[anoncake]

> You don't think lady in 'mail-lady' refers to woman?

It can either refer to their sex or their gender.

> Rude. I never would. But if I did it would be redundant after calling her a woman. What do you mean?

If we refer to sex, a woman/lady is someone with a vagina. So yes, if you call someone a mail lady, you literally are describing her as a mail carrier with a vagina.

> But maybe I'm trying to help my brother find a partner so I do want to point out available women, and that does imply people with vaginas. Again, so, and what do you think would be a more efficient way to do this?

In that case, you might also talk about "the cute ginger mail lady with blue eyes" (or whatever your brother likes). But in most situations, that would be quite inappropriate.

[Rule35]

> It can either refer to their sex or their gender

That seems unlikely and definitely unproven.

We're told gender expression is individual, so the gendered concepts you hold for 'woman' aren't going to be the ones I hold. Thus is seems unlikely that we're referring to gender or nobody would be able to understand each other.

Also, we refer to people by the same pronouns whether they're awake or sleeping, cross dressing or not, which changes their gender expression, but not their sex.

> If we refer to sex, a woman/lady is someone with a vagina.

Which we do. Yes.

> So yes, if you call someone a mail lady, you literally are describing her as a mail carrier with a vagina.

No. I'm also not describing her as a bipedal humanoid. Some things are just expected unless you say otherwise.

> the cute ginger mail lady with blue eyes

Yes, lady. Okay, so no suggestion.

> But in most situations, that would be quite inappropriate.

Right, right, human attraction is verboten.