ext_177260 ([identity profile] ndkid.livejournal.com) wrote in [personal profile] sorcyress 2009-07-10 02:55 pm (UTC)

I won't speak for [livejournal.com profile] woozle, but this reads to me like a semantic argument. You sound as though you are defining "woman" in a chromosomal way. [livejournal.com profile] woozle appears to define "woman" in an anatomical way. (I'm guessing a vagina is necessary, but not sufficient.) I get the impression [livejournal.com profile] kittikattie has a different definition than either of these, but I couldn't quite tease it out of this context. And, of course, all of this started based on [livejournal.com profile] kdsorceress tossing out an impressively narrow definition above.

While I'm all for semantic arguments, at a certain point, I think the more useful question is: as long as everyone understands each others semantics, is there a need to get everyone to have the *same* semantics? And, if the answer is "yes", does that imply we should do so with *all* words? Personally, I find in my life, I am flummoxed by differing definitions of "relationship" and "love" than "woman".

Post a comment in response:

If you don't have an account you can create one now.
HTML doesn't work in the subject.
More info about formatting