is this... it?
is this really the state of the board?
twitter screencaps?
this board is dead, friends...
maybe it deserved to die...,

>>36356848
Actually, it's called X now.

>>36356826
JKR is my queen

>>36356848
>twitter
Who?

>>36356826
I CAN actually define woman
but nobody will accept my definition
don't try to argue with people who have already made up their mind
JK rowling, glinner and their ilk are not engaging honestly, they are hateful bigots who have somehow managed to create a larger movement around their insanity about how womens rights are somehow being taken away or diminished in some capacity when LITERALLY ever trans issue have 0% to do with cis womens rights
but they don't care, they never cared, the just want to hate, glinner hate because he represses, JK hates because of jealousy

File: IMG_7022.jpg (74 KB, 828x411)

74 KB JPG

>>36356925
We shouldn’t pretend like trans women are not the outliers and the ones entering cis women spaces. Be understanding that trans women ≠ cis women.

File: IMG_7035.jpg (180 KB, 1080x868)

180 KB JPG

>>36356942
It’s the constant disregard for real women that has so many people defensive against the trans movement. Like this need to erase them and undermine them in order to uplift trans women. I see it all the time and it’s ultimately what pushes people away from supporting trans people.

>>36356942
>We shouldn’t pretend like trans women are not the outliers and the ones entering cis women spaces
You mean, WOMENS spaces
not "cis womans spaces"

>>36356961
I guess this person stops calling someone a woman if they are infertile then, or get a hysterectomy

>>36356968
I agree but I’m using this wordage so they understand. Trust me these people are cray cray

>>36356826
“chair gambit” is all we have is hilarious

We are trying to dumb the science down for people that won’t read it or believe it

>>36356977
Already starting with the bullshit again in order to uplift trans women. Genetic defects or issues with their reproductive organs is something women deal with and shouldn’t be used as a gotcha for trans women. It’s in such bad taste

>>36356982
Oh I'm aware, but women are women
regardless if they are trans or not, but these people will never see it like this because of their, obvious misandry

reminder that the buddhists solved "what is a chariot" thousands of years ago
https://www.budsas.org/ebud/ebsut045.htm#chariot

A manmade, sturdy object built for the purpose of one person sitting on

>>36357012
This one guy likes letting me use his face as my personal butt cushion :3

>>36357023
Not manmade

>>36357040
Lies. His parents made him. Duhhhh Becky

>>36357012
is a stool a chair?
is a beanbag chair a chair?
is a toilet a chair?
is a bicycle a chair?

>>36357069
>beanbags
>sturdy
kek

>>36357012
chuds can't stop falling for it
>>36357040
>>36357069

>>36356961
your mom is man now

>>36357069
I would consider a stool a chair
A beanbag chair is not sturdy
Toilets and bicycles are not built for the purpose of seating one person, they just allow that as a means to achieving their actual purpose.

>>36357109
but a toilet and a bicycle are both manmade and created to be sat on. If a bicycle isn't sturdy enough a tricycle would work too.
Is a massage chair not a chair because the ultimate purpose is not just for sitting?

>>36356961
>>36356995
what the hell are you talking about dude

>>36356942
tell me what is an adult what is female what is human. literal npc dialog tree
you are literally incapable of thinking for yourself

>>36357109
>Toilets and bicycles are not built for the purpose of seating one person
so you take shits with your bro on the same toilet or what?
the fuck

>>36356826
Why can't we just say that a woman is someone that looks like a woman? Not like anyone is gonna treat hons as women anyway and this definition actually makes sense since if you look like a woman enough to be treated by one by strangers then you are functionally a woman

>>36357138
Go ahead, Tweet your photos to JK Rowling and ask her if she accepts you as a woman.

