August 8, 2023 - 7:00am
When you hear someone describe me as a trans woman, what do you think this means? Recent polling commissioned by an Edinburgh-based policy collective has found that four in every 10 people do not know. As politicians have stumbled over the astonishingly simple question, “what is a woman?” it was long assumed that we knew what a trans woman is. But evidently not.
The survey polled 1026 individuals on the trans woman question. Only 60% answered correctly — “someone registered male / a boy at birth”. Over a fifth (21%), thought it was someone who had been registered female, or a girl at birth, while 19% did not know. That matters when the term is used so widely — yet almost always without further explanation. When such a large proportion of the public does not comprehend the terminology, they are hardly going to grasp the issues associated with it.
That was not a one-off anomaly. Another group of 1008 people was asked the similar question, “when you hear someone described as a transgender woman, what do you think this means?” That cohort did slightly better — 65% realised that they belonged to the group that was registered male at birth — but over a third of the sample either did not know, or did not know that they did not know.
Let’s be clear: this is not a question of metaphysical beliefs about whether male people can be a type of women (spoiler: we can’t); this polling has found that over a third of the population either thinks that trans women are actually female, or they do not know whether they are male or female. Terminology so widely misunderstood is at best unhelpful, and can be downright misleading. With this new research, ignorance can no longer be an excuse.
On an emotional level, the descriptions trans woman and transgender woman register very differently to the term “male transsexual”, but they all refer to someone of the male sex. Indeed, the only people who cannot be trans women are women. But that sort of language is strongly discouraged by activists and those they have captured with their ideology. People have lost their jobs after denying that males can be women.
This should also be a wake-up call to anyone who reports on transgender issues. We must never again see headlines such as, “Trans woman Isla Bryson jailed for eight years for raping two women”. Both terms — “trans woman“ and “transgender women“ — were unknown until little more than 20 years ago. It’s beyond time that we returned to clear and simple English which everybody understands and, using that outrage in Scotland as an example, point out that a male called Isla Bryson was jailed for eight years for raping two women. Who can argue with that?
Join the discussion
Join like minded readers that support our journalism by becoming a paid subscriber
To join the discussion in the comments, become a paid subscriber.
Join like minded readers that support our journalism, read unlimited articles and enjoy other subscriber-only benefits.
SubscribePretty sure this was by design. The alphabet soup people who popularized the “transwomen are women” line were never interested in clarity and precision. They were interested in winning. And they have.
Perhaps the Right could learn something from this.
I’ve argued many times that the term ‘trans woman’ should be replaced by ‘trans man’ – that leaves no ambiguity but I expect its too late now. Even the legislators are confused.
It would be difficult now so I am trying to go with ‘trans identifying male’ for a man who wishes they were a woman eg Debbie etc.
Ideally it needs to be less of a mouthful and while ‘man’ should be enough it clearly isn’t at the moment.
Exactly. Grant them nothing.
Exactly. Grant them nothing.
The term “trans” has been filched from organic chemistry where it, and the opposite “cis” apply to compounds that can exist in two identical chemical, but different structural forms depending on how the molecule was formed. A left handed and right handed form of each being a good way of understanding it. Each form is called an isomer. A trans woman, and a woman are not identical genetic configurations because one has a Y chromosome and the other has two X’s. Thus the usage of these terms outwith their scientific meaning in this debate is inappropriate. Unfortunately language is both imprecise and inconsistent because “trans” also implies change through activity and so the words transsexual and transvestite became established.
Wasn’t it filched originally from geography? As in TransAlpine vs CisAlpine and TransJordan vs CisJordan. ie before and after crossing a boundary of mountains or a river. This fits the ‘trans’ concept better but has nothing to say on the concept of a transwoman being a woman.
Interesting. Thanks. Since I got a C- in college OChem (and that was charity given on the promise of not taking PChem the following year), I actually didn’t know the real use of the prefixes.
Wasn’t it filched originally from geography? As in TransAlpine vs CisAlpine and TransJordan vs CisJordan. ie before and after crossing a boundary of mountains or a river. This fits the ‘trans’ concept better but has nothing to say on the concept of a transwoman being a woman.
Interesting. Thanks. Since I got a C- in college OChem (and that was charity given on the promise of not taking PChem the following year), I actually didn’t know the real use of the prefixes.
It would be difficult now so I am trying to go with ‘trans identifying male’ for a man who wishes they were a woman eg Debbie etc.
