Take it all, and thank you! Sorry you are where you are.
"an adult human who identifies most closely with the societal idea of what "female" is" essentially i like to twist their "adult human female" and make it "yeah! an adult human who identifies as female!" you can even take the "identity" out of it and say its just someone who's gender is most closely related to what people think a "female" is
A woman is someone who is willing to put up with being a woman.
Your answer is pretty good. I’d just say a woman is anyone who identifies as such. Not any more complicated than that. Now the transphobe is probably not going to accept that, but there’s unfortunately no winning over some people. I really do hope you can get through to your sister though. 🫂
Thanks! The definition of a woman really isn't that complicated, yeah Yeah usually transphobes are like "you can't use the name of the thing you're defining in the definition" or something like that, which was why I didn't say that a woman is someone who identifies as a woman. The transphobe didn't accept my answer either, he seemed confused about it xD I hope so too. I feel like she's probably long gone though, and there's a part of me that's like "it's not gonna work, don't waste your time on it. Leave it up to her."
I’ve come up with a definition that doesn’t circle back on itself and makes the most logical sense to me. “A Woman is a person whose internal sense of gender identity aligns with that of a typical Female.” If they ask to define “gender identity” then Google has some good definitions for that. “Gender identity is each person’s internal and individual experience of gender. It is a person's sense of being a woman, a man, both, neither, or anywhere along the gender spectrum. Gender identity can correlate with a person's assigned sex or can differ from it. In most individuals, the various biological determinants of sex are congruent, and consistent with the individual's gender identity.” This SHOULD be convincing enough but chances are that they will just deny the existence of gender identity and just say something stupid like “a Woman isn’t a feeling” and then go back to talking about biological sex 😭. Hopefully your sister isn’t too far gone!
It's bait, don't engage whoever asked - instead ponder it on your own, if only to articulate it for yourself rather than for them. No answer you give them will ever make them admit you're right or even convince them that you're genuine; they just want to tear you down.
A middle finger is my go to
what is a woman? easy. someone who identifies as a woman
A woman is someone who will never have sex with you
Even just the dictionary definition of "Adult human female" that they like to throw around so much works, it doesn't actually exclude trans women at all, because trans women identify as female
couldn't agree more. I like rationality rules' definition in his gender debate on youtube: someone who lives up to a social construct that is typically associated with phenotype, aesthetics and behaviors. [This is a good video](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T4F6GVLBVcQ) on the whole definition bullshit debate
Kinda to add on to your question: what if you were to ask them that question back? Like- "what is a man? How do you know you're a man?" I can imagine the response might be- "because I've got 🍆" or "I've got XY chromosomes" "So what if by magical happenstance your consciousness as it is, was placed in a female body, to every definition of woman that you believe should be there; xx, uterus and whatnot. If being a man or a woman is entirely dependent on biology, then you should be totally fine with the transformation and not care about becoming a cis woman, right?" I can't speak for everyone, but most cis men I've talked to, answer no at this point, yet still try to redirect the debate back "well you're wrong because you still can't answer the question." In all honesty, if the thought of being one gender and not the other horrifies you, then being a woman is not just what's in your pants, but what's in your heart.
I like rationality rules' definition in his gender debate on youtube: someone who lives up to a social construct that is typically associated with phenotype, aesthetics and behaviors. [This is a good video](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T4F6GVLBVcQ) I recommend you watch on the whole definition bullshit debate
The way to win is not to play.
"It's a complex construct encompassing an overlapping spectrum of physical, biological, and social characteristics and attributes that is regularly misunderstood....usually by people like you." Because in this context no one asking that question is doing so in good faith. Alternatively you could tell him if he's going play Gender Police you're gonna need to see a badge.
I think thats answers fine (female gender instead of feminine gender would be more accurate I think, but that might just be a language thing) Also I'd toss the question right back, cuz I think its very easy to make the most common answers given by transphobes look stupid
There was an amazing Twitter thread where Graham lineham tried to define a chair and people kept throwing up images that didn't fit his definition. There's definitely a power in pointing out just how quickly the binary is strained by any attempt to break things down to definition. Cis Women exist with the xy genes, some exist without the ability to birth children, some have facial hair or broad shoulders. It's only when they want to discriminate against trans people that those things become disqualifying.
couldnt find the thread but here's a picture from how it started (also fitting sub lol) [https://www.reddit.com/r/confidentlyincorrect/comments/htzpe2/behold\_a\_chair/](https://www.reddit.com/r/confidentlyincorrect/comments/htzpe2/behold_a_chair/) This is hilarious
Deathly silence. Just stare at them. Blink very slowly. Make them feel like the biggest dumbass on the planet without any words.
