MindMatters: What Is a Woman? Three Dudes Attempt the Impossible

A hour a 20 minutes to find out what a woman is, took me a few seconds and the memory will linger for ever

If I have to do is look in the mirror, but then again, I was born in the 50's without this gender separation of who is what and what is what. is completely alien to me, and to foist this ideology on to young children, is a travesty of humanity.

A women is a woman, and a man is a man, biological testing will testify to that fact, regardless of what a person thinks or how he/she perform.in a reality created situation the blood and genetic testing (which we so love in this era). Will testify to that fact.

The fact that this discussion is even relevant is disturbing, it suggest to me societal collapse, and a nihilistic view, propagated by a sociopolitical mindset, to bring about such a collapse, and also social degradation of any social norms

In other worlds the social degradation of the Roman era elects , anything goes, and the malevolent thought process of the post modern era all rolled into one.

I only hope that humanity has enough strength to dig us out of this cesspit of lies and manipulation this hole that has been created to cause the circus of circus, also commonly reported as a clown world.

Over and out Scottie, beam me up, no intelligent form of life found, just a bunch of sociopsychopaths trying to create a not so brave world in their own image. What is wrong with the transporter Scottie, get me out of this place ASAP

In my view, the topic should be what are women, because there are so many women in the world that we can focus on. There are many angles we can approach this: historical, image, role, family, society, relationships, hormones, emotional vs intellectual, intuition, right vs left brain, individual human being, biology. As you point out, men defining women is questionable. To set the stage, we are trying to understand how “woman” as a word has become manipulative in the globalist push for totalitarianism.

Historically women were second place human beings, that were to focus on the household and the family. For many men, they were property. The kings had a wife, but also mistresses. Religion, as a doctrine, promoted family coherence and monogamy. Historically women were a support of men, but men were the active players.

The image of women has changed dramatically in the last century. Women were given the right to vote in America in 1920. This led to women entering the work place environment where they could be second place to men in relation to salary., and often played secondary roles like secretaries and nurses. The image of women as sex objects seemed to begin in earnest with Playboy magazine. This is important because it treated women, again as second place, as an object of pleasure for men. More importantly it portrayed sex as only pleasure, not spiritually or for procreation. The next phase was to make women buy into the sex as pleasure propaganda. Finally, free sex was the game, played by any “gender”.

The role of women, coincides with the image. In the 50s entertainment, women were portrayed as loving wives and homemakers supporting their husbands. Women were what made families work. As more women went into business and careers, the family took second place, and the education of children was captured by the government. Family was no longer the focus of society. And as noted in the discussion, the break up of the family and of religion were 2 methods the communist ideology promoted to gain control. The indoctrination of children into “choose your gender” continues this generational programming.

Having been married a number of times, I see women as having more of a right brain, emotional and intuitive connection than men, and that they have more of a focus on relationship and relations to others. Obviously my choice in marriage can influence my understanding. As many have noted, conflicts in communication between men and women, of men wanting to “do” or “fix” and women wanting to “connect emotionally”.

In my view, the nature of “woman” has been and is being attacked through scientific materialism which focuses on mind and “science” and “what is real” as the “truth”. The witch trials in Europe and America show that intuition and emotional understanding were seen as a threat to this materialism. Women are still treated as though they are intellectually inferior and their emotional intelligence is depicted as “belief”. In my view, emotional intelligence and intuition are the basis of morality and compassion in the world.

As Jesus stated in the Gospel of Thomas, "When you make the two into one, and when you make the inner like the outer and the outer like the inner, and the upper like the lower, and when you make male and female into a single one, so that the male will not be male nor the female be female…”. He is not talking about gender identity.

I just now requested my "woman" to dress herself in another hue, as she was lying unclothed on her velvet pink sofa, and I couldn't see her shape.

This is a question that begs answering...[Link]

Since this discussion was provoked by Matt Walsh's film "What is a woman", the context in which that question was asked in the film is important I think. The question was asked in the context of the transgender movement attempting to claim that biological men can also be women and vice versa.

That claim is patently false. Men are men, and women are women, because of biology. Everything else pertaining to what a woman (or a man) is, that you discuss in this conversation, springs from that biological fact. A man can 'feel' like a woman, and vice versa, but that does not make him/her one.

The entire transgender debacle can, IMO, be summed up by the belief held by many people today, in particular those affiliated with the LGBTQWXYZ movement(s), that feelings are facts. Yes, feelings are an important part of the human experience and how humans interpret and act in response to the world around them. But throughout human history, feelings have always been understood to be, at best, a subjective perception of some thing, not the thing itself, although they may at times be an accurate perception of some aspect of the nature of the 'thing'.

The pragmatist approach should be applied in cases where there are strong 'feelings' about a certain thing. If we act on the 'feeling' as if it is an accurate interpretation of some part of reality, we need to focus on the results of doing so. If doing so does not result in a clear, net positive result for ALL people concerned, then the feeling can be said to be an incorrect interpretation of reality.

So men who claim they are women and vice versa, how is that working out for them from a practical pov? The fact that they are forced to mutilate their bodies to make their 'feeling' a 'fact' suggests that their interpretation of reality in this case is incorrect.

If you find yourself having to radically reshape or distort a thing in order to make it fit with your feeling of what it is, then logic would suggest that your feeling is not an accurate interpretation of what it actually is, and you should rethink it (or 'refeel' it). Also, if you find yourself having to coerce or manipulate the rest of society into accepting that your feeling is an accurate representation of reality, then it's also likely incorrect.

IRELAND- jails teacher for contempt because he sat in an empty classroom to protest being sacked for ‘following the science’ and not the feelings. “I am here today because I would not call a boy a girl” [Link]
*

"...Questioning the cult symbols of the pride order now results in corporate retribution by financial institutions.

Standing up for defenseless children who are being groomed into gender confusion and life-altering physical damage through surgeries and chemical castration is now “transphobic”.

Learn more about the academic roots of gender ideology, gender confusion, and child grooming. Watch Matt Walsh’s Documentary: What Is a Woman?..."

Misgendering Tyranny The cult of social justice is accumulating tremendous power, and for the left, with great power comes ̶g̶r̶e̶a̶t̶ ̶r̶e̶s̶p̶o̶n̶s̶i̶b̶i̶l̶i̶t̶y̶ greater tyranny. by Good Citizen [Link]

Are we already living this quote?

The permanent lie becomes the only safe form of existence. Every wag of the tongue can be overheard by someone, every facial expression observed by someone. Therefore, every word, if it does not have to be a direct lie is nonetheless obliged not to contradict the general, common lie. There exists a selection of ready-made phrases, of labels, a selection of ready-made lies. — Alexander Solzhenitzen