>>36357138
terfs would get mad because it includes passing trannies
trannes would get mad because it includes enbies and ftfemboys

>>36356826
i would just prefer that ppl treat me like a woman regardless of definitions. i've gone to great lengths to modify myself. if you dont treat me with such respect to alleviate the distress that comes with my mental condition then dont expect me to like you or want to be around you but i'm sure those kind of ppl just hate us anyway so win/win

>>36357174
actually terfs would get mad because it excludes them

>>36357125
>>36357135
Both of you deliberately cut out the last part of that sentence about bikes and toilets. Trannies lost.
>Is a massage chair not a chair because the ultimate purpose is not just for sitting?
Just is the keyword here, because sitting is one of the purposes.
Nobody sits on the toilet or a bicycle just to sit, because those seating is not a purpose but a means.

>>36357191
>Nobody sits on the toilet or a bicycle just to sit
I'm sure people have sat on toilets as something to sit on before
what about a wheelchair? is sitting the purpose or the means?

>>36356826
>Why can't you define "woman"?
>Oh, but we explicitly reject any alternative definition of "woman" to the point we are histrionic—not over a different definition—but merely over a deconstruction of the flaws in our rhetoric that doesn't advance any specific other conclusion. Try again!

>>36357191
>never sit on the toilet just to sit
you've clearly never been super drunk

>>36356925
Oh, you mean, adult AFAB?
That's a woman. Right?
Or did you have something incoherent to add?

>>36356942
>>36356968
Transwomen ≠ women.
They are similar in terms of endocrine environment to women but not women.

>>36357191
you can't determine purpose. its individual and subjective idiot

>>36357183
I'll treat you like a transwoman, hope this helps
or just a person, I guess
wouldn't want to be sexist and treat you differently

>>36356961
humans for most of history did believe in magical souls whereas no one believed in chromosomes or gametes until a century ago or something. The "gamete" definition is a modern invention. Also in recent history legal change of sex/gender existed, so clearly the "gamete" definition is not the only one that has been in use even in modern times post-dating the discovery of gametes.

>>36357214
trans woman are woman because there's no essence of womanhood or manhood just like there's no essence to cats that determines they are cats we categorize them based on our social envoirnment and values essentialism is a bogus framework to view reality and interact with it

>>36357241
you treat people based on appearance and not some fundemental truths simply because you are incapable of doing so

>>36357199
>>36357203
Sure, you can sit on basically anything, just to have something to sit on. That does not mean it is the purpose of it. If you had the option of a chair, you would pick it every time, because it's purpose is seating.
And yes, wheelchairs are like the massage chair, it's a chair with additional purpose.

>>36357220
There is always purpose behind creations. Every invention started with a problem that needed a solution. The purpose is resolving that problem. Reddit mentality.

>>36357266
>That does not mean it is the purpose of it
are you not meant to sit on toilets?
the ultimate purpose of a toilet is more than sitting, same as a bicycle or a wheelchair, but sitting is still part of its intended use

>>36357266
maybe there's purpose every creation that's not the point I'm talking about purpose of using an object which differs from individual to individual

>>36357283
>part of its intended use
Which is not the actual purpose as has been stated many times. If you'd like I can add the word freestanding to the definition, which would not exclude any chairs, though I stand by the original as being sufficient.

>>36357264
So, you'll look kinda AMABish and I'll never see you as an AFAB, treating you accordingly? I can't just see you as a person or train myself to regard people with relative indifference?
OK. I mean, I just respond to tone. If a female-socialized AFAB talks to me, it's different because she'll expect me to talk in a certain way to her and reward me for certain courtesies that AMABs wouldn't care for nor want.

>>36357247
True, you can get tossed into the "AFAB" bin at birth for the sake of convenience. But you still have zero uteruses. You're biologically disposable and not cute. That's the essence. Zero large gametes or the perceived production of them.

>>36357349
everybody is socialized to respond according to the input they get from enviornment.
for your second point: do you understand that the only reason you imply that uteruses are essence is because of realtionship between men and women if there was no heterosexual relationship between men and women, uteruses wouldn't be "essence" because then everybody would just be a man just like now we have short men tall men bearded men and bald men then we would have men with uteruses and men without one

>>36357283
yk you can use a bicycle and a toilet for their purposes without even touching the seat right so it's not even necessarily a part of it

File: IMG_8881.jpg (44 KB, 640x506)

44 KB JPG

>>36356961
Why do women feel they deserve such worship for their role as essentially baby ovens? Like, isn't there anything more they'd like to offer the world than shitting out more fucking kids?