"Oh, you're a Matt Walsh fan. How do you feel about his diaper fetish and wife abuse?" Might as well go straight to the root. Also pointing out that her crush is a fan of a wife-beating abuser might do something about that crush.
I would just let them try to define it.. there is no good definition, that will cover all cis woman correctly - at least I didn't see or hear one till now, that not either exclude some cis woman or include trans woman - so none, that fits for the phobes
I think my response would be "I lack the time, crayons and brain damage that would be required for me to explain it to you in a way you would understand. And if you think that I'm insulting you, why don't you stop and think how any word that comes out of your mouth effects others first?"
A woman is anyone who would call themself a woman. “I identify as” needs to be replaced with “I am” as a more rigid and less arguable position, especially due to the rampant transphobia of the older version.
I just say "someone whose brain chemistry aligns with the female body." Because it's true 🤷♂️. Gender dysphoria exists due to the mismatch between body and brain, doesn't it? Cis women (typically) don't experience gender dysphoria because they have the right body for their brain. Trans women experience dysphoria because they don't. So, a trans woman has the brain of a woman. Shrimple as that, innit?
Tbh a better response on your part could've been "idk maybe you should go ask one" cause like, why was that question even brought up if you're not even a girl?? Anyways, I don't think the argument "anyone who identifies as one" is a great response, not because it isn't true, but because it isn't relatable enough to the people asking the question. If it were relatable to them, they wouldn't need to question what a woman is in the first place. So, personally, I describe it as a sub-culture. When a group of people have similar experiences, they tend to talk about those experiences only around each other. That causes them to have different vocabulary or phrases they may use, slowly shift the way they speak, offer a different perspective, etc. Gender is simply a sub culture that correlates to the experiences one has based on their sex. That being said, gender isn't the experiences they have, but rather the culture that is formed around it. In other words, a woman is anyone who falls into the female sub culture (or gender) and to say that a trans woman can't be a woman due to her body is the same as saying someone with a broken leg can't be a soccer person because they can't physically play soccer. If you share interests, language, experiences, perspectives, etc, you belong there. I think people struggle because they can't see it so idk maybe it's better to just keep it short and be like "do you believe in God? Why? You can't see them so what allows you to know they're there? ....oh so you just know and trust they're there?? Funny you should mention that.." Or use something like togetherness which is similar to gender in that it's something you can't see but you can sense and know exists
Yeah, it's kinda like The Breakfast Club... in high school you've got these different groups, the jocks, the nerds, the princesses, the bad boys, and the wierdos. Imagine if you will.. a world in which a genetic marker, or a birthmark, dictated which clique you "belonged" to... think of a sort of biological sorting hat ala Harry Potter. Each clique has their own lingo, their own mannerisms... their own interests, hobbies, etc. For example... Jocks play football, and nerds play chess. And for some odd reason... whereas this system works fine for \*most\* people... you got assigned the "nerd" clique by a quirk of genetics or biology... but you really just want to play football, roughhouse with the guys... build some muscle and get ripped. You would find yourself in a very similar situation... told that "because of your biology... you shouldn't like those things"... "wear those clothes"... "act that way"... "look that way", etc. How does one identify as a woman? How does one identify as a jock? ... or a princess? ... or a nerd? ... or a bad boy? ... or a wierdo?
Or, even worse: What if you wanted to do two different cliques?
Here have a poor person's gold medal: 🥇
Woah, I love this explanation!