Ideally it needs to be less of a mouthful and while ‘man’ should be enough it clearly isn’t at the moment.
The term “trans” has been filched from organic chemistry where it, and the opposite “cis” apply to compounds that can exist in two identical chemical, but different structural forms depending on how the molecule was formed. A left handed and right handed form of each being a good way of understanding it. Each form is called an isomer. A trans woman, and a woman are not identical genetic configurations because one has a Y chromosome and the other has two X’s. Thus the usage of these terms outwith their scientific meaning in this debate is inappropriate. Unfortunately language is both imprecise and inconsistent because “trans” also implies change through activity and so the words transsexual and transvestite became established.
Yes, it was part of the strategy, So was the conflation of ‘gender’ with ‘sex’. And linking the Ts to the LGBs (very different phenomena and many LGBs don’t want the Ts). And the myth that that trans ‘genocide’ is taking place. And the myth that trans people are ‘the most oppressed and marginalised people in the world’. And the myth that a person can be ‘born in the wrong body’ or ‘misgendered’ at birth.
One alternative term is ‘trans-identified male’, which acknowledges the biological reality.
Indeed. When the term ‘transwoman’ is used to refer to a man who ‘identifies’ as a woman, the implication is that these men are actually a subset of women, when actually they are nothing of the kind. But this language has a normalising effect and embeds the ideology into the wider culture.
If we can no longer use the terms ‘transvestite’ and ‘transsexual’ – perfectly adequate terms in my view – then we should be calling men who identify as women, transMEN, and women who identify as men, transWOMEN.
Those terms more nearly express the truth.
I’ve argued many times that the term ‘trans woman’ should be replaced by ‘trans man’ – that leaves no ambiguity but I expect its too late now. Even the legislators are confused.
Yes, it was part of the strategy, So was the conflation of ‘gender’ with ‘sex’. And linking the Ts to the LGBs (very different phenomena and many LGBs don’t want the Ts). And the myth that that trans ‘genocide’ is taking place. And the myth that trans people are ‘the most oppressed and marginalised people in the world’. And the myth that a person can be ‘born in the wrong body’ or ‘misgendered’ at birth.
One alternative term is ‘trans-identified male’, which acknowledges the biological reality.
Indeed. When the term ‘transwoman’ is used to refer to a man who ‘identifies’ as a woman, the implication is that these men are actually a subset of women, when actually they are nothing of the kind. But this language has a normalising effect and embeds the ideology into the wider culture.
If we can no longer use the terms ‘transvestite’ and ‘transsexual’ – perfectly adequate terms in my view – then we should be calling men who identify as women, transMEN, and women who identify as men, transWOMEN.
Those terms more nearly express the truth.
Pretty sure this was by design. The alphabet soup people who popularized the “transwomen are women” line were never interested in clarity and precision. They were interested in winning. And they have.
Perhaps the Right could learn something from this.
The concept of being transgender really doesn’t make any sense. It is an illogical extension or corruption of the concept of being transsexual.
In the past it was simple. There were people who suffered from the mental condition, Gender Identity Dysphoria (GID). Some suffered so acutely from the sense of alienation from their physical bodies that they transformed their bodies through surgery. Having undergone a physical transformation or transition to resemble the opposite sex they were called transsexuals.
Transgender doesn’t make any sense because those asserting this status haven’t transitioned or transformed from a former state. Unless someone is actually a clinical sufferer of GID, then by claiming to be transgender all they are really claiming is that their character and behaviour is atypical from that commonly associated with their biological sex. So what? – we used to call that someone’s personality or character. That is why transactivists can’t put a a figure on how many genders there are; they are just describing individuals atypical personalities, and personalities are highly variable.
The matter became more confused when the trans activists left the realm of reality and, rather than just asserting that transwomen were biological males who “felt” like they were women, claimed they actually were women, apparently incorrectly identified at birth by the outdated scientific dogma that having the chromosomes and genitalia of a male and female were not determinative of whether a child was male or female. Silly nonsense.
It is perfectly understandable that the public are confused, Firstly, the trans activists have continually shifted to more extreme and wholly irrational positions. Second, the trans activists have viciously suppressed any discussion of the legitimacy of their ideology. I don’t recall there ever being a programme on mainstream TV or radio in which opposing sides debated the legitimacy of concepts such as “gender identity” or transgenderism in general. It doesn’t even occur within the psychiatric profession, where there is clearly disagreement between professions; such is the power and threat of the vicious trans mob.
