🐱 Dictionary's definition of 'female' mentioning 'gender identity' draws criticism

CatParty


Despite the change being years old, Merriam-Webster is facing fresh criticism after a change to the definition of "female" was pointed out on social media.

The offending change is apparently the addition to the definition of "female" that reads "having a gender identity that is the opposite of male." Archived instances of the dictionary website show the change was made sometime between July 3, 2020, and Sept. 10, 2020.


Conservative political commentator Matt Walsh posted the change on Twitter to his over 1 million followers Tuesday. Many replied or quote-tweeted Walsh's post voicing their outrage at the change.

It was bound to happen. Merriam-Webster has changed its dictionary definition of 'female' to appease the trans activists," Walsh claimed, highlighting the offending part of the definition.
I thought Webster would redefine 'woman' and then say that woman and female are not necessarily the same (which is what the trans cult has been incoherenly claiming for years). But they went right for the most extreme rewrite, actually changing the biological definition of female," Walsh adds in another tweet.

Merriam-Webster's definition of "male" also includes similar phrasing, saying "having a gender identity that is the opposite of female."

"What does the 'opposite of male' mean?" asks political commentator Mike Cernovich, who also said the definitions don't "make sense."

Others chimed in, with some saying the definition change led them to believe "the language is dying." Others likening it to"newspeak," a form of language control featured in the oft-referenced George Orwell novel "1984."

Never mind that the trans activists have always insisted that sex and 'gender identity' are two different things," Walsh says in a follow-up tweet. "If they can rewrite the dictionary then they can certainly redefine their own made up jargon as they please.
The conversation of gender identity, transgender acceptance, and what constitutes a "man" or "woman" has been a hot political topic in recent years.

Transgender activists say these changes, coupled with general awareness of trans issues, promote safer, healthier spaces for their community.

Critics have been actively pushing back against any proposed changes they see as superficial or unneeded, advocating instead for "traditional" definitions and practices based on their own ideologies.
 
broke take: this is LITERALLY Newspeak from the book 1984
woke take: Merriam-Webster is low key reinforcing the gender binary by placing male and female as diametrically opposed poles
bespoke take: given that they have no immediate way to express their subjective identity, it is now impossible and indeed problematic to gender animals
 
I like how useless these definitions are:

If a female is merely the opposite of a male and a male is the opposite of a female, that's well and good, but what makes someone male or female. What are its intrinsic values? How does one determine what they are based on this? "Being the opposite" of something isn't a definition. There's nothing defined about what they presented.
 
Or in other words: Clown World.

(and the word "society" can be associated with The Joker now)

Both for the same reasons.

We are in a world where The Joker's nihilistic anarchist talk is starting to make some sort of sense, frighteningly.

Im not one of those "When you grow up, The Joker makes sense" type of guy, but I will recognise that the things he said in the interrogation scene in The Dark Knight are still uncomfortable to hear because they do hit close to home, especially the one about people dropping their morals and codes at the first sign of trouble and their "virtue" is paper thin. Tho I attribute that more to Bale and the writers than the character itself.
 
What are its intrinsic values? How does one determine what they are based on this? "Being the opposite" of something isn't a definition. There's nothing defined about what they presented.
I'll give people a little slack, in reading all these threads and articles it is shockingly difficult to condense "what is a woman" or any definition into a box that is around 260 characters. It's one of those things that humans intrinsically know, but is hard to say because it's actually 30-40 subtle parallel cues and body language expression mannerisms that still count if as many as 10 are absent or actively being violated.

To define a woman on paper would take several paragraphs, no one's really done it in a tweet, and nobody reads anymore.
 
You can provide an antonym to assist with a definition, but it is not a definition in of itself. If female is defined as "opposite of male" then male is "opposite of female". Says nothing about what it means to be male or female, it's circular logic and completely meaningless.
 
I'll give people a little slack, in reading all these threads and articles it is shockingly difficult to condense "what is a woman" or any definition into a box that is around 260 characters. It's one of those things that humans intrinsically know, but is hard to say because it's actually 30-40 subtle parallel cues and body language expression mannerisms that still count if as many as 10 are absent or actively being violated.

To define a woman on paper would take several paragraphs, no one's really done it in a tweet, and nobody reads anymore.
Well "adult human female" works just fine. Intersex conditions are the exceptions; man / woman is the rule, and woman should be defined without reference to intersex conditions.
 
Back