What is a woman

What is a woman?


  • Total voters
    29
  • Poll closed .
AlexAP

AlexAP

Kraken
Joined
Nov 3, 2020
Posts
13,387
Reputation
27,823
I know what you think, XX chromosomes, that's it. But this would count for 99% of women, not 100%, so what do we do with the women with chromosomal abnormalities? Just ignore them or use a more inclusive definition?

If so, what would it be? Would it be "People whose bodies were naturally designed to produce eggs for reproduction"? That sounds good but there are intersex people who were born with bodies who don't produce eggs and with inner testicles, but with a vagina, and of course most of them were raised as and identify as female. Are they not women? Surely the men who date them see them as women if they were born with a vagina jfl.

So is it person with vaginas? Then transwomen with vaginas are women ...

Skip that. I think the hard truth that society doesn't want to accept is that the definition is:
1. A person who passes looks-wise as a woman in the eyes of society.
2. Following from 1, a person who can get sex whenever she wants (without paying).


So, forget all this biology stuff. It's all about looks. If you pass as a woman, you can get sex whenever you want, so you are effectively a woman.

This is Valentina Sampaio, a transwoman.

Obviously, 99% of straight men would have sex with her. If she's not a woman, that would men that 99% of straight men are actually gay. This "dilemma" could be solved by accepting that Valentina Sampaio is, indeed, a woman.
 
  • +1
  • Love it
  • JFL
Reactions: Austrian Oak, thecel, Growth Plate and 2 others
Can give birth to children
 
  • +1
Reactions: LightSkinNoob and Deleted member 18776
Yes, we just ignore them. People with chromosomal abnormalities or some other mutation that affects the genitals or some other form of development are the exception and they should not be included when answering the question. Men that dress like women and look like women are men that dress like women and look like women.
 
  • +1
Reactions: Deleted member 5892, Mongrelcel, ShowerMaxxing and 2 others
99 percent is enough and there is dna coding or some shi
 
Can give birth to children
That's a stupid definition because it excludes post menopausal women or women who have trouble having kids because of shit like PCOS
 
  • +1
Reactions: thecel, ShowerMaxxing, Deleted member 18776 and 1 other person
That's a stupid definition because it excludes post menopausal women or women who have trouble having kids because of shit like PCOS
At one point in their life they could still have children, they were women back then and they still are

Those who are infertile due to diseases or malformations of the uterus are biologically speaking “useless” from a reproductive standpoint;as non politically correct as this sounds

OP has a coomer mindset, he considers people women based on them being fuckable or not, I consider them to be women if they can birth offsprings
 
  • Woah
Reactions: thecel
Yes, we just ignore them. People with chromosomal abnormalities or some other mutation that affects the genitals or some other form of development are the exception and they should not be included when answering the question. Men that dress like women and look like women are men that dress like women and look like women.
But the whole debate is about the 1% exceptions. Everyone agrees that it's clear for 99%, no one will change that.

It's all about people who are intersex and trans, if they can be women too.
 
A woman is a human who happens to be born female
Anyone who disagrees is a transvetite in denial
 
  • +1
Reactions: ShowerMaxxing and Deleted member 18776
OP has a coomer mindset, he considers people women based on them being fuckable or not, I consider them to be women if they can birth offsprings
I used a definition that is, imo, the definition that most society uses, at least in the West. Obviously no one asks if you can give birth or if you have XX chromosomes, people just guess by the way they look.
 
  • +1
Reactions: Deleted member 19551
dont know but she hates me
 
  • +1
Reactions: wollet2
I used a definition that is, imo, the definition that most society uses, at least in the West. Obviously no one asks if you can give birth or if you have XX chromosomes, people just guess by the way they look.
Making offsprings is the only biological goal we have, anything else is just a different set of copes

Homos will just admit it openly they are banging dudes but people who believe in trans women will run circles of copes
 
  • +1
Reactions: LightSkinNoob and ShowerMaxxing
id fuck the bitch in OP
 
A woman is someone who was BORN with a vagina.
 
I think all of them can be "true" depending on the perspective. Like from a biological vs societal perspective.
 
  • +1
  • JFL
Reactions: AlexAP and Growth Plate
Making offsprings is the only biological goal we have, anything else is just a different set of copes
This means you define it with reproductive capabilities, which is fine. The definition I used was just how society views it, which is the most important definition imo.
Homos will just admit it openly they are banging dudes but people who believe in trans women will run circles of copes
Men who fuck transwomen with dicks are gay. Men who would fuck someone with a vagina and who looks like a women are not gay, most straight men would fuck the transwomen posted in OP (if they didn't know she was born a man).
 
Last edited:
A woman is a person who has no y chromosome(s). Technically a women can be born with additional copies of x chromosome.
 
  • +1
Reactions: LightSkinNoob
Men who fuck transwomen with dicks are gay. Men who would fuck someone with a vagina and who looks like a women are not gay, most straight men would fuck the transwomen posted in OP (if they didn't know she was born a man).
Every man who fucks another man is gay, some just do mental gymnastics instead of admitting to themselves
 
Every man who fucks another man is gay, some just do mental gymnastics instead of admitting to themselves
What if you have a date with Adriana Lima, she says "Turn the lights off", then comes and sucks your dick, but then it turns out the person who sucked your dick was Adrián Lima, a man?
 