>>36356961
>Like this need to erase them and undermine them in order to uplift trans women
They aren't erased at all by trans women though. Never understood this assertion from the terf side.

>>36357410
what about a tree that grew in the shape of a chair?
is that a chair?

>>36357397
So, people can't train themselves to override their treatment of others external to perceptible sex?

I may not be perfect, but I'm pretty fucking close, in that regard. I've practiced it for a while and deal with various human beings often.
In fact, you need people to train themselves to entertain your "girlhood" since transgirlhood is generally just what living as a twink is like. Harmless AMAB.

>>36357444
you are a chair and my fat 400lb ass is coming your way

>>36357444
not manmade so no and also you're in retarded hypotheticals at this point

>>36357243
No, it was and is just AFAB or AMAB.
Step 1. - remove neonate from womb (hope the mom didn't die, who was clearly AFAB or else this miracle couldn't have transpired)
Step 2. - evaluate its genitalia and other mild secondary traits to pick its sex
Step 3. - raise it along certain lines of sexism to prepare it for biofunction - die in war or in childbirth

That's what's been happening. It's been gametes the whole time but crudely, without knowing what controlled sperm or eggs.

>>36357451
y-yes of course sir
>>36357460
but it looks like a chair, functions like a chair. What difference does the mode of creation make?
you can't tell the difference between a chair naturally formed by strange luck, and a chair carved by man. The only difference is in your mind

>>36357445
you can be polite sure but if you see someone clocky you can't help but notice that and that information will be registered whether you like it or not, and by "you" do you mean trannies or just me?
trans women who transition after puberty usually have a lower chance of passing and people will interact with them accordingly whether by being "nice" or not being nice.
if by "you" you mean me my situation is a lot more complicated than you think

>>36357465
>it was and is just AFAB or AMAB.
which in your example wasn't defined on gametes as no one believed they existed, unlike eg magic souls. You yourself is stating the assignment was based on visible genitalia at birth, not gametes.

The definition clearly has changed.

>It's been gametes the whole time but crudely
of course gametes themselves have existed, but not your definition. Retard.

>>36357465
no it wasn't just AFAB or AMAB there were also intersex(if they had analogous genetiles) babies who most likely were killed after birth

>>36356848
Let’s face it this board has been going downhill for at least 3 years. With tranny derangement syndrome becoming popular on pol and right wing discourse we get an exponentially expanding tourist population who only know how to call us degenerate pedophiles and get angry at the threads they derail.

>>36357474
if it's anything like the "you can't tell the difference" you usually see on here, trust me, we could
if it was entirely natural, it would not have the purpose behind it, disqualifying it. it would be a neat coincidence you could use as a seat.

File: 1713010666243603.png (131 KB, 601x508)

131 KB PNG

>>36356826
>look how unfunny they are, guys, trannies are delusional if they think this proves anything

>>36357542
literal npc behaviors they literally have a dialog tree and each one of their talking points can be easily debunked but the problem is more than that these bastards think that the existence and rights of a group CAN be debated. fuck them never engage with them

>>36357423
There isn't anything that anyone can offer that is more valuable than making new people

>>36357549
but you can't ascertain the purpose of creation simply by what is real about the object. Perhaps it was an art piece explicitly created not to be sat on, yet among chairs you would not recognize it as otherwise
your attempt at a definition has resulted in a spook. You have no idea what a chair is if you have to guess at its creators intent to know.

>>36357549
so it's entirely subjective therefore your definition becomes null

File: 1695018629509156.gif (820 KB, 227x300)

820 KB GIF

>>36356848
twitter is GAY and this is not epic winrar >:(

Lol the horse reply doesn't even make sense because a horse isn't intended for usage as a seat, it's as objectifying of animals as they are being of women by comparing them in complexity to chairs

Fsr i kind of admire how absolutely deranged willing to cope you guys are over pretending to be women for some reason

>>36357191
Actually I have used a toilet to sit and mess around on my phone during work as a bonus break so like...

