do I understand the definition of a woman?

[Some Schmo]

Quite the quandary. Is the power of the priesthood directly tied to a penis with testicles?

No. Anyone can pretend they have magical god powers. For Mormons, the cock and balls are just an excuse to keep the club for imaginary magical god powers exclusive to who they want in the club.

But there's nothing stopping women from pretending to have the same powers. They just have to choose to do it, and they'll quickly find out they have just as much magical god power as men do.

[cinepro]

A teenage boy gets a "sex-change," twenty years later, discovers the Book of Mormon, gains a testimony, and comes to regret the decision. Just as a smoker can't un-smoke all those cigarettes and change their lungs, this person bears the mark of the decision in body form, dresses worn and the long hair and mannerisms. Can this person get the priesthood?

note: trans men can get baptized but can't get the priesthood because no matter how much they have altered themselves, they are still 100% women. Likewise, this person who long ago made these radical superficial changes is every bit as man as Elder Bednar, and should not be prohibited from holding the priesthood.

It's an interesting situation, and one that will one day happen, I have no doubt.

But you asked if you understood the definition of "woman", but you never shared a definition. So how are you defining "woman"?

[Chap]

But you asked if you understood the definition of "woman", but you never shared a definition. So how are you defining "woman"?

It seems to me that something I posted in another thread may have some relevance here.

On re-reading it, I ought to have left room for people born with a clear biological sex, male or female, who end up feeling that they do not wish to be classified in gender terms as either men or women . And I'm OK with that too.

Let us try to clarify the situation in relation to the question of gender and transgender identity. We can take it step by step as follows.

A: The initial big picture (but too crude to use nowadays)
At birth it is simple to identify who is a girl and who is a boys. You just look at the genitalia, and it is obvious. If you do a chromosome check, you will find that the girls have two X chromosomes, and the boys have an X and a Y. The girls grow into women, and the boys into men.

B: A developmental complication: (but not really relevant to this thread)
In about 1% of cases the baby has somewhat abnormal genitalia, but is still clearly a somewhat abnormally developed girl or boy. In 0.1-0.2% of cases, the genitals are abnormal enough to make it difficult to tell:
https://www.childrensmn.org/services/ca ... genitalia/
This is not however very relevant to transgender identity as nowadays discussed.

C: Taking account of the transgender issue.
In about 1% of the population, people are born with unambiguous genitals that enable them to be identified as a girl or as a boy, and those genitals match their chromosomes. However, as they grow up, they begin to make it plain by their behaviour or by their explicit statements about themselves that instead of being a girl (as identified at birth and by their normally developing genitalia and chromosomes), they consider themselves to be a boy, or vice versa. In what I have just written, the figure of 1% is deliberately taken from a source with no interest in minimising the data, so we can take it as a realistic maximum:
https://www.stonewall.org.uk/truth-about-trans

D: Finding a more useful terminology to talk about the issue
At this point, we will find it useful to adopt a more precise terminology that will enable us to talk about this issue with less confusion than is usually found in relevant discussions. We distinguish:
(1) Sex: Based on genitalia at birth and XX/XY chromosomes, we can easily classify all but about 1% (see (B) above) of human bodies as female or male. This is a matter of objective medical science.
(2) Gender: This is a social distinction, based on the roles people play in society, how they are recognised by others, and how they think about themselves. We may classify most people as being, in social terms women or men.

E: Talking about the trans issue:
In all but about 1% of cases (see (C) above), sex and gender correlate: possession of a body with female sex expresses in gender terms as identifying a person as a woman, and male sex expresses as identifying a person as a man. Overwhelmingly, what trans people want from the rest of us amounts to no more than saying:
"I was born with a female body, and my parents called me Mary and dressed me as a girl. However, I passionately wish to be recognised in gender terms as a boy/man, to call myself Mike, and to dress and be treated as a man."
"I was born with a male body, and my parents called me Mike and dressed me as a boy. However, I passionately wish to be recognised in gender terms as a girl/woman, to call myself Mary, and to dress and be treated as a woman."

F: Dealing with transgender people
In the overwhelming majority of cases, the 1% of the population (at most) who wish to live in a gender not usually associated with their birth sex simply want the rest of us to let them live normal lives in their preferred gender. They just ask, in effect, that we should be kind and tolerant, and let them live trouble-free existences, in which (most of the time) we shall not notice that the accountant, store clerk or taxi driver we meet has crossed from one gender to another (i.e. is "transgender"). Overwhelmingly, people being transgender causes the non-transgender 99% of the population no problem at all, and the accommodation needed is no more than (say) providing toilet or changing room accommodation that takes account of their otherwise not troublesome identity. And that is the decent and humane standpoint from which this issue should be approached.