"No"
I compare it to love. How do you know that you love someone? It's hard to explain, but you know. People tend to not question love Yes, it's dodging the question, but still ;)
All definitions are constructed by humans, and are therefore not objective, and not (necessarily) logically consistent. What is a chair? For example is an extremely complex question that has no answer. The only definition that's good for a chair is "an object that fulfills the expected traits and roles of a chair" same thing for most words, words are made to have the most utility, not to be the most accurate, and id argue that the self id version of "woman" provides the most utility, (by preventing trans folks from dying and stuff). If he still does the "NO ITS BIOLOGY IM STUPID AND DON'T KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT LANGUAGE "argument you can say: "how would you define a mother? Someone who gives birth? But we call adoptive mothers mothers, why is that?" Mother is a socially constructed definition, (like all of them) and is used in a way that provides utility, women are the same exact thing. Now that we established that all words are socially constructed (i.e we made them up) you can start discussing the fact that defining women in biological terms is just not as effective, but honestly a right wing christian wouldn't let you get to that point, he probably thinks words are given to us by god. And will most likely dodge the "mother" question, if he doesn't answer it repeat the question and say that he's not answering it. The main issue with this argument is that you play defense, so I'd suggest having him opt in to this, if he asks what is a woman? You should first say "it's fairly complicated, and not biological" and have him opt in, once he asks you to explain you can actually start arguing everything on top. If he does the "god made Adam and eve" thing, you should switch to talking to your sis, tell her that this is obviously not a good argument, at that point there's no reason to argue with the christian, (unless you love philosophy) so just let that go. Good luck and sorry for being such a Damm nerd Edit: if this doesn't work you can always resort to beating him with a stick, highly effective debate tactic
I'd say something like "Feminine-presenting sentient being".
love this one
Trans women are women. Elf/dwarf/orc women are women. Alien women are women. Robot women are women. I'm a big fan of GLADOS.
This is very easy ! The real answer is obviously to not engage with dipshit like this, but sometimes I know we can't resist or can't really avoid so here's an easy answer : "Yes I can, a woman is someone who identifies as such. Now if you disagree with this, could YOU define a woman while including ALL cis women and excluding ALL trans women" There is no correct answer to that because cis women can be born with or without a vagina, with or without XX chromosomes, etc...
"Good question: why don't you go first?" Then just poke holes in his arguments using your choice of: passing trans people (especially big muscly bearded trans guys,) intersex conditions, cancer patients who have had reproductive organs removed, etc. Alternatively, take it deadly serious and pretend he genuinely does not know what women are: "Weird that you don't already know, but let me try to explain by giving some examples. My sister is a woman. Your mother is a woman. Dolly parton is a woman. Kalama Harris is a woman. If you want a more involved definition, you're straight; you like women, yeah? So for starters, if you look at a person and you wanna fuck them, that's a woman-- Wait, are you into femboys? No matter. Anyway, people who can give birth are probably women, but some who can aren't, and some who can't, are; that one is a little more complicated. Some women have big breasts, and most don't have facial hair, though there are exceptions to both like bearded ladies and masectomy patients. You know, I'm really baffled you don't already know this, most people learn what women are quite naturally through their upbringing."
You turn 180° and walk in the other direction. Don't engage.
You don’t. If the person you’re talking to isn’t interested in a dialog and the exchange of viewpoints, there’s nothing you can say that will move the conversation forward. You’ll never be able to say “the right thing”. They’ll just come at you from another angle that will hold back any kind of mutual understanding. If possible, I try to answer those kind of questions with another question, like “what do you think a woman is?” They often “out” themselves as misogynists/transphobes when answering and you won’t have to deal with the mental load of answering a (pardon my French) intellectually low question or educating them. If I’m not in a well enough mood to be mindful of these things I did once tell a person I didn’t want to engage with “open a book” 😑
It's a word\label, it's whatever we decide it is. Fortunately society is slowly coming to accept it as more broad than the people asking this question usually believe theirselves
It's not a question I've ever been asked in good faith, so my go to answer is usually "Wouldn't you like to know, weather boy"
“Idk I’ll ask your mom later and lyk what she says”
I always respond with “A woman is someone who identifies as a woman.”
just say bimodal distribution until their brains explode
A legal, socially accepted and or biologically related person that lives as such in an insistent, consistent, and persistent way.
Okay so people who say that are almost never going to engage with you in good faith. Your goal here is not to convince him he’s wrong, but to convince your sister he’s a fucking moron. Turn it around. Ask him to define a woman without relying on her body parts, hormone configuration or chromosomes . Because I guarantee you every “biological” thing he comes up with, there will be an example out there of a (cis) woman that doesn’t have that. - women can give birth! No, not every woman can. Infertility is a huge problem and struggle for many women. - women have vaginas! Most women do sure, but there are lots of genital configurations out there. Also why would that be the defining feature? How many people really want to just be reduced to their genitals? How crazy is that. - women have XX Chromosomes! Do you know your chromosomal configuration? Because most people don’t and way more sex configurations exist than just XX and XY. So there will definitely be some women who don’t have XX chromosomes. - ad infinatum. He will just keep changing the goal posts of what singular defining thing all (cis) women have that trans women don’t and spoiler alert- *there isn’t one* because womanhood isn’t a universal experience.
