Yes! 😁

One could even say that the pronouns “him” and “her” could indicate specific types of pointers, like int and char.

Let’s make an agreement that the English word “coffee” now means 65. The reference of any word within any language only exists because we make an agreement with ourselves or with others for what a particular set of symbols gives reference to. Without an agreement, all the symbols we use mean nothing more than an arbitrary scratch on a table.

A pointer is the word, which means nothing by itself other than a grouping of letters exist, and the reference to an address is the reference to an object, which exists independently from the object—a reference to a fictional object can exist and a real object can exist without a reference.

To be a bit more specific, a word is nothing more than a set of symbols (physical) which indicate an agreed value (abstract/reference). A pointer is the word and the agreed value is the reference of the object. The object the pointer points to is the existence of the real object (physical) and its value(s) which exists regardless of abstract references.

Pattern: physical -> reference -> physical -> value

Double pointer pattern: physical -> reference -> physical -> reference -> physical -> value

Etc…

A word’s meaning can change through time as cultures rise and fall, for the temporary purpose of encrypting conversations (e.g. the word “dog” can point to the agreed value of “fork” or “7”), or even misidentification.

That is a simple and good analogy, and, yes, perhaps better than my own.

Whether the pointed data by the pointer is valid or not is… not the point.

Nor is that the point of my analogy, but I do see how you inferred that point. Your criticism has helped me identify a flaw in how I express the analogy.

Yes and no, according to the analogy. Just as a word contains the idea of an object, but not the object itself.

Hmm… If only there were buttons to express explicit disagreement or agreement of the behavior of the OP, the idea expressed in the post, or both.

An interesting social media evolution path to think about, at the least.