>>36357605
I'm drunk i said fsr at the beginning and end oops lol

>>36357423
I wouldn’t say it’s women
But with the rise of free love, as well as acceptance of non hetero sexualities, some women started to feel anxious about losing their place in the stable family. Women have less value as a sexual partner because they age, but as a breeder? A breeder makes you tangentially more valuable than being a hole. In a world in which divorce rates are nearing 50% and households are increasingly needing more than one income because of wage stagnation, some women prefer to revert to being stepped on if it meant security.
As such terfs exaggerate this to the extreme by putting all the emphasis on pumping out babies because it’s epic to own the trannies even if they sacrifice their own rights by banning abortions and legalizing child marriage, or whatever it is the heritage foundation is up to.

>>36357578
I can guess that horses didn't evolve to be sat on by a species of animal that has only had horses domesticated for 10k years you insane troon

>>36357638
if you created a horse clone in a lab for the purpose of sitting on it, is it a chair?

>>36357578
first youre assuming visual information is all there is to go off of (shocker for this board)
but more importantly it is possible to incorrectly assume something is or isnt a chair and that does not change whether it is in fact a chair

>>36357654
I think you should be able to recognize a chair quite easily simply with a glance. I certainly can
if your definition of a chair requires you to know something about the chair's history and purpose of creation I think you have a very clumsy and unhelpful definition. Can't a chair be defined purely by what it is, not by what it might have been in the past?

>>36357647
? This is such a retarded redditfag semantic argument. No, it would still be an animal that has DNA evolved over aeons to encode it to run around really fast in plains. Cloning occurs in the womb in almost every circumstance it occurs btw you retarded tranny

What do you people even think you're accomplishing with this argument? Even if you were able to prove yourself correct (which you cannot because nothing about what you are saying makes sense) all you would be doing is showing that the english language, or rather, the english vernacular currently used isn't complex enough to describe what the people using it mean(again, you are not doing this, i am describing what you would be doing if you were arguing on a point that made sense, not "why dont you guys think men are women")

>>36357685
>No, it would still be an animal that has DNA evolved over aeons to encode it to run around really fast in plains
are chairs made of wood still chairs if all their material came from dna that does not exist for the purpose of being sat on?
>all you would be doing is showing that the english language, or rather, the english vernacular currently used isn't complex enough to describe what the people using it mean
read this >>36357005
no language is able to create a perfect definition of a chair. Chairs aren't real and you should stop trying

>>36357701
All wooden chairs come from dna not intended for sitting on you absolute mongoloid... Are you asking me if a chair made out of bones or some other type of solid structure would be a chair?

There are many descriptive terms used that are entirely vague in specification by their very purpose, and even the examples it DOES apply to (not fucking chairs or women) such as "heap" or "evildoer", are not suddenly invalidated as words that have definitions because you have come to the genius conclusion that the size of a "heap" is not possible to quantify, or "evil" being a completely relative term. I fucking hate trannies. Again, repeating that woman is an entirely quantifiable term as well as chair.

>>36357743
if a chair is quantifiable how come you need to know the intent of its creator?
you're not trying to define a chair, you're trying to define the definition of a chair, your idea of a chair. You can't do it, because chairs don't exist.

>>36357761
DNA has no actual intent, or creator, are you assuming I'm a retarded christfag, or are you one? DNA is just a set of instructions an organism follows that broadly give it the traits and goals necessary to propagate itself

Again, just because you have come to the conclusion that is taught to most people around 4th grade that indefinable terms exist does not mean that you can pretend that something like a chair is undefinable and therefore somehow prove that you are a woman

>>36357788
but you can't define a chair

>>36357788
indefinable is the wrong term sorry lol indefinite is what meant i was annoyed because youre being a retarded faggot to justify your masturbatory obsession
>>36357795
Are you just short circuiting and repeating the same stupid shit you saw all the other ugly losers pretending to be girls say on twitter? Is this interaction over?