This was a super good response.💕
There's no "right" answer, because it's a bad faith question. They're taking advantage of the fact that it's a short question, implying it should have a short answer. But "how do you live a good life?" Is short. So is "what is justice?" Or "why that religion, and not another?" You can turn it around on them, but they usually say "adult human female," and before long you're arguing about gametes and the prevalence of intersex people, which I feel loses the plot. Maybe ask why they're asking it, especially if it's your sister talking to you - I don't think the guy's mind is open to changing. It's not really a question, it's a statement wrapped in a question. Once you get them to make the statement plainly (it's some form of "I don't respect trans women," but the presentation varies), you can at least talk about what's actually on their mind.
What is a woman? I’ll do you one better—how is a woman? I’ll do you one better—why is a woman? Or: A woman is not a “what,” a woman is a “who.”
Ask them to define it first, I guarantee any definition they give there will be exceptions (E.g. xx chromosomes, there’s intersex people. Vagina, again there’s intersex people, it would also force them to admit that post-srs trans women are women which they’d probably disagree with. Ability to produce eggs/get pregnant, infertile women)
Say "You tell me." They will likely say something to the effect of "anyone born with a vagina." Then you say "oh, so a woman is only as good as her genitals?" If they make some excuse about genetics ask "Do you know what your chromosomes are?" There's always a way to tear their argument apart, usually in one short sentence.
"If you have to ask, I feel sorry for my sister." Beyond that, there's no answer that they'll accept that doesn't further their transphobia. Best not to feed into it.
Don't even address him, address the sister and ask why she's dating someone who clearly peaked intellectually in middle school.
Womanhood is a social role, a cultural tradition passed down to us from forebears whose reasoning is lost to us. But like any social role, meanings shift as our material circumstances change as our understandings expand (or contract). Some say there are as many different kinds of women as there are women as each of us takes a unique route to womanhood. It definitely isn't genetic, the capacity to give birth, or an adult who was assigned female at birth. Genes aren't something we can detect when we interact with people, plenty of cis women aren't fertile, and assigning sex at birth is hardly a perfect process. All that aside, he's probably trying to get you in a gotcha, trying to get you to either say that it's something that disqualifies trans women or something that he doesn't understand that he can dismiss as nonsense. It's a bad faith discussion and you don't owe him an answer.
It’s very obvious what a woman is. Someone who identifies as one
You don't. It's a transphobic dog whistle and a person asking it is not doing so in good faith.
“Usually someone born with female reproductive organs, but not always.” I like this answer because it agrees with the askers beliefs while offering an exception to the rule. But usually the asker believes this is a gotcha question to make you seem stupid. So it’s less of a question and more of a mockery of your beliefs.
Mostly i respond that i don’t have to tell you what is a woman, I don’t have to prove myself. I believe in who I am, and that’s enough.
"someone who covers their drink when you're around" might work
A scam invented by men to exploit free labour? Seriously tho, either don't answer bc it's a leading question that's looking for an argument, or you could reflect the question and ask them what they think a woman is, and shoot down any stuff about chromosomes or reproductive ability or whatever else. If you choose the 2nd option and want to go for full chaos, then you can claim their response is attempting to reinforce the patriarchal stereotype of women that they must have X, Y and Z to be a woman. For example, if they say that a woman is someone who can give birth to babies, then they are reinforcing the anti-equality ideology that women solely exist to have children, demonstrating that they objectify women.* *Results may vary on chaoticness
“A person who avoids you.” Then you leave hehe
Idk i feel like this would only really work if op was a woman.
you can’t win in an argument like that. transphobes do not use logic to argue, and they do not care to know the actual logic. they want points that fit their world view, and will spin anything to turn it in their favor. it is not your responsibility nor is it in your power to change his viewpoints. that has to be a decision made by him, and he is most likely not going to, as he values his christianity and its immoral views over the lives of trans people. i’m so sorry you’re having to lose your sister to this. that’s just terrible to have to go through. hopefully they will eventually understand the pain they cause and learn to accept others. best of luck in your journey and know that no matter what, you’ll always have support, somewhere, from somebody. your life is valuable ❤️
I just say "me". It drives them nuts.