We had it right originally. There are clinical suffers of GID. Then there are people who just have personalities and characters that are atypical of their biological sex. That is all !transgenderism” is. As such it is an unnecessary and illogical confection. A “transwoman” doesn’t need defining because it doesn’t exist.
Seems to me that there’s no such thing as GID. It’s Sex Identity Disorder if anything.
Seems to me that there’s no such thing as GID. It’s Sex Identity Disorder if anything.
The concept of being transgender really doesn’t make any sense. It is an illogical extension or corruption of the concept of being transsexual.
In the past it was simple. There were people who suffered from the mental condition, Gender Identity Dysphoria (GID). Some suffered so acutely from the sense of alienation from their physical bodies that they transformed their bodies through surgery. Having undergone a physical transformation or transition to resemble the opposite sex they were called transsexuals.
Transgender doesn’t make any sense because those asserting this status haven’t transitioned or transformed from a former state. Unless someone is actually a clinical sufferer of GID, then by claiming to be transgender all they are really claiming is that their character and behaviour is atypical from that commonly associated with their biological sex. So what? – we used to call that someone’s personality or character. That is why transactivists can’t put a a figure on how many genders there are; they are just describing individuals atypical personalities, and personalities are highly variable.
The matter became more confused when the trans activists left the realm of reality and, rather than just asserting that transwomen were biological males who “felt” like they were women, claimed they actually were women, apparently incorrectly identified at birth by the outdated scientific dogma that having the chromosomes and genitalia of a male and female were not determinative of whether a child was male or female. Silly nonsense.
It is perfectly understandable that the public are confused, Firstly, the trans activists have continually shifted to more extreme and wholly irrational positions. Second, the trans activists have viciously suppressed any discussion of the legitimacy of their ideology. I don’t recall there ever being a programme on mainstream TV or radio in which opposing sides debated the legitimacy of concepts such as “gender identity” or transgenderism in general. It doesn’t even occur within the psychiatric profession, where there is clearly disagreement between professions; such is the power and threat of the vicious trans mob.
We had it right originally. There are clinical suffers of GID. Then there are people who just have personalities and characters that are atypical of their biological sex. That is all !transgenderism” is. As such it is an unnecessary and illogical confection. A “transwoman” doesn’t need defining because it doesn’t exist.
Does it matter how you are defined? As long as you don’t steal the definition of adult human female I don’t care. You are part of a tiny group that gets far too much attention as it is. Can trans people just get on with their lives instead of constantly trying to co-opt the rest of us as bit part players in the psychodrama of your mental health problems?
Agree generally but lets not forget trans identifying woman (TIW) may not impact men as much as TIM do but they must not be allowed to confuse language and ‘get away’ with their rubbish.
The first problem with trans identifying people is their attack on reality and only second is their impact, potential or real, on other members of society.
The attack on reality is also an attack on society. We are forced to go along with this charade.
The attack on reality is also an attack on society. We are forced to go along with this charade.
The people who make the most noise about all this are heterosexual people who have become “allies” with the trans movement. They are the advance troops using both T and LGB for ends they hardly know about. The ends are decided somewhere on high by people very rich and powerful. Seems a lot of trans people just do want to quietly get on with their lives.
Tell it like it is, sister!
Agree generally but lets not forget trans identifying woman (TIW) may not impact men as much as TIM do but they must not be allowed to confuse language and ‘get away’ with their rubbish.
The first problem with trans identifying people is their attack on reality and only second is their impact, potential or real, on other members of society.
The people who make the most noise about all this are heterosexual people who have become “allies” with the trans movement. They are the advance troops using both T and LGB for ends they hardly know about. The ends are decided somewhere on high by people very rich and powerful. Seems a lot of trans people just do want to quietly get on with their lives.
Tell it like it is, sister!
Does it matter how you are defined? As long as you don’t steal the definition of adult human female I don’t care. You are part of a tiny group that gets far too much attention as it is. Can trans people just get on with their lives instead of constantly trying to co-opt the rest of us as bit part players in the psychodrama of your mental health problems?
I had gender identity disorder since about age 5 and it caused so much inner turmoil that I came close to committing suicide 30 years ago. I am fortunate enough to have a supportive wife and over the past six years I transitioned. This included therapy, hormone replacement therapy, electrolysis, breast augmentation and what is referred to as SRS, or sexual reassignment surgery – it’s a long, painful and arduous journey. I live with my wife as though I were a woman.
