While many people define being a man or a woman as being dependent on reproductive capacity, it is worth noting (should such a superficial argument present itself) that there are many males and females who are born male or female and cannot reproduce either. Are they to be considered 'not male' and 'not female'? Or does that only apply to transgender people?

I can understand backward patriarchal reasoning coming from a male, but from a woman - and of all people, a leader of women? It says something profound about leadership - and, if anything - what it says about followers is not very flattering at all.

Isn't it strange that having a dick automatically makes a man, but having a vagina isn't enough to make me a woman?

Isn't it strange that having a dick automatically makes you a man, but having a vagina isn't enough to make me a woman?