Because this is a simple infographic. It's not designed to address the issues you want to discuss or meant to be used for the purpose you're trying to use it.

I used this infographic as it has two phenotypes on it labeled male and female. And I want to know we we call the brown phenotype the female bird. That question proved too tricky for Kathryn. She could not be honest in answering.

No, she was honest. You just can't accept that the truth of the matter is your understanding of your own exhibit and the facts is deficient. If you had an infograph of M&Ms with just the Red & Green candies, would you insist the green one was dark chocolate? God, I hope not.

You are aware that phenotype and genotype do not map 1:1, so what are you trying to prove?

I have never made that claim.

Your claim is that there is some critereon by which the entire population can be sorted into either female or male with no third category. For some reason, you are not able to identify what this critereon is.

No, you're not feigning ignorance about the peafowl. A male phenotype can have either a male or female genotype. What are you trying to prove?

So which determines sex -- what something looks like, what its genes are, or neither?

My dude, you CLEARLY don’t know much about peacocks or you’d never pick them for this argument. Peahens spontaneously becoming peacocks, growing the tail feathers, and making male calls is a well-documented phenomenon.

None of that changes why we call the brown birds the female birds. Once you can accept the answer, we can disuss all the other phenomenon. But you refuse to accept *any* grounding of sex in biology. SO I laugh at you.

What you are describing is nto a sex transition but a disorder that a few feamle peahens syffer from. They have an ovary problem that over produces testosterone. They do nto change sex, but some male secondary sex characteristics will grow. You have no idea what you are talking about.

They change phenotype, yes?

You literally gave an example of a species that can undergo sex reversal, so what point do you think you're making?

Who is "we"?

...dude is stuck in grade school biology. There are more things in heaven and on earth than are dreamt of in his philosophy. 😑

Those of us in this thread. Kathryn, you have already been exposed as blustering rather than engaging and being dishonest. Best tone it down with the silly questions.

I find it adorable that you’re claiming to speak for people in this thread when you’re clearly the only one who thinks so. You do appear to have been exposed as someone with no idea what a phenotype is, mind you…

Who does this line actually work on, in your experience

What if we wouldn't all give the same answer?

"There are dozens of us!" says the single and only person on the whole thread spouting nonsense.

Good grief. I am struggling to think down to your level now.

Is there someone else in the thread agreeing with you that the rest of us are missing?

what is your education in biology?

Like, of all the birds to get gender essentialist about, peacocks are about the worst possible pick. Anybody who keeps them has probably had a hen transition.

Wait, the idiot who claims to use biology to justify their bigotry is actually completely ignorant of biology??? My world is shaken!

How do you judge who is ignorant when you know fuck all? Genuine question.

By seeing people responding with things like this to you? bsky.app/profile/tkin...

Well, you seem to do it via wildly unwarranted confidence

I have a degree in biology, you are ignorant of biology.

An expert! Fantastic! Can you help us all out here and explain hwo biologists define what a sex is? In particular can you say what we mean when an organisms sex is Female? My daughter, dog and parrot are female. What do they all share that makes them female? So happy we have an expert at last.

Where did I claim expertise? I know more about biology than you do, so I can evaluate whether you are ignorant of biology. How do you know those 3 are female? What standard do you use to determine their sex? Because the one you want to use might not actually apply.

A question you should be asking yourself.

Well, I can base my claims in the peer reviewed literature. When my opponent flaps around, refused to define terms, and never bases any claim in the literature, I can be confident it is not me. How about you?

You, sir, are exactly the kind of person who thinks they know things and does not. You have happily dismissed every argument brought to you, not understanding any of them, and have done nothing to refute any of them. I'm not here to argue with you--I'm here to mock you. You don't merit argument.

No coherent argument has been made that sex is "bimodal". Every question asked to define terms, find evidence in the literature etc, has been met with bluster. Meanwhile, I have presented several papers that describe why biologist understand only two sexes have evolved and ...

... there has been no serious engagement with those papers. No-one read them. This is because I am discussing biology with ideologists, not enquiring minds.