I have as close to the body of a woman as modern surgery can accomplish. I essentially have everything that a woman who underwent a hysterectomy has, but with the musculature, bone structure, lung and heart capacity of a man. The surgery was successful because I no longer have GID. I know that I am not a woman, and it causes me sorrow that I wasn’t born as one, but I am happy as I am.
I am comfortable with the term “transsexual” to describe those like me who have undergone the full journey; and feel alienated from the trans activists who are trying to force the rest of society to accept their secular religious concepts. It seems that they are constantly inventing new formulations for what is transgender. I just want to live the rest of my life quietly and I have, within my family, my extended family and my community, been accepted for who I am.
Thank you for sharing, it helps the conversation. Though I suspect you’ve raised even more questions! But i agree, transsexual fits better.
Thank you. I suppose you’re right – more questions. The one that always comes to mind is whether to address someone who started out life as male, but is now living full time and presenting as a woman: “Ma’am or Sir.”
It all depends on whether someone seeks to deliberately hurt and humiliate that person to that person’s face. And then the question becomes, what pleasure do they get out of doing so? The choice, of course, is yours.
I imagine such a question isn’t commonplace, though. Given everyone in your world has fully accepted your terms and conditions, and joe public being overly polite en masse – life must be good.
My manners would depend on where we met; garden centres and coffee shops are less of a problem. However hospitals, prisons and sports fields are different.
I believe that everyone has the right to know that you are at least, transsexual – a very small price for the life of your dreams, I’d say.
I imagine such a question isn’t commonplace, though. Given everyone in your world has fully accepted your terms and conditions, and joe public being overly polite en masse – life must be good.
My manners would depend on where we met; garden centres and coffee shops are less of a problem. However hospitals, prisons and sports fields are different.
I believe that everyone has the right to know that you are at least, transsexual – a very small price for the life of your dreams, I’d say.
Thank you. I suppose you’re right – more questions. The one that always comes to mind is whether to address someone who started out life as male, but is now living full time and presenting as a woman: “Ma’am or Sir.”
It all depends on whether someone seeks to deliberately hurt and humiliate that person to that person’s face. And then the question becomes, what pleasure do they get out of doing so? The choice, of course, is yours.
Thank you for sharing, it helps the conversation. Though I suspect you’ve raised even more questions! But i agree, transsexual fits better.
I had gender identity disorder since about age 5 and it caused so much inner turmoil that I came close to committing suicide 30 years ago. I am fortunate enough to have a supportive wife and over the past six years I transitioned. This included therapy, hormone replacement therapy, electrolysis, breast augmentation and what is referred to as SRS, or sexual reassignment surgery – it’s a long, painful and arduous journey. I live with my wife as though I were a woman.
I have as close to the body of a woman as modern surgery can accomplish. I essentially have everything that a woman who underwent a hysterectomy has, but with the musculature, bone structure, lung and heart capacity of a man. The surgery was successful because I no longer have GID. I know that I am not a woman, and it causes me sorrow that I wasn’t born as one, but I am happy as I am.
I am comfortable with the term “transsexual” to describe those like me who have undergone the full journey; and feel alienated from the trans activists who are trying to force the rest of society to accept their secular religious concepts. It seems that they are constantly inventing new formulations for what is transgender. I just want to live the rest of my life quietly and I have, within my family, my extended family and my community, been accepted for who I am.
Perhaps we need to go back to using the terms transsexual and transvestite, they are much clearer descriptions and there is a clear difference between them.
Perhaps we need to go back to using the terms transsexual and transvestite, they are much clearer descriptions and there is a clear difference between them.
I’m often surprised, when reading comments in respected publications, that many people seem to believe that ‘gender reassignment’ involves genital surgery.
We have a trans model in a life class I attend and a fellow student commented to me that, as this person had ‘lived as a woman’ for decades, why would they still retain their p***s?
Perhaps Joe Public has only recently twigged that ‘transwomen’ are mostly fully intact heterosexual males?
Am I right in assuming Debbie, that you feel misrepresented by some of the more aggressive trans activists who, for instance, insist on identifying as lesbians (whilst retaining their tackle)?
Thank you indeed.
Until fairly recently I was one of those misguided fools who believed that men who become women had indeed had, (and to lapse into the vernacular), all their ‘working parts’ chopped off, and quiet right to!
