Man quits job over bad woo

[Violet]

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/atheism?s=t
1. the doctrine or belief that there is no God.
2. disbelief in the existence of a supreme being or beings.

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/atheism
1. Disbelief in or denial of the existence of God or gods.
2. The doctrine that there is no God or gods.

Now, you wouldn't purposely withhold information in order to make a case, would you?

You've just proven my point: dictionaries have different definitions. You *cannot* simply trust any single dictionary.

A dictionary is a list of words with attached meaning/equivalents... it is not the end-all authority on language. You could grab every dictionary in the world, and still not have every word used in them. Plenty of words and potential words are simply ignored as 'archaic' or 'slang' or 'not proper'... and restricting oneself to use of only *one* dictionary only puts one further behind understanding the language (as I demonstrated).

[John V]

You've just proven my point: dictionaries have different definitions. You *cannot* simply trust any single dictionary.

First, we don't know that yours disagrees, as you haven't provided the link.

Second, your protest is disingenuous. If I show similar definitions of woman from several dictionaries, you'll still say nuh-uh.

A dictionary is a list of words with attached meaning/equivalents... it is not the end-all authority on language.

It's not an authority so much as a reflection of current usage.

You could grab every dictionary in the world, and still not have every word used in them.

I'm pretty sure all the current English ones have woman in them.

Plenty of words and potential words are simply ignored as 'archaic' or 'slang' or 'not proper'...

They're not ignored, they're marked as those things if current usage requires it.

and restricting oneself to use of only *one* dictionary only puts one further behind understanding the language (as I demonstrated).

See above. If multiple dictionaries will change your mind, I'll post them.

[PhilipD]

To be frank, the only thing that really matters in defining who is or is not considered a 'woman' is the law. A dictionary can be out-dated (laws can too) but laws are the official governing power at the time in question. So if you can find the legal definition (applicable to the country of Blossom or whoever else) then you may have some foothold. Even then, however, you're still simply limited by cultural implications. It's like a never-ending circle.

[Violet]

To be frank, the only thing that really matters in defining who is or is not considered a 'woman' is the law. A dictionary can be out-dated (laws can too) but laws are the official governing power at the time in question. So if you can find the legal definition (applicable to the country of Blossom or whoever else) then you may have some foothold. Even then, however, you're still simply limited by cultural implications. It's like a never-ending circle.

The law might well say I'm a woman, but then again: I really don't care. The law is asinine enough and arbitrary enough to throw age-lines at people. I find that the only thing that really matters in a socio-cultural construct is 'what people see'.

Hence the invention of makeup.

---

First, we don't know that yours disagrees, as you haven't provided the link.

Second, your protest is disingenuous. If I show similar definitions of woman from several dictionaries, you'll still say nuh-uh.

Should be 'New Oxford American Dictionary', but I really couldn't tell you without googling whatever apple uses for its dictionary (which I'm way too tired for right now). All mine tells me is, "atheism |ˈāθēˌizəm|
noun
the theory or belief that God does not exist." No elaboration, 3 derivatives of the word (atheist, atheistic, atheistical), and origin. No notes, no second definition, nothing.

If I see a definition that begs the question... you'd better bet that I'll inquire further. Dictionaries exist inanimately, soliloquy goes unquestioned by the silently screaming universe, and incorrect definitions are malformed until the protagonist is satisfied with the outcome.

So, in a roundabout way, you're absolutely correct: I'll not bow to definitions that rip themselves apart for any reason (except money, I'll change definitions however you fucking want if you pay me enough). Popularity is not a good reason to condescend into stupidity... or maybe it is, if they become rich enough

It's not an authority so much as a reflection of current usage.

A reflection through a trick-mirror at a funhouse while the reflector is drunk and on acid.

I'm pretty sure all the current English ones have woman in them.

And I'm pretty sure more than a few have totally whacked-up definitions. Women: the leading cause of life in humans

They are deliberately farce dictionaries, sure... but other dictionaries just can't seem to agree on much of anything. The all-knowing fools...

They're not ignored, they're marked as those things if current usage requires it.

Then dictionaries are very reluctant and extremely lethargic in updating such. Typically, they don't update in 'current' usage until they're a good 5-25 years late

See above. If multiple dictionaries will change your mind, I'll post them.

If multiple people answering a math problem wrongly changes your mind... I'll take you back to kindergarten. How quickly we forget what we've learned.

