Anonymous at Tue, 15 Oct 2024 18:30:59 UTC No. 16433272

>>16433269
An adult human with the potential to be impregnated and bear children.

Anonymous at Tue, 15 Oct 2024 18:35:56 UTC No. 16433278

>>16433272
Are there really no such thing as infertile women?

Anonymous at Tue, 15 Oct 2024 18:40:18 UTC No. 16433288

>>16433269
XX chromosomes

Anonymous at Tue, 15 Oct 2024 18:41:42 UTC No. 16433292

>>16433269
"man" and "woman" are titles that society assigns to people typically based on their sexual characteristics.

Another case, for example, is when in prison some people with typically male sexual characteristics are assigned as women to avoid homosexuality.

Anonymous at Tue, 15 Oct 2024 18:43:16 UTC No. 16433296

>>16433288
Chromosomes were discovered only two centuries ago, so were there really no mentions of women before that?

Anonymous at Tue, 15 Oct 2024 18:45:11 UTC No. 16433300

>>16433278
They're still women. Also this is a continuum fallacy even if it were a good point. The core of "man" and "woman" is reproduction.

Anonymous at Tue, 15 Oct 2024 18:48:11 UTC No. 16433305

>>16433300
So to be a woman it is not necessary to have the potential to give birth to a child. Then what?

Anonymous at Tue, 15 Oct 2024 18:50:49 UTC No. 16433308

>>16433296
The question was define woman scientifically, not how did they define woman 300 years ago.

Anonymous at Tue, 15 Oct 2024 18:51:20 UTC No. 16433310

>>16433305
It's necessary to have the potential to bear a child. Infertile women don't actualize this potential, but they're still women.

Anonymous at Tue, 15 Oct 2024 18:52:22 UTC No. 16433313

>>16433296
H2O was only discovered two centuries ago (I don't actually know when but the point stands), so was there really no water before that?

Anonymous at Tue, 15 Oct 2024 18:52:49 UTC No. 16433315

>>16433269
person with an innie. I got an outie

Anonymous at Tue, 15 Oct 2024 18:58:49 UTC No. 16433323

>>16433310
We are not talking about women who just refuse to have a child, but who simply cannot have one because of their biology.

Anonymous at Tue, 15 Oct 2024 19:01:24 UTC No. 16433325

>>16433323
They still have the potential, but their development has made it so they can't actualize their potential. They still have a womb and ovaries and periods and everything. They're essentially a woman affected by a disease. Now you may ask about intersex people, but that would be the fallacy of the beard.

Anonymous at Tue, 15 Oct 2024 19:03:30 UTC No. 16433329

>>16433313
Of course there was water, but water is not "H2O", lol? it's just that in our universe water has such an embodiment, but what we call water could have a different chemical formula in a universe with different chemistry, for example. The fact that we had a reference to water before the molecule H2O was discovered proves this. The concept of water precedes the concept of H2O.

Anonymous at Tue, 15 Oct 2024 19:04:30 UTC No. 16433331

>>16433325
A disease that deprives them of the potential to bear children.

Anonymous at Tue, 15 Oct 2024 19:04:38 UTC No. 16433332

>>16433323
A human is still an organism with 2 legs and 2 arms even if some people are amputees or are missing limbs due to birth defects. You're grasping at straws.

Anonymous at Tue, 15 Oct 2024 19:04:44 UTC No. 16433333

>>16433323
A woman is a person who was assigned female at birth.
>ok what is female then
;- )

Anonymous at Tue, 15 Oct 2024 19:06:36 UTC No. 16433335

>>16433331
Yes?

Anonymous at Tue, 15 Oct 2024 19:07:50 UTC No. 16433336

If a person is born with one leg are they still human?
>yes
ok now follow that to its logical conclusion and you will see why abortion is murder

Anonymous at Tue, 15 Oct 2024 19:08:19 UTC No. 16433338

>>16433332
Show me a human organism with two arms that does not have two arms. By your definition, this is possible.

Anonymous at Tue, 15 Oct 2024 19:08:40 UTC No. 16433340

>>16433329
>if humans reproduced asexually, women and men wouldn't exist, therefore women and men don't exist
this is your logic dude
"what if 1+1=1" tier lmao

Anonymous at Tue, 15 Oct 2024 19:12:29 UTC No. 16433344

>>16433340
But I didn't say that. I just said that the fact that we have references to women before chromosomes were discovered suggests that the term woman at least could not always refer to chromosomes.

Anonymous at Tue, 15 Oct 2024 19:13:36 UTC No. 16433346

>>16433344
Two things can refer to the same thing though. Water is H2O, but you can also define it in another way, as the ancients did.