2 2
brenthutch

What is a woman?

Recommended Posts

6 minutes ago, metalslug said:

I agree that it was a 'gotcha' question, but it's only a gotcha question when faced by woke lefties and therein lies the cowardice in failing to answer. I've chosen that word because I don't believe KBJ to be either unintelligent or ignorant. I believe she simply lacked the courage to state what defined English grammar, the vast mainstream and indeed even herself has always known a woman to be, for fear of backlash from the woke mob. 

Nonsense. She was simply smart enough not to get sucked in by morons.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, SkyDekker said:

Bullshit. It is a difficult question for anybody who understands there is more to male and female than dick and pussy.

That's rather my point. Either they don't know, or they do know and lack the courage to make  statements in that regard with eloquence matching yours. What's remarkable is failing to give any answer at all. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, SkyDekker said:

Not at all. It would be like trying to explain climate change to Brent.

And yet people here have been trying to do exactly that. Does that make them foolish? Much less smart than KBJ?

Quote

I think it is telling enough that people are being asked to define woman, but nobody has been asked to define man.

OK. I'll bite. What's telling about it?  Is it easier to define a man?  Is the definition any clearer? In the link I posted previously the Australian senator involved did actually ask for either definition and received neither.  It's rather clairvoyant of you to claim that nobody has been asked to define a man.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, metalslug said:

That's rather my point. Either they don't know, or they do know and lack the courage to make  statements in that regard with eloquence matching yours. What's remarkable is failing to give any answer at all. 

I think that any ruling by a judge on what constitutes female or male (or man or woman) would have to take into account the specifics of whatever case they were being asked to judge. Therefore, it really is asking the candidate to say how they would rule in a case, and that's off-limits. Cases are supposed to be judged on their own merits, as circumscribed by the rules of evidence and the rule of law.

Also, as far as whether it's harder to define man, well, men kind of personify the legal standard, and everything else is compared with them. It's good to be king.

Wendy P.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, wmw999 said:

I think that any ruling by a judge on what constitutes female or male (or man or woman) would have to take into account the specifics of whatever case they were being asked to judge.

It's fair to have that opinion but mine disagrees; I believe it would only be relevant in determining if particular individuals in the case concerned were men or women and not the actual definition of a woman. Perhaps similar to knowing specific case details to decide whether fraud was committed, rather than to decide what fraud is. Legal statutes already exist for that definition.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, metalslug said:

It's fair to have that opinion but mine disagrees; I believe it would only be relevant in determining if particular individuals in the case concerned were men or women and not the actual definition of a woman. Perhaps similar to knowing specific case details to decide whether fraud was committed, rather than to decide what fraud is. Legal statutes already exist for that definition.

So I ask you then, what the is the legal definition of a woman and in what case would it be relevant?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, SkyDekker said:

So I ask you then, what the is the legal definition of a woman and in what case would it be relevant?

And why would it be relevant in questioning KJB or any other candidate for Justice?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(edited)
13 minutes ago, SkyDekker said:

So I ask you then, what the is the legal definition of a woman and in what case would it be relevant?

Unless otherwise stipulated in the specific legislation; I believe it defaults to being the same as the grammatical definition; an adult human female. It would apply to any case in which gender impacts the application of the laws in question.  (See, it is possible to give some kind of opinion, albeit generalised, without knowing case specifics).

Your turn.

Edited by metalslug

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(edited)
10 minutes ago, metalslug said:

Unless otherwise stipulated in the specific legislation; I believe it defaults to being the same as the grammatical definition; an adult human female. It would apply to any case in which gender impacts the application of the laws in question.  (See, it is possible to give some kind of opinion, albeit generalised, without knowing case specifics).

And why would this be important for a Supreme Court Justice. Should they also be asked to define person, man and camera?

She recognized a stupid question and refused to answer it. 

 

Can you find any US legislation that defines a woman?

Edited by SkyDekker
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, SkyDekker said:

And why would this be important for a Supreme Court Justice. Should they also be asked to define person, man and camera?

She recognized a stupid question and refused to answer it. 

You're not aware that US law includes Women's legal rights ?  m'kay....

Still your turn. You expected me to answer and yet you've clammed up?  Figures.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, metalslug said:

Unless otherwise stipulated in the specific legislation; I believe it defaults to being the same as the grammatical definition; an adult human female.

Yep.

And an XY woman?  And an XY person who is halfway through transitioning to a woman?  And an XY person who has just begun the transition?  An XY person who intends to transition, and has begun the "living as a woman" process?  Which of them are women?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, metalslug said:

You're not aware that US law includes Women's legal rights ?  m'kay....

