11 Sapiens, by definition, have the inalienable birthright

to correct information
The existence of life conscious-of-itself as 'conscious life',
cannot tolerate symbols based on phallic fantasy and seminal
nonsense claimed to be Truth, without having the mind cluttered
and damaged. Man-as-mind/species is divisive. And does a lot of
hate-mongering. Only one is man, male.
Evolution brought about the reality we live in. With millions
of designs. From the first elemental explosion that created the
multi-planet cosmos to the multi-life-forms on earth. No Phallus,
claimed to be divine, "created" the cosmos. The clutter 'belief in
this Truth' creates harms the mind. Phallic clutter is not about
correct information. It's about bias touted as Truth.
Definitions in "mankind" are biased; few are neutral, fewer
are inclusive, even sex-specific names are tainted with bias.
Definitions are man-written in man-edited dictionaries. They're
not true-to-reality, they're not about what actually exists in our
species, they're not about caring for the mind.
A comparative examination of sexed-pairs in a dictionary
reveals the large-scale of male-bias accepted in language as
being correct, i.e., Truth. Looking at how my dictionary deals with
defining man and (wo)man the bias is obvious. 'Man' is defined
using half a page; (wo) man, a short paragraph, defined in view of
man, male. Comparing definitions, one could believe they are
'opposites'. After the initial bias, man is identified in his many and
varied major roles in society. After the initial bias, (wo) man is
identified as sexual partner, domestic help, prostitute, and even
goes into (wo)men's lib. (Concise Oxford Dictionary, 1990)
The same divisive bias holds for husband/wife.,
father/mother, brother/sister, son/daughter, sperm/ovum,
male/female(sic), etc.
In view of bias what is a definition? Does defining have rules
and regulations? To get an answer I looked at definitions of
names having no relation to sex.

For example, stalk. 1, the main stem of an herbaceous

plant, 2, the slender support of a leaf, etc. Oven, 1, an enclosed
compartment of bricks, stone or metal for cooking food, etc.
Definitions are precise and true to reality. Rules are followed.
Rules, however, don't seem to apply where 'sex' is entangled in
the patriarchal phallic-centred mix that is his bias.
Symbols and names about ourselves that inform and
enlighten the speech-makers-and-users as a minded species,
ought to be defined under the strictest rules and regulations to
communicate what we need to know as a species to develop a
harmonious and moral one. Name-makers must be held to the
highest precision possible when making and defining a name for
all speech-users to use. Names, symbols, concepts and ideas
must reflect what is seen existing in reality by definition.
So what does a sapient definition look like?
man, n., the male in the species of animals sapiens that makes
and uses speech to develop language to communicate in his
species.
fem, n. the feme in the species of animals sapiens that makes and
uses speech to develop language to communicate in her species.
male, the sex that produces sperm, that with the ovum, causes
conception. (No sperm, no conception)
feme, the sex that produces ovum, that with the sperm, cause
conception. (No ovum, no conception)
The definition, man consists of man and woman as human
promotes belief in bias, to wit, ignorance. The ignorance that only
one mind exists. And that mind is male. That the repetitiousness
of the name 'man' in thousands of names by which he defines his
species, creates male as norm. That the Brand, man, names him
norm and mind of the species. Fem is excluded. As (wo) man
she's not an equal, she's a helpmeet, domestic and/or prostitute.
Divisive. Hate mongering.
In 'man', whole species, man is mind. Information comes
from what man says it is. The focus is not on mind as mind, it's on
man-as-mind. No definition of mind in man is sapient because it's

not true-to-reality by definition. The definition does not

acknowledge the existence of two speech-users as evidence that
there are two distinct minds in our species, and that mind is to be
defined by this duality.
The sapient definition of our species is, sapiens consists of
two who evolved with minds and physical-organs having the
capability to make and use speech, fem and man. This definition
is precise, inclusive, true-to-reality. It's consistent with the reality.
It's based on evidence that both are seen and heard to speak. It's
based on the experience of seeing and hearing two speech-users
in reality. Using what is seen to exist in reality, the definition is, by
all criteria, true-to-reality.
Once we know 'fem is the feme speech-maker and -user in
our species' she shows herself to be an active agent in her
species. Her full participation in her species shows in statesfem,
sportsfem, chairfem, boardfem, that she can practice good
gamesfemship, be rofemtic, etc. The symbols femmed, femage,
femmade, femhour, fempower, , schoolfem, fem's college soccer
team, femstand, femly, femliness, gynility, gynexus, refem,
airfem, airfemship, adfem, alderfem, anchorfem, antifem,
assemblyfem, bandsfem, batfem, barfem, repairfem, bibliofem,
spokesfem, birdfem, boatfem, bondsfem, bookfem, brinkfemship,
busfem, cabfem, carfem, chairfemship, clubfem, cochairfem,
cofemagement, cofemdeered, cofemder, congressfem,
middlefem, counterfem, craftsfem, craftsfemship, crewfem,
daysfem, nightfem, deliveryfem, defensefem, deskfem,
disfemtlement, pressfem, draftsfemship, earthfem, everyfem,
flagfem, gatefem, gentlefem, handyfem, headfem, horsefem,
kinsfem, lawfem, leadfem, femdate, femfulness, femhood,
femkind, femlike, femmade, femsuetude, ... names having
currency in language informing our species that she is a full
participant with man in the species. And more, femic thoughts,
femic symbols, femic intent, femic balance, femic evidence, ...