In fact it should be mandatory that all Trans Women or whatever they call themselves are castrated, just as the Papal Choir of old, and the eunuchs of various ‘Oriental Courts’, Manchu, Ottoman etc we’re until fairly recently.
We might then believe them, if and ONLY if they demonstrated total commitment.
Thank you indeed.
Until fairly recently I was one of those misguided fools who believed that men who become women had indeed had, (and to lapse into the vernacular), all their ‘working parts’ chopped off, and quiet right to!
In fact it should be mandatory that all Trans Women or whatever they call themselves are castrated, just as the Papal Choir of old, and the eunuchs of various ‘Oriental Courts’, Manchu, Ottoman etc we’re until fairly recently.
We might then believe them, if and ONLY if they demonstrated total commitment.
I’m often surprised, when reading comments in respected publications, that many people seem to believe that ‘gender reassignment’ involves genital surgery.
We have a trans model in a life class I attend and a fellow student commented to me that, as this person had ‘lived as a woman’ for decades, why would they still retain their p***s?
Perhaps Joe Public has only recently twigged that ‘transwomen’ are mostly fully intact heterosexual males?
Am I right in assuming Debbie, that you feel misrepresented by some of the more aggressive trans activists who, for instance, insist on identifying as lesbians (whilst retaining their tackle)?
Manipulation of the language is the point. You change belief structures in part by changing language. It shifts the Overton window. That is why they would like to force people to use preferred pronouns. That’s why medical interventions are called gender affirming care.
Manipulation of the language is the point. You change belief structures in part by changing language. It shifts the Overton window. That is why they would like to force people to use preferred pronouns. That’s why medical interventions are called gender affirming care.
The other more vexing question is at what point in the transition process does a man / boy become a trans woman / girl. Is it when they wake up one morning and decide they are trapped in the wrong body and want to be treated as women, but not even bother to have a shave? Is it when they have fully surgically transitioned so she no longer has “her pen!s” with which to rape real women? Is it when they have a GRC or some other point.
The nonsense still is not resolved by simply chanting trans women are women (like the sheep in Animal farm who bleat 4 legs good 2 legs bad to stifle any discussion) as we already have a load of exceptions to that with more coming every day as sport authorities wake up to the need to protect real women’s sport from becoming a farce because nobody really wants to watch mediocre men winning the competitions.
The other more vexing question is at what point in the transition process does a man / boy become a trans woman / girl. Is it when they wake up one morning and decide they are trapped in the wrong body and want to be treated as women, but not even bother to have a shave? Is it when they have fully surgically transitioned so she no longer has “her pen!s” with which to rape real women? Is it when they have a GRC or some other point.
The nonsense still is not resolved by simply chanting trans women are women (like the sheep in Animal farm who bleat 4 legs good 2 legs bad to stifle any discussion) as we already have a load of exceptions to that with more coming every day as sport authorities wake up to the need to protect real women’s sport from becoming a farce because nobody really wants to watch mediocre men winning the competitions.
I’ve had to resort to emphasising transwoMAN, just to help the person I’m talking to – ridiculous! And dangerous; language is enabling the ideology to distort reality, facts and the data. It has to stop!
I’ve had to resort to emphasising transwoMAN, just to help the person I’m talking to – ridiculous! And dangerous; language is enabling the ideology to distort reality, facts and the data. It has to stop!
Well said, and of course this outrage had to happen in Scotland didn’t it!
Well said, and of course this outrage had to happen in Scotland didn’t it!
It isn’t difficult at all. A “trans woman” is a MAN who says HE is a woman.
That’s exactly what I call them…”men who say they are women” and vice versa. The aggressive activists have absolutely benefited from the confusion of the general public about this. Luckily the confusion is abating thanks to all the brave women who have fought this awful ideology.
Agreed 100%.
It would be good if it were abating. However, where I live, in New South Wales Australia, we are about to be presented with bills to outlaw “conversion practices” and to legalise sex self-identification. It has taken us longer to fall into the hole and will take longer for us to climb out again. Sigh.
Yes, they’ve shown much more balls than so many of the alleged men in public life.
Agreed 100%.
It would be good if it were abating. However, where I live, in New South Wales Australia, we are about to be presented with bills to outlaw “conversion practices” and to legalise sex self-identification. It has taken us longer to fall into the hole and will take longer for us to climb out again. Sigh.
Yes, they’ve shown much more balls than so many of the alleged men in public life.