That’s incorrect. You’ve ignored the responses that prove you wrong, that doesn’t mean that they aren’t in the thread. It also doesn’t mean that the people who aren’t ignorant are the ones without “inquiring minds”.

You've been dogwalked this entire thread and you are the type of person for whom ignorance is bliss; because you don't understand it, you can't see it, and thus you don't acknowledge it.

You quote 'the literature' with little to no understanding of what it is, demand people accept your points FIRST, as if that will give you more of a platform, and yet-- --you are nothing more than a garden variety transphobe, speaking of things he does not understand with misplaced confidence.

Do *you* accept this paper describes why two and only two sexes have ever evolved? Or are you another closed mind? www.researchgate.net/publication/...

I do not accept that the paper describes why two AND ONLY TWO sexes have ever evolved.

Would you say that every blue-green peafowl with long tail feathers is male?

Bar some rare medical conditions, yes.

The question was "every." Every means "every one, without exceptions." Is your answer yes or no?

@quackometer.bsky.social

Conditions which result in a bimodal distribution...

Of what?

Of your "we can just look at their sexually dimorphic traits and identify what sex they are" argument.

You are making no sense. What is the bimodal distribution a distribution of? What measurement?

📌

I accept what you're saying because I know who you and Sran Eric Fagan are, but I don't think most people know this. I mean, I didn't, and it's the sort of thing i'd enjoy reading about.

I did not know this and it has made my day

I am pretty sure SOMEONE in this conversation is aware of this... Ok, several people.

Oh crap, I only went up to the block so I missed context. Sorry!

No I think you're providing extra entertainment here. The only reason I haven't blocked the deliberately ignorant person is because this is *hilarious*.

Crap, sorry, I scrolled up to the block and missed the context.

I'm so confused but I did learn a thing about peafowl so I call that a win

Slight peacockup, no big.

Nah I’m just joshing. She hasn’t shown any sign of being able to read or comprehend anything else so there’s no reason to believe this will sink in either.

Wombat AND Tewson in a thread: this gunna be good. (Note: Scrolled up and it was, in fact, good. Never fails. Absolute Queens, these two.)

Don’t worry. They can change their example to amphibians and fish. Those things never change after birth. Nope. Never. Definitely not an entire movie franchise about that event happening.

I made popcorn, want some?

I've got some space on my picnic blanket here, if you want a seat?

Woo, picnic time!

"I refuse to believe in anything that isn't demonstrated in a 200 word infographic of my choosing" is a buckwild way of experiencing the universe.

Mate. I just want to know why it is we call the brown birds the female birds. Are you going to pretend you do not know too like the other morons?

It's been multiple hours and you still haven't looked up the word "bimodal", then?

Who is “we”?

Can we talk about Clownfish? If the breeding female dies, the breeding male becomes a female and takes her place. What's that mean for your theory of immutable sex?

I mean he posted about peahens and peacocks.

“Why do this illustration not show the entire range and complexity of nature?” -You, a simpleton.

I’m not the one who labeled it!

You are not the first person to play the peafowl game. And it is always fascinating to see how hard the gender-muddled wriggle to not answer the question despite we all know you know the answer. But to answer will show how absurd you have been so you bluster and struggle.

You do realize that peahens spontaneously become peacocks, right?

You refuse to give me the information I need in order to give you an answer.

Liar

bsky.app/profile/kath...

You do nto need this info. You have given no justification for needing this info. You are liar I am afraid and have been exposed.

Yes, I do. Because the answer will change depending on who is making the determination and for what purpose.

This debate has been popping up in my timeline for days, and I can't not watch as I can't believe Kathryn has not blocked him yet. Not even after "liar"

Here's where the pseudo scientist quack flops around just like the anti-evolution quacks. The quack is cackling because it thinks it's found a "gotcha" against Kathryn, but all it's done is note that the mostly brown birds are typically in the "female" part of the bimodal distribution. Gosh.

Anything not demonstrated on this specific infographic cannot exist, Kathryn. It's also why I do not believe in gravity or the existence of hot dogs.

this kind of behavior is why your friends have a group chat without you

I refuse to believe he has friends. Well, maybe that Leonidas W. Steel guy.