  • JFL
Reactions: Chasseur and Growth Plate
What if you have a date with Adriana Lima, she says "Turn the lights off", then comes and sucks your dick, but then it turns out the person who sucked your dick was Adrián Lima, a man?
I would beat him up obviously, almost killing him
 
  • +1
Reactions: n0rthface
What if you have a date with Adriana Lima, she says "Turn the lights off", then comes and sucks your dick, but then it turns out the person who sucked your dick was Adrián Lima, a man?
Adrián’s 0.85 midface ratio would illuminate the dark room, leaving a chance for me to escape the room before he can touch me
 
  • JFL
Reactions: AlexAP
Obviously, 99% of straight men would have sex with her.
Even if they pass facially and have gigastacy face somehow (their frames and height could make them sus though)

if I see a dick on their body, I have no erection.

that fake vagina shit looks disgusting and is disgusting imagining your dick going inside that "vagina" when in reality you're going into idk what

so in conclusion, trannies are disgusting monsters even if they had a gigastacy face body and fake vagina
 
  • +1
Reactions: Deleted member 1901
Alex op you subversive jew
Your Jewish tricks are not going to work on us
Blocked
 
Even if they pass facially and have gigastacy face somehow (their frames and height could make them sus though)

if I see a dick on their body, I have no erection.

that fake vagina shit looks disgusting and is disgusting imagining your dick going inside that "vagina" when in reality you're going into idk what

so in conclusion, trannies are disgusting monsters even if they had a gigastacy face body and fake vagina
legit
 
  • Woah
  • JFL
Reactions: thecel and buckchadley31
The poll is very limited in options. Fuck you.
 
Where’s the poll answer for “whoever identifies as one”?
 
 
Last edited:

Minec
 
  • Love it
Reactions: thecel
The poll is very limited in options. Fuck you.
Cope, 4 options are good.
Where’s the poll answer for “whoever identifies as one”?
It's not enough. Even if gender identitity would be biological (?), it would be still "whoever has diagnosed gender dysphoria" and not just whoever identifies as one, as every troll could then say he's a woman.
 
  • JFL
Reactions: thecel
Where’s the poll answer for “whoever identifies as one”?
of course a retard like you would believe something like that
 
  • WTF
Reactions: thecel
Cope, 4 options are good.

It's not enough. Even if gender identitity would be biological (?), it would be still "whoever has diagnosed gender dysphoria" and not just whoever identifies as one, as every troll could then say he's a woman.

But it’s a poll. You pointed out the problems with the first 3 choices in your post, yet you included them in the poll. Gotta put everything in the poll, even the things you disagree with.
 
  • +1
Reactions: Deleted member 19551
At one point in their life they could still have children, they were women back then and they still are

Those who are infertile due to diseases or malformations of the uterus are biologically speaking “useless” from a reproductive standpoint;as non-PC as this sounds.

OP has a coomer mindset, he considers people women based on them being fuckable or not, I consider them to be women if they can birth offsprings
Yeah, biologically useless from an evolutionary perspective, but they are still women.
But the whole debate is about the 1% exceptions. Everyone agrees that it's clear for 99%, no one will change that.

It's all about people who are intersex and trans, if they can be women too.
Trans are just men in women's clothing. True genetic abnormalities are super rare.

It would be like if there was a country with 10 million people, 9,999,999 are black, and 1 is white, and I say, that's a black country, and you say, wait, but there's one white person, we should expand the definition of what it means to be from x country to include that one guy
 
  • +1
Reactions: thecel
Trans are just men in women's clothing. True genetic abnormalities are super rare.
Then your definition of women is just based on chromosomes. I would agree that it's enough in 99% of cases, but I would let exceptions exist.

At the end of the day, it's just about a word, not about biology. For example, the word "father" is officially used for adoptive fathers and stepfathers too, it doesn't only have a biological meaning, it also has a social and legal meaning. No one who calls an adoptive father a father thinks he's the "biological father."
It would be like if there was a country with 10 million people, 9,999,999 are black, and 1 is white, and I say, that's a black country, and you say, wait, but there's one white person, we should expand the definition of what it means to be from x country to include that one guy
Let's say the country is named Stanville, and everyone except for one person is black. Of course you can say "Stanville is a black country." But the single white person who is a citizen of Stanville is still a Stanvillian, isn't he? The definition of "Stanvillian" would then be "Everyone who is a citizen of Stanville" and this would include the single white person.
 
  • +1
Reactions: thecel

Similar threads

Canwefixit
Replies
32
Views
2K
stamaster21
stamaster21
InnerVoid
Replies
4
Views
216
InnerVoid
InnerVoid
Depresso
Replies
15
Views
325
Facecel
Facecel
Eternal_
Replies
2
Views
217
Jagger
Jagger

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top