From Definition to Disorientation: How Language Became a Weapon Against Women

For most of human history, the definition of "woman" was simple, grounded in biological reality. This definition carried societal weight—both as a tool of oppression and as a foundation for movements demanding equality. "Woman" wasn’t just a biological fact; it became a shared identity that unified generations in their struggles against patriarchal control. Despite the restrictions imposed by society, the clarity of that identity provided women with a rallying point from which they fought for their rights and dignity.

What’s remarkable is that human language evolved across centuries without ever needing to redefine womanhood. The term "woman" stood the test of time, untouched by the kind of over-intellectualized tinkering that seems to dominate discourse today. So, what are we to conclude? Did humanity wander in ignorance and darkness for all of history, only to be enlightened now? Or were we, perhaps, correct in our original assumptions about womanhood all along? If that’s the case, then it stands to reason that our current state of confusion is not progress, but an unwelcome affliction—a product of a culture more obsessed with rhetorical acrobatics than with practical reality.

How Did We Get Here?

We now inhabit a strange cultural moment where a question that should have no controversy—"What is a woman?"—has somehow become a philosophical circle-jerk. And the absurdity of it all lies not just in the debate itself, but in the impact it’s having. The movement that claims to be advancing gender inclusivity risks undermining the very foundation upon which women built their fight for equality.

This confusion isn’t progress—it’s a power play. By making the meaning of "woman" fluid, the same forces that have always had power ensure we stay distracted and disoriented. Unity fractures, and real power stays right where it’s always been.

The Power Play Behind the Question: What is a Woman?

The question "What is a woman?" gets tossed around like a punchline, but beneath the joke lies an unsettling truth:

“A woman is whoever power needs her to be—an identity on loan from the same forces that have caged her for centuries. This so-called gender fluidity isn't freedom; it's control with shinier labels. Women thought they shattered the glass ceiling, only to be handed a kaleidoscope—beautiful fragments with no shape, no clarity, and no power.

The real winners—those who thrive in confusion—sit back and laugh. The cage? Still there. Just with a fresh coat of paint. A woman’s identity fluid? Fine. Just don’t be surprised when it washes away everything that once gave women strength.”

The conversation that shouldn’t have been needed in the first place is laid bare for what it is: a distraction and a disservice. This debate isn’t about progress—it’s about maintaining power through confusion. And until we stop entertaining it, we will remain trapped in the same tired cycles, playing right into the hands of power.

It’s time to stop chasing definitions that fragment and confuse, and instead focus on the things that truly matter—things that build strength, unity, and real progress for women, not just more elaborate forms of control.

Postscript:

Ever wonder why the question of "What is a man?" is rarely, if ever, asked? Why that question fails to take center stage or is injected into this discussion?

The answer lies in the wiring of the power structure itself. Thousands of years of human evolution have embedded this asymmetry into the collective psyche. Man has been positioned as the default, the stable and unquestioned norm, while woman has always been treated as the "other"—the subject of scrutiny and definition. Ironically, this isn't even a conscious strategy. It’s an inherent feature of a power dynamic so deeply ingrained that it perpetuates itself without effort, reflexively turning its focus toward redefining and fragmenting women’s identity, while the concept of man remains untouched, preserved, and above inquiry.

This is how power maintains itself: by confusing and dividing those it seeks to control while leaving its own foundation unchallenged.