Four days a week, please

[malvolio]

Oh dear...
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/202...female-update/

Not at all. In fact, quite the opposite. Tthey are talking about the descriptive demotic word "woman" - and "man" come to that. An example to disprove the adage about ducks and quacking...

Biologically a woman is a human being with two X chromosomes (as opposed to those who have an X and a Y). No amount of reassignment surgery or cosmetics will alter that simple fact. And assuming you've gone through puberty - which most current laws around reassignment surgery make highly probable - you will retain the endurance, skeleton and muscle to fat ratio of the male human. You will also retain a higher proportion of testosterone with its concomitant side effects.

[northernladuk]

Oh dear...
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/202...female-update/

Crickey, dangerous stuff that is. So there is now no longer a definition for a biological human being with two X chromosones, and adult human female, a biological woman that is of the nature to get pregnant or whatever definition it is, there is no longer a term for that distinct group. That's pretty unheard of. We have a name/definition for absolutely everything in the world but now not for a woman that means the desciptions above. That's pretty staggering tbf.

[vetran]

Sorry but it doesn't matter how many women you put together, they aren't getting pregnant.

Depends if you are in a Scottish Prison or an Olympic swimmer.

[WaltZucher]

I'm sure that when working days went down from 6 days a week to 5, similar arguments were made. Yet here we are. Interesting that the nay sayers don't propose a 6 (or 7) day working week.

It's true that when working days were reduced from 6 days a week to 5, there were likely similar arguments made about the negative impact it would have on productivity or the economy. However, as you pointed out, we have adjusted to this change and it has become the norm. It's also interesting to note that the "nay sayers" who argue against reducing the workweek don't typically propose a longer workweek, as you mentioned. Instead, they tend to argue that shorter workweeks will lead to reduced productivity or economic growth. However, there is evidence to suggest that working longer hours does not necessarily lead to higher productivity, and that a shorter workweek may actually lead to improved productivity and job satisfaction. Ultimately, it's important to consider the well-being of workers and their ability to maintain a healthy work-life balance, as well as the potential benefits that a shorter workweek could bring.

[vetran]

Nah still Biological females or a person with XX chromosomes. You can't define biological reality away however woke you are If people want to think themselves what they're not then that's fine but like all disorders it's probably a mental thing to pretend to be a none binary popty ping or whatever

oh I do like a bit of pansexual!

[Zigenare]

oh I do like a bit of pansexual!

I was more into Pan's People - Showing my age, I know...

[d000hg]

Define "women"...

As a whitecismale(!) I know better than to fall into this trap of defining a woman, you can't just go round defining other people these days you know.

[DoctorStrangelove]

Stone me, I remember the five and a half day week: early closing day for shops* on a Thursday. 44 hours a week.


*There were regulations re opening hours. Closed completely on Sunday. I remember a chap being prosecuted for refilling his cigarette machine on a Sunday.

[Paralytic]

As a whitecismale(!) I know better than to fall into this trap of defining a woman, you can't just go round defining other people these days you know.

Answering "what is a woman" is not the same as defining other people.

[northernladuk]

Answering "what is a woman" is not the same as defining other people.

Agreed. There has to be a base definition of something before you go defining other people based on definitions. Now there isn't a single definition for the original woman it's very difficult to discuss and understand anymore.