Y’know, I asked the question a few posts back on the essence of womanhood, or what it means to be a woman, but then I barely touched on the answer.

There are those who focus on body parts. Others insist that it is chromosomes that matter.

I think that on a practical basis, both miss the point.

The way I see it, a person who goes out in the world as a woman, behaves as women are known to behave, accepts the privileges and restrictions that pertain to women… that person is, for all practical purposes, a woman.

Of course, male-bodied individuals who wish to assume this role cannot conceive children, but many women-born-women cannot either.

Is there a good reason to restrict our conception of women to those with the right body parts or chromosomes? I don’t really see it.

There is a major issue that complicates matters, however. And, that is the question of “part-time gender.”

“Part-time gender” is probably not even a fair term. Some of us live between the genders, some don’t really care to be identified as man or woman, and others switch back and forth as their spirit – or perhaps convenience – dictates. Whatever we are, “man” or “woman” doesn’t quite cover it.

I have heard people complain that it is unfair for someone to enjoy being a woman when it suits them, and then seek the power and protection of their masculinity when things get tough.

I think that’s sour grapes, jealousy.

It’s like an anglophone saying that bilingual people should only be allowed to speak one language because they have an unfair advantage speaking English in the US and then, when they find themselves in China, turning around and speaking Chinese.

Anyway, the whole “unfair advantage” argument rings false. Yeah, in theory, changing genders would be convenient, but in reality those of us who can change are more marginalized than any single-gendered woman. Besides, it really is quite difficult, stressful and time-consuming, not to mention, rare, and is probably why most of those who can be both will eventually pick one or the other.