When you have to make an argument you've already lost, make it as structural/functionalist as possible to reduce how much surface area you have to defend.
Are you some sort of idiot needs a definition of each word used? That's what dictionaries are for. Anyways she defines what she meant in the complete sentence. Arguing with me about whether or not she's right is pointless, I didn't make the statement, merely pointed out she did define it.
"A woman is someone who belongs to the sex class that produces large gametes." That's all she said. No word on what a sex class entails, or whether someone who no longer produces large gametes, or who should produce them but can't due to a genetic defect, continues to be in it.
You have one more reply before I report you for being a troll.
It’s case by case, the category of intersex sometimes called hermaphroditism (though many dislike the term) is usually accompanied with sterility though. It’s also very rare as far as intersex conditions go
She forgot to define "sex class", which could be all sorts of things. She did that because either she doesn't know shit about classes, or because she wants to just say "women are women goddamnit" without actually saying it.
A sex class is defined by the material conditions of the exploitation of labor it's members experience while producing their respective gametes. Obviously.
And of course she doesn't, because she can't. She has a middle-school grasp of the subject, and she's trying to define "woman" as "woman" by using the weasel word "class".
I believe a woman is a human being who belongs to the sex class that produces large gametes. It’s irrelevant whether or not her gametes have ever been fertilised, whether or not she’s carried a baby to term, irrelevant if she was born with a rare difference of sexual development that makes neither of the above possible, or if she’s aged beyond being able to produce viable eggs. She is a woman and just as much a woman as the others.
I can only deduce that "sex class" is some kind of group where you produce large gametes, but it doesn't matter if they're viable.
I don't have ovaries, but I had them at some point in my life. I can only surmise I'm not in the "sex class" woman according to Rowling, since I don't produce large gametes, viable or not.
Yeah, except I'm pretty sure she disagrees. Weird, it's almost as if any rational definition actually is actually automatically inclusive, except when you jump through a million hoops to make it less so.