I’m not sure who it was, and it may or may not have been on here, but someone suggested that whenever you see the prefix ‘trans-‘, you should mentally replace it with the prefix ‘fake-‘. That gives you the correct answer.
That’s exactly what I call them…”men who say they are women” and vice versa. The aggressive activists have absolutely benefited from the confusion of the general public about this. Luckily the confusion is abating thanks to all the brave women who have fought this awful ideology.
I’m not sure who it was, and it may or may not have been on here, but someone suggested that whenever you see the prefix ‘trans-‘, you should mentally replace it with the prefix ‘fake-‘. That gives you the correct answer.
It isn’t difficult at all. A “trans woman” is a MAN who says HE is a woman.
You’ve previously said that it would be “unkind” to call you a man.
But surely that is what you are and the solution is fairly simple: there are men and there are women. Inner lives and cosmetic alterations regardless.
Do you still consider it “unkind”?
You’ve previously said that it would be “unkind” to call you a man.
But surely that is what you are and the solution is fairly simple: there are men and there are women. Inner lives and cosmetic alterations regardless.
Do you still consider it “unkind”?
“Transwoman” is an example of the “B” vocabulary in George Orwell’s Newspeak: “The B vocabulary consisted of words which had been deliberately constructed for political purposes: words, that is to say, which not only had in every case a political implication, but were intended to impose a desirable mental attitude upon the person using them. … The B words were in all cases compound words. They consisted of two or more words, or portions of words, welded together in an easily pronounceable form.”
Adapting one of Orwell’s examples of Newspeak, “Oldthinkers unbellyfeel Woke.”
“Transwoman” is an example of the “B” vocabulary in George Orwell’s Newspeak: “The B vocabulary consisted of words which had been deliberately constructed for political purposes: words, that is to say, which not only had in every case a political implication, but were intended to impose a desirable mental attitude upon the person using them. … The B words were in all cases compound words. They consisted of two or more words, or portions of words, welded together in an easily pronounceable form.”
Adapting one of Orwell’s examples of Newspeak, “Oldthinkers unbellyfeel Woke.”
“Trans woman” is a term designed to trick your brain into thinking that you’re referring to a woman who is trans, in the same way you might refer to a tall woman or Asian woman. The confusion is deliberate because “woman” is the first thing your brain registers.
“Trans woman” is a term designed to trick your brain into thinking that you’re referring to a woman who is trans, in the same way you might refer to a tall woman or Asian woman. The confusion is deliberate because “woman” is the first thing your brain registers.
“It’s beyond time that we returned to clear and simple English which everybody understands…”
This statement is difficult to argue with. Half a century ago, I read some graffiti at a train station. It said “Eschew Obfuscation.” Over the years, I have accepted this as a universal truth.
However, it has been known that a certain ideology has been hell-bent on moving the language as far from clear and simple English as possible. The he/she/them “pronouns“ nonsense now seems like the good old days. We have people wanting to be referred to as Xe, Xer, vamp/vampself, cat/catself, or any of an infinite number of similar absurdities.
In addition, the “accepted” vernacular seems to change on a daily basis. Logical thought is not possible in the absence of definition of terms.
“ It’s a beautiful thing, the destruction of words.”
– George Orwell 1984
“It’s beyond time that we returned to clear and simple English which everybody understands…”
This statement is difficult to argue with. Half a century ago, I read some graffiti at a train station. It said “Eschew Obfuscation.” Over the years, I have accepted this as a universal truth.
However, it has been known that a certain ideology has been hell-bent on moving the language as far from clear and simple English as possible. The he/she/them “pronouns“ nonsense now seems like the good old days. We have people wanting to be referred to as Xe, Xer, vamp/vampself, cat/catself, or any of an infinite number of similar absurdities.
In addition, the “accepted” vernacular seems to change on a daily basis. Logical thought is not possible in the absence of definition of terms.
“ It’s a beautiful thing, the destruction of words.”
– George Orwell 1984
Woman: a sexually-mature human female.
Female: an individual possessing the genetic machinery for oogenesis.
Sexually-mature: capable of reproducing the species into a successive generation.
Human: a featherless biped.
Woman: a sexually-mature human female.
Female: an individual possessing the genetic machinery for oogenesis.
Sexually-mature: capable of reproducing the species into a successive generation.
Human: a featherless biped.
The answer to the question in the headline is obvious: because there is no such thing. On the other hand, the definition of the term ‘woman’ is so blindingly obvious I’m not even going to bother to repeat it.