>>36357803
uh huh
go read that buddhist thing about the chariot, it's cool

>>36357576
Value is subjective so maybye someone dying of thirst would think a pregantwomen offering them a glass of water is far more valuable than the baby they will plop out.

>>36357814
It is a philosophical proverb that isn't referring to what you're saying at all lol everyone and their mother has read this

I can't believe trannies genuinely share this shit as evidence for the dumb shit they say, it's like a baby boomer posting bible verses or a retarded old muslim man quoting some hadiths to justify hating gay people

I think I'm gonna go play games because I have spent the 20 minutes being annoyed at a retard today that I allow myself

>>36356942
This definition is to specify the difference between women and girls. It’s not all encompassing. Look at the definition of girl and you’ll see what I mean.

Also using google definitions instead of a respected literary source lmao are you 15?

File: merriam webster.png (20 KB, 712x219)

20 KB PNG

>>36357879
Merriam webster

>>36357682
Sure, almost everyone can correctly assume something is a chair at a glance 99.99% of the time. And of the few times you may be wrong it would probably be inconsiquential. But the thread asked for a solid definition, so one was given. At this point the definition isn't even being debated, so you're trying to switch the argument to the usefulness and subjectivity of definitions in general to try to find a gotcha.
You can make extremely realistic lookalikes of many things in many ways, so trying to make definitions have to be applicable "at a glance" is pointless.

>>36356826
>famous writer
>doesn’t understand the difference between and analogy, a comparison, metaphore, simile etc.

Girl this is like grade 9 English I know it’s been a while but you’re supposed to be a renown author this is embarrassing.

So many of you have so much to learn about the world. The best part is you don’t have to worry about jk growling’s opinion. You can just keep on living your life as she tweets into the void with her hateful followers. It literally doesn’t matter. Her opinion is just that. It stops being important as soon as you stop giving it importance

>>36357914
JK Rowling S.S. wont leave us alone

>>36356925
No ome is honest about. Trannies will get angry if hons are pushed out and cisoids will get angry if passing tranny is pushed in. Its all about passing the social construct we all agree makes a women or a man, if you dont look like the thing society classifies it as then you arent and work harder.

>>36357879
>Also using google definitions instead of a respected literary source lmao are you 15?
You uh.. you know google don’t write those definitions, right?

Like bruh it’s literally in the screenshot. “From Oxford Languages”. Lmao.

>>36356961
>women have to have children to be women
It's so telling that TER"F" talking points revolve around this. I guess women actually are solely reducible in value and importance to being baby factories, thanks for letting us know 'radical feminists.'

Trannies insisting on making normies pretend they’re literally women instead of trying to go the third gender “ladyboy” route in society will ultimately be their downfall fr

>>36357997
Well yeah traditionally the only value women have to society is breeding and these people are reactionary traditionalists

>>36357012
words can no more perfectly describe reality than a painting can capture it
inevitably, some perspectives are left out, and some details are smoothed over

File: Triumph-Rocket-III-motorc(...).png (1.3 MB, 1600x1131)

1.3 MB PNG

>>36358389
oh sorry i forgot to add the image lol

>>36357885
why does it say 1 a there anon? what does that have to do with the definition?

>>36357605
>because a horse isn't intended for usage as a seat
it was literally bred to be say upon. the reason it was born, and it's parents were born, and their parents were born going back thousands of generations, was so that people could sit on them

>>36358393
Did you think this was a good argument? This fails for the same reason as the bicycle

>>36356826
this feels like when your super weird fucked up hobby or fetish gets an article or section in a TV show and you get crippling embarrassment at being percieved, normies dont talk about my gay internet debatebro drama

>>36356961
>constant disregard for real women
bro this sounds an awful lot like the "white genocide" that white supremacists always talk about.

>>36358773
What a coincidence…

>>36356995
>Genetic defects or issues with their reproductive organs
That's trans women

>>36356826
This argument hurts troons more than it helps them. Yes, "chair" is somewhat hard to strictly define, but everyone knows a chair when they see one. Just like people know a horse isn't a chair, they know that a tranny isn't a woman.

