Now that Merriam-Webster has changed/added to the definition of female (again?) to mean "a gender identity that is opposite from male" (and made a similar change to the definition of male), does this mean that animals and insects, too, have gender identities, since we can objectively distinguish between male and females in these animals (among a plethora of others)?
Or perhaps there is a difference between biology sex and gender identity?
Is Merriam-Webster asserting that fish, bees, kangaroos, and ants all have gender identities in this example?
The same goes for a lot of animals. The point isn't to what extent it is "easily" identifiable. It is that it is identifiable. Being male or female, while some niche variations exist, is identifiable. If being female is a gender identity like Merriam-Webster states, and wr can determine whether a hyena is female (regardless of how immediately apparent it is), then according to the definition, Hyenas have gender identities.