[renew]

John V, the book of thomas didn't make the cut in your book mainly due to this reason. so if you can; which i doubt highly. do a comparison on the subject of trans sexual that you began with this thread while relating it to the verse below.

(114) Simon Peter said to them: Let Mary go forth from among us, for women are not worthy of the life. Jesus said: Behold, I shall lead her, that I may make her male, in order that she also may become a living spirit like you males. For every woman who makes herself male shall enter into the kingdom of heaven.
The Gospel according to Thomas.

[Norfolk And Chance]

At least you're honest. And again, it ain't my board. If the powers that be say that's how it is, I'll abide by it.

Honesty is always the best policy.

Here is some more honesty for you - GOD IS MADE UP.

[John V]

The law might well say I'm a woman, but then again: I really don't care. The law is asinine enough and arbitrary enough to throw age-lines at people. I find that the only thing that really matters in a socio-cultural construct is 'what people see'.

I was headed to law next as well. In another thread you stated that you could have difficulty getting a job. Why? Are you legally required to check "Male" on an application? If not, and if you're all woman except for the crotch, what's the problem?

Should be 'New Oxford American Dictionary', but I really couldn't tell you without googling whatever apple uses for its dictionary (which I'm way too tired for right now). All mine tells me is, "atheism |ˈāθēˌizəm|
noun
the theory or belief that God does not exist." No elaboration, 3 derivatives of the word (atheist, atheistic, atheistical), and origin. No notes, no second definition, nothing.

http://oxforddictionaries.com/definition...?q=atheism
Definition of atheism
noun
disbelief or lack of belief in the existence of God or gods.

They are deliberately farce dictionaries, sure... but other dictionaries just can't seem to agree on much of anything. The all-knowing fools...

They agree pretty well on atheism and woman.

New Oxford American gives "an adult human female" as first definition for woman. SOund familiar? For female it says, "of or denoting the sex that can bear offspring or produce eggs, distinguished biologically by the production of gametes (ova) that can be fertilized by male gametes."

Then dictionaries are very reluctant and extremely lethargic in updating such. Typically, they don't update in 'current' usage until they're a good 5-25 years late

Dictionaries typically have committees that watch current publications for usage changes and make annual updates.

Note that I'm not saying you're wrong to use words as you do. You can use them any way you like. You're wrong to insist that other people bow down to your usage even though your usage is demonstrably outside the mainstream.[/b]

[John V]

@ Violet:

BTW, has it crossed your mind that, if you were really living as a woman, we wouldn't be having this conversation, as I wouldn't know otherwise?

[Violet]

@ Violet:

BTW, has it crossed your mind that, if you were really living as a woman, we wouldn't be having this conversation, as I wouldn't know otherwise?

Sorry, busy having too much sex to care

---

I was headed to law next as well. In another thread you stated that you could have difficulty getting a job. Why? Are you legally required to check "Male" on an application? If not, and if you're all woman except for the crotch, what's the problem?

I could have difficulty getting a job... mostly because I haven't been arsed to move to California and get my stats updated. So my legal status is rather inaccurate now, and inaccurate data on one's legal information tends to turn off potential employers.

Texas is a problem, but I'm stuck here

http://oxforddictionaries.com/definition...?q=atheism
Definition of atheism
noun
disbelief or lack of belief in the existence of God or gods.

Yeah, that's the accurate info. Unlike what my built-in apple dictionary tells me

They agree pretty well on atheism and woman.

New Oxford American gives "an adult human female" as first definition for woman. SOund familiar? For female it says, "of or denoting the sex that can bear offspring or produce eggs, distinguished biologically by the production of gametes (ova) that can be fertilized by male gametes."

Because humans with XX chromosomes, but lacking gametes, are clearly not female

Dictionaries typically have committees that watch current publications for usage changes and make annual updates.

Note that I'm not saying you're wrong to use words as you do. You can use them any way you like. You're wrong to insist that other people bow down to your usage even though your usage is demonstrably outside the mainstream.

Annual updates for words that appeared in mainstream 10 years ago

Because the first people to insist that 2 was prime were wrong, the man to suggest washing one's hands in hospitals was wrong, and copernicus/galileo and co were wrong.

My definitions are demonstrably true, that they are demonstrably not 'mainstream' is irrelevent to their correctness. We're not about to commit to arguments from establishment or authority here, are we?

[Annik]

How does one "live like a woman"?