I asked for a law that defines a woman. Should be pretty easy. Can you find any law that defines a woman in anything other than a circular argument that says a woman is a female.

4 minutes ago, metalslug said:

Still your turn. You expected me to answer and yet you've clammed up?  Figures.

I think women (and men) cannot be "defined" without context. I am comfortable with there being more than "black and white". Why is it so important to you? If you have doubt about your own gender or sexuality, there are groups that can help you with that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(edited)
25 minutes ago, billvon said:

Yep.

And an XY woman?  And an XY person who is halfway through transitioning to a woman?  And an XY person who has just begun the transition?  An XY person who intends to transition, and has begun the "living as a woman" process?  Which of them are women?

That is not the OP of the thread or the question that was asked to KBJ.  

Regardless, to entertain your question; I would say only the 'XY woman'. The answer is already implicit in the phrase itself. A medical doctor is not someone who is "halfway through becoming a doctor" or "just begun the training to be a doctor" or "intends to be a doctor" or "living as a doctor". Of more importance here is not whether my opinion on this is either 'correct' or popular, but more significantly that I've offered one at all under questioning. As did you (IIRC).  Should other more prominent public figures be so bold...

Edited by metalslug

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, metalslug said:

You're not aware that US law includes Women's legal rights ?  m'kay....

Still your turn. You expected me to answer and yet you've clammed up?  Figures.

Note that all of those rights are really just extending equality under the law to people who had been discriminated against based on perceived gender. If the people with power were just to recognize the innate equality for both rights and responsibilities of humans these enumerations of subsets of them being "granted" would be irrelevant.

That these enumerations aren't irrelevant is telling.

Wendy P.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, billvon said:

Yep.

And an XY woman?  And an XY person who is halfway through transitioning to a woman?  And an XY person who has just begun the transition?  An XY person who intends to transition, and has begun the "living as a woman" process?  Which of them are women?

Females are XX, Males are XY.  They can act, dress, identify, transition how ever they like.  Other X, Y combinations have their own definitions.

They are all people and should have equal rights, opportunities, respect and treatment under the law.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Bigfalls said:

Females are XX, Males are XY.

Well, but see, XY people who suffer from AIS are female.  They have vaginas and breasts.  They have organs that, to any kind of normal examination, look like ovaries.  Legally they are female - simply because most women with AIS don't know about it until later in life.

And some XY women are even female with no medical problems whatsoever, if they have an SRY translocation.

Quote

They are all people and should have equal rights, opportunities, respect and treatment under the law.

Hmm.  So anyone can use any bathroom legally, and anyone can compete on any team legally regardless of gender or sex?  There's no difference?  I would actually agree that that's a good thing to aspire to - but as of now there are some legal differences.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, metalslug said:

Regardless, to entertain your question; I would say only the 'XY woman'.

OK great.  So she's chromosomally male, but is a woman.  That's a valid position.  Now let's look at what Bigfalls said:

Quote

Females are XX, Males are XY.

Looks like he disagrees.  (And to nitpick, sex is different than gender, but let's ignore that for now.)

Now his position is not universally accurate, since what makes a person genetically female or male is the presence of the SRY gene.  99.9% of the time it's on the Y chromosome.  But in a small number of cases, it ends up on an X chromosome - and then that person is not only genetically female, they are female in every other way.  They have ovaries, can have kids etc.  There is no question that they are female.  But they are _chromosomally_ male.  This is almost never discovered because most people have no reason to ever get genetically tested, and so no one knows what its prevalence is, other than it happens sometimes.

So even people here disagree on what the definition of "woman" is.  Does that mean that you and Bigfalls are both woke lefties who can't agree on what a woman is?  Or does that mean that it's not all that easy a question?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, metalslug said:

I believe she simply lacked the courage to state what defined English grammar, the vast mainstream and indeed even herself has always known a woman to be, for fear of backlash from the woke mob. 

I believe that she was attempting to give an accurate legal answer, since she was being interviewed for a legal position, rather than a position as a writer or grammarian.

I mean, if someone asks me what master and slave mean, I am going to give a very different answer at an engineering interview than if someone asks me that in a history class.  Even though they are "simple" words.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, billvon said:

I mean, if someone asks me what master and slave mean, I am going to give a very different answer at an engineering interview than if someone asks me that in a history class.  Even though they are "simple" words.

But what if they are topping from the bottom.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

2 2