Hypergendered Logic Source
Hypergendered Logic — Page 76
The resumption does not make her “an Archfemale again” because she never stopped being one during the pause. Months 17 onward Suppose becomes her permanent maximum. She can remain 𝑆𝐹 4 𝑆𝐹 4 for the rest of her life while continuing whatever other biological changes the fictional causal system permits. This single example demonstrates four distinct concepts: • stage acquisition; • stage progression; • temporary stage stagnation; • permanent stage stagnation with continued biological development. 116. A parallel Archmale example Let an Archmale named Daren reach 𝑆𝑀 3 before completing male puberty. Suppose he remains for three years while puberty progresses. 𝑆𝑀 3 Then 𝑆𝐷, 𝑡 ( ) = 𝑆𝑀 3 can be constant while 𝐷𝑀𝐷, 𝑡 ( ) changes substantially. Later, Daren may advance to , or he may remain permanently. Neither possibility changes the 𝑆𝑀 4 𝑆𝑀 3 logical fact that male sexual development during the stagnation interval is not identical to Archmanhood-stage progression. The female and male cases are structurally symmetric. 117. Twenty invalid inferences exposed by the new distinction The following statements are invalid unless additional axioms are supplied. 1. “She stayed , so nothing about her female biology changed.” 𝑆𝐹 3 2. “He stayed , so puberty must have stopped.” 𝑆𝑀 5 3. “She is no longer climbing stages, so she is no longer an Archfemale.” 4. “He permanently stopped at , so he is biologically frozen forever.” 𝑆𝑀 4 5. “ means sexually mature.” 𝑆𝐹 8 6. “ means older than every Archmale.” 𝑆𝑀 20 𝑆𝑀 5 7. “Two Archfemales must have identical anatomy.” 𝑆𝐹 6 8. “Two Archmales must have identical physiology.” 𝑆𝑀 9 9. “Puberty progressed, therefore the Hypergendered order increased.” 10. “The Hypergendered order increased, therefore every puberty variable changed immediately.”
Source Canon: Verbatim mathematical and modal logic. Interactive navigation and operator lookups available at /#hgl-part:76.