Officer Jinn knocked on the door and a man slowly opened it, cautiously poking out his head.

“Sir, we’re sorry to bother you tonight, but there was a burglary near by, and a witness saw a woman with red hair running away from the scene.”

“Yeah, a rather short female – wearing a green coat” added her partner, officer DaRolz.

“So, you’re looking for two ladies?” queried the man.

“No, sir, our witness saw one person running from the scene.”

“Well, why’d you say you were looking for a woman with red hair and also for a short female in a green coat?”

“Sir,” volunteered officer Jinn, my partner was merely using the word ‘female’ to mean the same thing as ‘woman.’ “

“Well, that’s confusing! Anyway, I didn’t see or hear anything.”

“Sir,” asked officer DaRolz, is there anyone else at home we can talk to?”

“Yes officer, my wife is home. I’ll get her, but let me warn you that she’s not a female you want to mess with.”

“Why?” queried officer Jinn.

“Around this time night she’s usually a grumpy woman.”

“See there – you did it! It’s not confusing!” shot officer DaRolz.

“Did what?”

“You just used ‘female’ as equivalent in meaning to ‘woman.’ You just switched things up for variety,” observed Jinn.

“Oh, you’re right,” said the man, scratching his head. “I guess it isn’t confusing. Anyway, I’ll get her for you.”

That little dialogue, authored by yours truly and not by Byrne, illustrates Byrne’s sixth and final argument for AHF. “Adult human female” – or when humans and adults are clearly the subject at hand just “female” – can be used as a stylistic variant for the word “woman” – and vice-versa.

And generally it is not confusing. Why? Seemingly because AHF is true.