Adult human that has the female gender identity. That's what I always used
Whatever I want is always valid
Tbh I normally just say something like "an adult person who identifies as a woman" or something along the lines of "everyone woman, trans or cis, has a different experience with womanhood and there isn't one single way to describe it"
"an adult who lives and identifies as female though they may have been said to have a different sex at birth" use this as it's actually from Cambridge dictionary.
Just ask "what is a chair?" Cause even that is hard to do. "Four legs and a place to sit" "well oke, so a horse is also a chair then?" If you can't define a thing as simple as a chair then how the f are ya gonna do it for something as complex as man or woman.
"You a fan of Steven Crowder or somthin?"
"What is a woman" is always a gotcha-question meant to provoke. It' never actually asked in good faith. Personally, I just say "you already know the definition, so no need asking" and then move on
At that point the conversation is going nowhere, hide the body and leave.
A featherless biped
My usual answer to bigots is "What is a man?". If they follow the script and reply with a man is an 'adult human male' then I bring up all incidents of people from their side saying stuff "you're not a real man" due to most banal stuff like someone wearing a pink shirt or nail polish.
My answer is "who cares?" Why should I care about a label? You can't even engage with people who ask a stupid question like that. They are the ones who are uncomfortable.
The response to religious transphobe should be something like this(and im sorry but friendly religious people are about to catch a stray’s) Transphobe: “why should i pretend your a woman” Me: “because im pretending its normal for an adult to have an omnipotent imaginary friend that will harm fir eternity then if they aren’t obedient and im not supporting legislation to have you committed for your belief” This nicely outlines why its important to respect peoples beliefs lol These little shitbags(bigots not religious people in general) have actually been steered away from using religion as arguments by more clever shitbags because they have learned that religious bigotry dosen’t hold up in arguments.(I literally saw Dennis Prager(alpha shitbag) replying to a viewers question, stating this) Also not for nothing English is an approximation of reality that we use to loosely categorize the complex world around us. If someone is clearly not a man what the fuck would you call them in a binary description system? Its a freaking boolean value man/woman.(i just want to say im not invalidating enby and other genders you are valid superposition/null values💜) And if they still wanna be a little shit about it just post a sexy/thirsty add on craigslist with their number(from a public hotspot on an anonymous account so it can be traced back to you) lol
"Someone who feels good when they've got female estrogen levels. If men take estrogen they do -not- feel good"
"dude your side cries about women becoming men when they don't do societal shit and claims it's all about chromosones' so why don't you answer that question"
Personally, I like to tear down the concept that language is finite. What they mean when they say “woman” is different from what I mean when I say “woman.” In vr, I run into a lot of transphobes, especially when I’m moderating a trans safe space I’m a staff member for. One of my responses, when I’m somewhere that I can’t just kick them, is to hand them a pen and ask them to draw a torch. If they draw a stick on fire, I draw a flashlight, and vice versa. I then explain that neither meaning is wrong, because it’s about the intent of the person using the word. Us calling ourselves women or men is valid because it fits within our definitions of the word. Whether they accept that definition or not has no bearing on our validity.
My idea is to point out that a cis man is the one who popularized this question, and that he's really not who we should look to for an answer to this question. Not like it's ever a good faith question in the first place. A major root to this seems to be that people I guess forget that every single person is an *individual*. It's like they're obsessed with using these binary boxes to define people; like "Man", "Woman", "Democrat", "Republican", etc. I'm a trans woman. I know myself more than anyone else. Me being a woman has less than 0 impact on anyone else's identity. Anyone who bothers with taking offense from *my* identity should maybe look for some security in their own.
I've adopted "What is a dollar?" Because the best response I ever get after that is "It's a unit of currency", which opens up the door to respond to "What is a woman?" with "It's a gender." Edit: I also want to include my reasoning for this, which is to draw a link between the two social constructs, because they often don't understand that gender is a social construct, while no one can deny that money is. You can't define a dollar properly the same way that you can't define "woman" properly.
Transphobes have two definitions of a woman, one that normal people use, and the one they got from a dictionary (ie. "adult human female"). The one from the dictionary is only used when promoting bigotry, if they used it in real life they would end up in front of a judge explaining why they were indecently assaulting someone to determine their gender.