>>36359508
being a man isn't a genetic defect, you're just the opposite sex

>>36359543
Being trans is
Trans is real, biology is real

>>36359527
tl;dr passoids and cute twinkhons are women

>>36356848
i miss tripfag drama and discord wars, even that was far ore entertaining than the moder nboard

>>36357574
This is why I never debate with them. No amount of arguing, fighting, about the existence of LGBT people is going to magically make us disappear. They’re literally wasting their time. They would understand this if they took all of 5 minutes to realize lgbt people aren’t choosing to be lgbt. It’s amazing to witness the depths of human stupidity day in and day out. Truly has no bounds

>>36357885
Yes, and what is a girl? Also like the other anon said, I’m not surprised you didn’t include the other definitions in your shit crop job

>>36359558
yes, passoids essentially are women. if you pass as a woman you'll get treated as a woman in almost all circumstances. "cute twinkhons" aren't women, despite what chasers say.

>>36357927
I understand but it’s only important so long as you give it importance. I used to find virtue in not letting people get me angry enough to block them, but after elon husk went with his stupid blue. Heck mark pay to play system, and the algorithm feeding me absolute nonsense everyday, the block button is so much more useful. It’s simple. Those people’s opinions never make their way into my feed again. There’s no use in letting literal dunces get you riled up. Even the trolls in this board. It’s funny because the most they can do is so minuscule compared to the vastness of the world. The religious ones are the funniest because they would rather rant and rave asking questions to lgbt people, but are too scared to ask their “god” why he keeps creating us in the first place. Lmao it’s all so silly in the grand scheme of things. Nothing pisses them off more than just ignoring them and giving no attention

>>36359664
They look more like women than men and can seem like masculine cis women

>>36357997
They don’t realize the floodgate that bioessentialism opens up.

Males have bodily development intended to produce small gametes, regardless of whether that is successful
Females have bodily development intended to produce large gametes, regardless of whether that is successful
>but muh intersex
Intersex conditions are variations on males or females. Not a third thing.

>>36359543
Example #22375837236384 cis male who doesn’t understand gender dysphoria. What’s new

>>36359682
NYA but, Which species? Some plants have both. Some animals have both. Some insects, have both yet get referred to as male and female. You have to be specific. “Female” denotes more than just the animal kingdom.

>>36356925
>jealousy
>of trannies

>>36356826
the chair argument only works when you're discussing the issue with people who think its up for debate. the definition of woman for JK will be whatever narrow definition she can come up with that only includes her and excludes any trannies

File: wow.gif (2.81 MB, 600x338)

2.81 MB GIF

>>36359720
Damn that's crazy I was convinced that sex can rather easily be defined but your semantics through pretending to miss the point has convinced the world otherwise, nobody can stand against the intellectual stunlock that is transgender word games

>>36359682
That’s a definition. You could have just said chromosomes though, it’s simpler and functionally the same thing. That’s why we use them.

But it’s not the definition, just a definition. There’s a lot of different things we mean when we say “sex” or “female”, and most of the time we’re not talking about gametes or chromosomes.

We look at peoples “physical sex”; their sex characteristics, the thing we observe in the world.
We look at their “social sex”, the way they behave and function in society. Something people often call “gender” now.

The fact is there’s dozens of different definitions of most words, and the power of language is that we can use context to interpret which one to apply and how. Most people do this automatically.

häst!

>>36359682
How can you measure bodily development when it's not successful your statement contradict itself and your too stupid to realize it and by your own stupid definition some variations of intersex people don't produce any gametes but you still say they belong to one sex or another even though earlier you said that what sperates men and women is their production of gametes
In summary you're a retarded bastard who doesn't even believe his own bullshit

>>36359682
intersex conditions are not just variations on male or females. they're not third things either. they're altered pathways which will lead to different destinations. depending on your criteria you can draw a shape of "male" that includes these some of those other destinations, and a circle of "female" that includes some of those other destinations, but which destinations will fall in the bounds of which shape is going to depend entirely on arbitrary distinctions. do you put more stock into genotype or phenotype is going to be the most obvious type of distinction, but really there's hundreds of possible answers.

