• Ginny [they/she]@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    19 hours ago

    My understanding was that current consensus was that humans with ovaries are born with all of the eggs already created - waiting to be released - and no more are created after that. So you’re either born holding eggs or you ain’t, and intention and capability don’t come into it.

      • Fedizen@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        17
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        18 hours ago

        It also excludes women with certain kinds of infertility.

        The social/political definition of women should just be believe what people say they are because otherwise you’re creating a genital/dna inspector.

        As for the biological definitions, we should teach more people biology. There are like 6 definitions of species so biology has trouble answering “what is a human”

        • Ginny [they/she]@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          16 hours ago

          There are like 6 definitions of species so biology has trouble answering “what is a human”

          We don’t need biologists to define what a human is, though. We have known since the time of Plato that a human being is a featherless biped with broad flat nails.

        • T00l_shed@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          18 hours ago

          It also excludes women with certain kinds of infertility.

          That was my “main” premise for lack of a better word, but i agree with what you said :)