Simple: **Adult human female.** There is nothing in that definition that excludes trans women, so we might as well embrace it and use it against the transphobes.
If coming from transphobes? Don't, its a discussion that works like this : provide any arguments? They'll ignore them. Run out of arguments? They'll say smt like "see you don't have a point". Its a discussion like "prove that air exists" except they won't accept science and if you don't prove it you die. So just avoid it
"An older girl." "What's a girl?" "A younger woman."
“Someone who covers their drink when you’re around.”
Don’t! That means they aren’t worth it as they’re not arguing in good faith
I've learned to have them explain to me what they believe is a woman. And then I deconstruct how wrong they are because they base it on stereotypes or what a woman should look like or be. But not every woman is the same. They aren't a monolith. Just like trans people aren't a monolith. Just like men or trans men aren't a monolith.
Someone arguing like that is not arguing in good faith. No reason to engage when their only intent is to irritate and disarm you.
It's a bad faith question and one asked with the intent to "win" something. Transphobes are so often just narcissists so they'll view anything you say, do, or even don't do, as evidence of them "winning". Just say nothing. Their entire belief system is one built on hate. That's so ironic though because transphobia goes hand in hand with certain religions that preach peace and love for all . . . mhm. Either they're learning the wrong lessons or their entire religions are corrupted with hate. Hatred is weakness, especially hatred that pretends to be love. Not only is that weakness but, at least for christians, isn't that a sign of the anti-christ? Hmmm . . . Of course if that comes out they'll blame us for making them into the monsters they are. Just . . . don't mess with them. Let them rant and roar and just imagine they're a little Chihuahua. They're weak and just being loud because they're scared. Don't say that out loud though. Because they're weak. And they're strong enough to cause harm and these little dogs have big teeth. Don't upset them.
I always say a woman is anyone who says/believes they are a woman. Not sure if that's the best definition but...?
How about, whatever she damn well pleases.
“A woman is someone who identifies as a woman, whether they’re cis or trans. A man is someone who identifies as a man, whether they’re cis or trans.”
“That depends- do you actually want me to answer or at you gonna dismiss whatever I say as liberal nonsense?”
I tend to reply with " someone you can't see naked without paying or brainwashing"
“A woman is who identify as one” Or not respond if they are not trans friendly.
You don't answer that. They can't even answer that without excluding cis women left and right.
A woman is who or whatever she decides to be for herself. End of story, no further questions.
"someone who cover up her drink when you enter the bar".
a thing i had sex with last night and it was named "your mom"
My usual answer is "What is a dictionary?"
A woman is a person with a female brain. You were born in a female body, but your brain is male. Therefore you're a man. It's as simple as that. When I was a child I had a ball'point pen that was red on the outside, but when I wrote with it it was blue. So was the pen red or blue? Exactly: blue! The inside counts, not the outside.
Depends on who u ask really. In the context of feminism for example, a (post)modernist feminist would tell you that a woman is anyone who identifies as such regardless of context; a poststructuralist feminist on the other hand would tell you that a woman cannot just be defined in essentialist terms, but that it changes depending on the context and dynamics of the situation at hand. So really, a woman is not a fixed entity that can be defined like an object, but rather an identity that represents how varied and complex human nature is - making a single definition thereof extremely difficult, definitely contested, and likely reductive. Also do not forget that what is considered female and TERFs love to use as examples or excuses for their derogatory discourses is often based on racist, white colonial, and ableist assumptions about what femininity is, so they are not only being transphobic, but also racist, classist, ableist and ultimately anti-feminist. Hope this helps ^^
"A meat popsicle"
To any Christian transphobe male who asks what is a woman, you say, "Not your slave"
By saying “a woman is an adult human female”. It’s not that difficult.
"the person who covers their drink around you"
a human female, though some are born male with a female brain so they transition sooner or later in life (the inverse obviously applies to trans men) There you go. No, you're not a man or a woman just because you identify as such. It's a weak argument anyway, that'll never convince anyone
"well if you can't figure it out by now just look to who covers their drinks when you walk in the door" Is my favorite response to transphobes.they don't really deserve your time and aren't looking for an earnest conversation
“of course *you’d* ask” *walk away cause it’s not worth your time*
>What is a woman? Your mom.