You don't appear to grasp that your example disproves your central argument. The meaning of the word 'fish' was refined as biologists observed sufficient common physical traits of the genus to exclude creatures that didn't fit that stable definition. You've spent hours arguing that the definition 'woman' should be decoupled from observable biological characteristics and applied both to females and to men who want to be women, even though the latter's observable physical characteristics prove them to be male. The linguistic change you're advocating isn't rooted in knowledge, but a quasi-religious belief.
Pro tip: when arguing, try not to put words into your opponent's mouth that the opponent has never spoken. Try especially hard not to do this when you're arguing in a public forum where everyone can see exactly what has, and hasn't, been said.
You're angered that I use accurate language to describe the sexes, because the whole edifice of your ideology collapses if you acknowledge that sex is binary, that it is impossible to change sex, that sex has material, important consequences and that legal rights should be based on observable facts rather than unfalsifiable concepts.
You're working backwards from your preferred conclusion and you're prepared to advance nonsensical arguments to do it. Your attempts to change the meaning of the words 'man' and 'woman', to shift them into philosophical concepts, do not change material reality. I'm with Friedrich Engels: "These gentlemen think that when they have changed the names of things they have changed the things themselves. This is how these profound thinkers mock at the whole world."
People with differences of sexual development are male and female. The various conditions that fall beneath the intersex umbrella are sex-specific. Klinefelter syndrome only affects men. MRKH syndrome only affects women. There is no third sex. Sex is not a spectrum, and the reason so many people with DSDs dislike the old-fashioned term ‘intersex’ is precisely because ignorant people like you use it to suggest they are hermaphrodites.
And lest we forget: the argument ‘some people are born with anbiguous genitalia, so men should be allowed in women’s changing rooms’ is one of the stupidest ever made.
He departed as he governed: with a list of lies, delusions and cope. I can't wait for the truth to start coming out about what was really going on with the most disgusting regime the country has endured since King John.
A Labour source has said that Keir Starmer feels "betrayed" after all his efforts to make Labour electable.
Oh dear, my sympathy goes to pensioners, British farmers, taxpayers, British veterans, Jews, Chagossians and all the other people he betrayed.
Good riddance to him. 👋🏽
As the UK goes into full on Podium watch for the inevitable resignation of Keir Starmer, the rest of the Us Labours are chapping their lips on Burnham's butt, determined to get a coveted spot on the front bench. But nobody is more determined than our Ang:
Reform councillor Wayne Briggs, has been reported to police over "transphobic" comments by Warwickshire Pride.
Below is what he said in a leaked email. I agree with every word because it’s all true.
In modern Britain, facts are “hate speech.”
Just to remind these same folk:
You’ve not lifted 1/2m kids out of poverty. You’ve just moved them over a bureaucratic line on a Whitehall spreadsheet.
Your ‘workers rights’ are destroying entry-level jobs, hitting young people disproportionately, where unemployment is now over 16%.
You have not transformed the NHS. It’s still the same old wheezing leviathan, just with a lot more dosh and still dismal productivity.
And you’ve nationalised steel and rail before. It was not the prelude to an economic or industrial miracle. Plus you will now have to include their demands for capital/subsidies among all the other priorities already crowding in on the public purse.
Other than that your reminder was useful. Thank you.