>>36360583
>your too stupid
geg

>>36356826
>solve for chair
>>36356961
>woman is when give birth
>transgender is when magical woman soul
hmm yes totally sane reductivism
isn't that argument in itself disregard for "real women"?

>>36356826
Much like The One Joke, you're getting old, Joanne

No one itt can define female and it shows

>>36361863
I have the best definition.
A female human is one that has oocytes of their own. No eggs? Not female. Lost them? Do better.
A male human is one that can fertilize an oocyte to make an embryo. Lost your nuts in the war? Too bad! Mouse somehow fertilizes a human oocyte? It is a human. Female human fertilizes an oocyte somehow? Female AND male human.

>>36362027
the mouse made it into the big leagues... im so proud

>>36357012
How you will determine the purpose something was built for?

>>36357605
>muh objectification
Most transparent dodge of the scenario so you can clutch your pearls, that I've ever seen

>>36357914
She is literally influencing British government policy

>>36357423
Read Engles

>>36356826
Regardless of the trans stuff, the way the internet uses dopamine mechanisms to turn argument into a bloodsport really does create this strange mental illness/autism where people cannot/will not into pattern recognition - that it’s somehow illegitimate or entirely subjective. It’s why everything is pedophilia, genocide or fascism. Moral/philosophical greys don’t equal into maximum dopamine pings from content engagement. Le sad

>>36359664
Why were you even being hostile? We pretty much agree with you

>>36359682
>intended to
What intent? Silly idea of biology

>>36362027
Infertile women are not female?
Infertile men are not male?

>>36356826
A horse does not have the same back that a chair would. Different definitions, same pronunciation by coincidence.

>>36363190
No two things in a category are exactly alike. You didn't define the difference, just asserted there is one.

>>36362963
Correct. Female referring to the capacity to reproduce sexually as the egg, whether that is an oocyte or an ovary on the stoma of a flower. Without the capacity, it has no value as a term.
Males are anything that can fertilize an egg. Doesn't matter if it is a different species or the same specimen.
I argue that male and female are not traits, but reproductive roles. Distinguishing the two is usually not important, but we WILL eventually conquer our biology. It is inevitable. We WILL eventually have pregnant cis men, three-way sexual reproduction in plants, bacteria that degrade plastic, and everything else you can think of.

File: 20240701_114427.jpg (1.46 MB, 2880x2880)

1.46 MB JPG

>>36363340
difference defined

>>36363426
first one can be subcat of the second one

>>36357023
i mean... yeah?
whats your point?

>>36356826
I've never heard the chair argument, but as a physics expert I feel compelled to add this is actually a valid argument. Our definitions of everyday things are vague at best, and crumble when inspected. This is a fundamental problem, and if not taken serious, it reduces the meaning of terms and concepts to a simple shitflinging of what you want them to mean in your current argument, making a reasonable and logical debate useless.
J.K. Rowling is a fucking idiot, as she masterfully displays in that image by dodging the point entirely.

Can't you reduce every argument to "what is a chair" when technically language isn't perfect and no idea can be exactly defined because all of us are experiencing reality subjectively and most forms of categorization have exceptions/outliers? It doesn't prove anything to derail the argument by doing this, all you're doing is extreme reductionism to
>reality is subjective so any word can mean anything
It's just a lame tactic to avoid arguing in good faith and then claim that you won after you've derailed all lines of communication. Like do you genuinely believe that reality doesn't exist outside of how it's defined by words, or are you just being a little shit and trying to "win" an argument by basically cheating?

File: Ludwig_Wittgenstein_1929.jpg (19 KB, 220x293)

19 KB JPG

>>36356826
It's funny how perfectly this example highlights wittgenstein's concept of language games but i don't think she'd understand that

>>36363674
You can, if you're a prick, but in this case it's a reasonable and short-range argument, at least if used right. After all, when a chud says "you will never be a woman", they often mean to imply lots of different other statements like "you will never look like a woman", "you will never feel like a woman", "you will never sound like a woman", all of which are extremely complex and not at all clearly defined things.
Human communication is complex. You are also practicing reductionism right now, because as it is, the chair argument can also be used to call attention to how the asymmetry of what two arguing parties mean by the same word can constitute the whole argument.
Slippery slope fallacies aren't the only thing that can happen when someone uses a strange argument, you know?

