+Trump—
+> devastating in their percentage and power of destruction
+
+Like I said, it would seem the disagreement centers around how robust the trait-clusters are, and how useful it is to be able to use simple language to talk about the overwhelming-majority case, and I'm wary of these standards being selectively varied for political reasons that, however well-intentioned, actually in-practice interfere with our collective ability to make sense of the world.
+
+When I say "selectively varied", I mean that the same standards aren't being applied evenhandedly to different topic-areas. For example, when talking about the anatomy of the hands, you might end up offhandedly saying something like, "Humans have ten fingers." I think it's good for people to be able to say "Humans have ten fingers" in most contexts without it being construed as a denial of the facts that polydactyly exists and that some people lose fingers in accidents. (It's true that polydactyly exists! And it's true that some people lose fingers in accidents! I enthusiastically affirm both of those facts! But I think it's also true that ... you know what I meant.)
+
+This is also my rationale for wanting "Men are the ones with penises" to be considered "true" in most contexts. The claim isn't that trans men don't exist; the claim is that adult human males are the prototypical thing that trans men are imitating (to the limits of available technology), such that it's useful for many unmarked usages of "man"/"men" to be understood to refer to the prototype unless there's some contextual reason to think otherwise.