G: Rare cases
Non transgender men are about 50% of the population. The overwhelming majority of violence and sexual assault against women is committed by non-transgender men. A very small proportion of the 1% of the population who are living transgender lives may act so as to be a threat to women, but mathematically the threat they pose is a minimal part of the dangers women face. All the same, it needs to be dealt with in the case of artificial environments such as prisons and women's refuges. But since we do not treat all non transgender men as a threat to society, there is no reason to treat the overwhelming majority of the 1% of people who are transgender as any kind of threat.

Such, at any rate, is the way I see things.

[Gadianton]

Quite the quandary. Is the power of the priesthood directly tied to a penis with testicles?

well, I would say the more important question is the authority of the priesthood -- is the person qualified to have the box checked. The power predicates on personal righteousness, and it might, although it's a little off topic.

The last F&T meeting I ever attended more than a half a lifetime ago at this point, was with a friend to his girlfriend's home ward in Sandy UT or something like that. This older woman got up and bore testimony about how manly Joseph Smith was. And how her faith was bolstered by Smith's broad shoulders and muscular frame. She didn't go there, but I'm sure she was thinking it. All this, of course, is counterproductive to the definition they think they have but don't have.

[Gadianton]

It's an interesting situation, and one that will one day happen, I have no doubt.

But you asked if you understood the definition of "woman", but you never shared a definition. So how are you defining "woman"?

Yeah, you got me there. That was clickbait. I don't have a definition. Since everyone from my right-wing friend to Ajax is waxing triumphant about a Supreme Court nominee not being able to answer the question, I figured I'd give the right-wingers here a chance to answer. As you can see, none of them have attempted to answer the question because they know they can't. So my case has already been made. I have won, again.

[High Spy]

Defining a woman is like defining 0/0.

Good luck with that.

[Chap]

Defining a woman is like defining 0/0.

Good luck with that.

"Woman" is an English word, and English words are in most cases not mathematical objects like circles or squares whose definition amongst mathematicians has in effect remained unchanged ever since people started defining such things in the first millennium BC. All a dictionary can do is to record the way that the word is used - and there are often several usages existing in parallel amongst groups of English speakers, and words change their ranges of reference as time passes.

Currently, most English speakers still use the word "woman" as if it referred only to adult human beings whose bodies were unambiguously female at birth. But others, like myself, note the difference between the biological distinction male/female, which refers to bodies, and is based on hard science that is unlikely to change, and the social distinction man/woman, which is a socially created opposition based largely on behaviour such as dress, naming, and other things that a person is widely thought to have the right to change, even if their body does not change: see my previous post.

So if someone asked me "what is the definition of 'woman' ?". I would say that "woman" (like "good", or "freedom") is one of those words whose meaning can change depending on who is using it. There is no single unchanging definition that can be simply cited.

[High Spy]

Defining a woman is like defining 0/0.

Good luck with that.

"Woman" is an English word, and English words are in most cases not mathematical objects like circles or squares whose definition amongst mathematicians has in effect remained unchanged ever since people started defining such things in the first millennium BC.

Did you think 0 meant circle ?

And 0/0 meant divided by ?

[Markk]

A teenage boy gets a "sex-change," twenty years later, discovers the Book of Mormon, gains a testimony, and comes to regret the decision. Just as a smoker can't un-smoke all those cigarettes and change their lungs, this person bears the mark of the decision in body form, dresses worn and the long hair and mannerisms. Can this person get the priesthood?

note: trans men can get baptized but can't get the priesthood because no matter how much they have altered themselves, they are still 100% women. Likewise, this person who long ago made these radical superficial changes is every bit as man as Elder Bednar, and should not be prohibited from holding the priesthood.

Biologically how are they 100% a woman? Aren’t they 100% a surgically and biological altered man?

If the person did not get the operation, but still wore a dress, had long hair, and mannerisms would they still be 100% a women, or just 50%+-?

There are plenty of women with short hair, that wear pants, and have masculine manners…but are still very much a women…so what is the exact “milestone or bench mark” that makes a biological man a women?

[Chap]

"Woman" is an English word, and English words are in most cases not mathematical objects like circles or squares whose definition amongst mathematicians has in effect remained unchanged ever since people started defining such things in the first millennium BC.

Did you think 0 meant circle ?

And 0/0 meant divided by ?

Nope.