>>36363674
The entire “what is a woman” argument is itself just an attempt to derail the discourse.
We’ve got people dedicating their entire career to deconstructing and analysing “what is a woman” but nobody who asks that is actually doing it in good faith. Otherwise they’d engage with the question. They just want to assert they have the “correct” one.

“What is a chair” is an attempt to illustrate what is going on when people say “what is a woman”. Pointless semantics naysaying.
The “correct” answer is:
>it depends what you mean

>>36363860
>>36363939
Wasn't the point of the whole "what is a woman" thing to illustrate how a normal person can easily describe a woman as an adult human female without getting too hung up over the ultimate subjectivity of language, whereas all the troons who were asked this question were forced to reduce the argument into "everything is subjective and nothing can be described, so a woman is anyone who says they are a woman". I feel like the chair thing helps the chud position more than yours because it highlights how extreme linguistic reductionism isn't helpful and if you have to stoop to the level where you can't even agree on what a fucking chair is, then you're probably just wrong about something and trying to make an escape.
>After all, when a chud says "you will never be a woman", they often mean to imply lots of different other statements like "you will never look like a woman", "you will never feel like a woman", "you will never sound like a woman", all of which are extremely complex and not at all clearly defined things.
You realize by this logic, no one can "be" anything, right? When you guys bring the argument down to this level it seems to me like you genuinely believe that reality doesn't exist outside of how you define it. Don't you think there's more to being something than just being perceived as it?

>>36364226
the point of the what is a woman thing was specifically to exclude trans people
because those same normal people were generally fine with referring to attractive transfems as women

are you assuming that matt walsh went into it purely as some good faith investigation into how we use language

>>36363703
Yeah except Wittgy wouldn't agree that people have some sort of moral responsibility to change their use of the term 'woman'. In fact, by his lights trans women are categorically not women within any community that employs the term 'woman' only when referring to afabs.

File: 1716511860287637.png (416 KB, 474x800)

416 KB PNG

>>36364226
If it's online we should just troll with stuff like picrel, or posting passoids and making them say it's not a woman.
If irl just say adult female human (not AHF, the slight dissonance from their preferred dogwhistle pisses them off and female is considered better by real feminists as an adjective anyway), then if they ask what female means just be like well you already know

>>36356826
>woman
Human with a vulva and vagina.
>man
Human with a cock and balls.
>hermaphrodite
Human with ambiguous genitals.
Simple as.

Twitter screencap thread.

>>36364226
>>36364254
>>36365069
So... no one can define female. Got it

>>36359527
>>36356826
thats literally not even the point at all wtf how is it this hard to comprehend semantics something all language is based on isnt jk rowling a fucking WRITER and how can you stare at it going clean over someones head put simply and easy to understand and somehow doing the exact same what the fuck

>>36365259
you are literally just a bot grade dumbass

File: 1717927465270175.jpg (134 KB, 736x879)

134 KB JPG

>>36364838
>>36356826
>>36364226
why do ppl think trannies are the only ones trying to change the heckin definition and being the pants shitters when any definition a transphobe would have you lay down/one that excludes trannies is nothing like the cultural perception of what a woman is, not in any time or place on the planet. at least a tranny definition would value function over some meaningless rule dictated entirely by material reality and could change a thousand times and nobody would ever be the wiser and/or value abstract and social reality (aka, what society is based on, the material world is the means not the dictator) and at least wouldn't require you to start caring what rocks think to be logically consistent

if you want to exclude all trannies from the definition of woman, you objectively have to change it considerably, or you're either not excluding all trannies or coping hard.

>>36367481
define semantics bozo

>>36364254
this, based on every single discussion surrounding that shit i doubt he even conceptualized something like that at any point at all

>>36367859
when we shed culture war TDS and postblanchardism and go back to 'what is a tranny' then some progress will happen t bh, not much before that