It seems unlikely after giving birth twice. But I could be one of those women with a rare intersex condition where the SRY region of the Y chromosome isn't working as normal. But yes I'd still be female.
-
well if the definition of human was "has two arms", it sure wouldn't fit the category definition, so this is not a good rebuttal.
But that's not the defn of human! I can't believe that this thread which started w ppl worrying whether a transwoman wld be offended if someone suggests a woman should join a panel is now talking about whether people w birth defects are human! In real life this is not a question!
-
-
yeah, that's not the definition of human, which is why your example does not work. we are not proposing that definition of human. You are proposing the capacity to produce eggs to be the definition of woman. You have not explained how this can fail to exclude infertile women.
-
No I'm not. I'm saying being *of the sex* that produces eggs. Think of typical female anatomy. Ovaries not working? Still female. No ovaries? Still female. No uterus? Still female. Etc.. None of these situations are part male
- 7 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
nobody is proposing that. please stay arguing in good faith with us.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.