femic partnership ... etc. Plus feme comedy, feme writing, feme
businesses, feme members of Parliament, feme members of
Congress, feme club members, feme thought, feme activity, feme
games, feme entrepreneurs, etc. She's an equal creative being
with man as fem in her species, by definition.
To be informative definitions must be true-to-reality. The
definition of what, we, as a species, are, must inform. We are the
ones who live conscious lives. Our definitions then, to be
informative, must be true-to-reality. False and phallic-biased
definitions have no place in our consciousness.
The purpose of a definition is to state what a sound, or
symbol, we made, means. The degree of distinctness made in a
name has to be such that the most distinguishing features or
differences must be seen to exist in reality as basis of the
definition. Any detail that distinguishes one thing from another
quite similar thing ought to go into a name. This means that rules
and regulations in defining a thing includes logic, correct causeand-effect relationship, evidence in reality, consistence, precision,
etc. For a name to be correct by definition it must respect all
aspects of reality and obey the rules of name-making respecting
reality.
Patriarchy refused to include the feme that evolved with
the same capability to think and make speech as man, and who
evolved simultaneously with the male in our species. This is the
major reason why religions are anti-evolution. Creationists
invented 'god', formerly Phallus, who zapped everything into
being, including (wo)man, a man that's not a man.
In defining our species as man, conscious life has not been
precisely defined either. Being sapiens has not been the focus of
any scientific enquiry. Being speech-makers has not been
adequately examined. Being partners in our species has not ever
been suggested. Man was, and still is, the major focus. Bias.
Up until patriarchy coined (hu) man in the 13 th Century to
replace 'sapiens', our early forebears had called us sapiens. When
we see ourselves as sapiens the definition of consciousness, and
having a 'conscious life', changes radically.

Why did our forebears coin this name? What went into this
idea? Almost every sense we have: taste, sound (hearing), touch
(feeling) and sight (experience) integrated in the mind (insight).
Sapiens is a multi-splendored symbol, compared to man, male
only. Sapiens reflects precisely what we are as animals, animals
conscious of ourselves as being minded-animals. Mind adds a
dimension to body, definitively acknowledged in the name
sapiens. The duality of mind-and-body in the basic duality fem
and man is the basis of the concept.
Sapiens: origin from metaphor of evergreen tree, sapin, Fr.,
pine, for its straight trunk. Tree, straight -> true, mind sees. Made
by infixing an 'e' in sapin, the name sapien was minted. Tree ->
true in making names related to being wise. A straight mind is
one that remains true-to-reality. It also came from being related
to taste, savourer, Fr. to taste. Sounds were "tasted" (like food) to
see if the fit was right, true-to-reality. Being "savvy" comes from
savourer, Fr., to taste, involving taste, sight and touch. The
symbol 'sage', sage, Fr., wise, comes from integrating taste,
touch, true (straight), sound, sight and mind, in the metaphor of
pine tree, to being sapiens. Being sapiens is to be wise; all the
senses are called upon to focus on naming an entity in order be
true to what one sees and experiences. What exists in reality to
make and transmit correct information to the (two) members of
our species is to be respected. It's wise to make names that are
true, names that inform us of what exists in reality to live
balanced, honest and moral conscious life.
(*L. pinus , pine, -> penis ? Appropriation of sounds in names was practiced in
patriarchy, the Sumer named the phallus god in 9000 BCE)

Being sapiens has no comparison to the definition of being

"two-men-of-opposite-sexes" as being man. Man male only, is
grand deception. Bias and lies are not straight and true. Neither is
the phallus. But the grand deception went on for 11,000 years.
The sapient definition of patriarchy is the system of wealth,
power and control in the hands (manus, L., hand) of the few men
believing themselves to be 'above all others' for the purpose of

"controlling the rest of us" as "kept-ignorant-masses." Begun in

9000 BCE it went on and is still going on to 2015 CE. 11,000 years
of male bias.
Sapient definitions entail laws, rules and regulations in
name-making, evidence as seen in reality, using this to make
names. From an acorn, an oak. From fem and man, as sapiens,
correct information. The development of useful and factual
language -by definition- done by fem and man as partners in our
species. It's a win/win/win for all life-forms existing on planet
earth. There is no other way.
Symbols made by sapiens for sapiens are based on what is
seen to exist in reality and thus are true-to-reality by definition.
Correct information is the best certainty we can have about
ourselves at any given time.