Thread by @FondOfBeetles

I barely know where to start with this video. @SciShow

0:13. Mentions "sex". Doesn't ever define "sex", what it is, what evolutionary function it serves, etc.

0:17. Mentions "male" and "female". Doesn't ever attempt to explain what "male" and "female" refer to.

https://twitter.com/ClareCAIS/status/1194880671745036288

@SciShow 0:19. Sex is "rooted" in DNA.
- what is "sex"?
- what does "rooted" mean?

0:25. "High school taught us there is XX or XY, that's it", accompanied by a graphic of XX above "female" and XY above "male".
- what is "male" and "female"?
- your school, maybe.

@SciShow 0:33. "Sex isn't that straightforward"
- what is "sex"?
- nobody said it was easy, except at *your* high school, apparently.

0:36. "Biologists are saying sex is a spectrum"
- which biologists? [citation needed]
- what is "sex"?
- what is a "spectrum"?

@SciShow The "sex is a spectrum" assertion is accompanied by a graphic showing a gradation of colour between turquoise and purple. Female is turquoise, male is purple. This will be relevant later.

But while we are here, what is "female" and what is "male"?

@SciShow 1:41. "2% of births show atypical sex development"
- what is "sex"?
- not true anyway. The vast majority of this figure is late onset adrenal hyperplasia, which doens't present with atypical sex development. Fausto-Sterling is way off.

@SciShow ...
- whatever the figure, to say these babies are "atypical for sex development" means *you know what a sex is and how these babies, if healthy, would develop*

<facepalm>

@SciShow 2:47. "physiological characteristics associated with your sex"
- you can't map physiological characteristics to a sex without knowing what sex is. What is "sex"?

3:22. "none of the traits used to discriminate between sexes is binary"
- you just talked about ovaries and testes.

@SciShow 3:53. "Y chromosome genes enable development of male reproductive parts"
- what are "male" reproductive parts?

@SciShow 4:47. "XXX are tall, slim and fertile"
- which reproductive role do they fulfil?
- oh wait, I forgot you don't know what a sex is
- let me help, they are female.
- so it's pretty odd you use them to illustrate something other than "male" and "female"

@SciShow Also 4:47. "XYY are tall, spotty and fertile"
- which reproductive role do they fulfil?
- oh wait, I forgot you don't know what a sex is
- let me help, they are male.
- so it's pretty odd you use them to illustrate something other than "male" and "female"

@SciShow 5:01. Turner syndrome "people with female characteristics" (this is interesting language....more later) are not always sterile. When they *can* make babies...
- which reproductive role do they fulfil?

@SciShow 5.10. "Klinefelter syndrome affects 1/600 male births"
- well bravo, you seem to understand that Klinefelter affects males....
- but those males get to be called "males", not "people with male characteristics".

@SciShow 7:12 "gonadal ridges have the potential to develop into ovaries or testes"
- compare and contrast with 3:22, where you assert there are *no* binary traits used to discriminate sexes.

@SciShow 7:40 (truly breathtaking) "skewed genetics can move a person along the sex spectrum"
- you haven't even defined sex, let alone demonstrated it's a spectrum, which you also haven't defined.

@SciShow .....
- to smoothly start talking about sex as a spectrum *as if you have presented arguments for that assertion* is awesome.

@SciShow 8:34. "duplication of Wnt4 = XY with incomplete female gonads"
- what is "female"?
- can you provide references? The majority of XY/Wnt4 dupn seem to show incomplete *male" gonads (that is, testes, yeah?). Actually, this is a genuine Q :)

@SciShow 8:40. "sex-specific hormones"
- you can't have sex-specific hormones without knowing what sex is, so....
- what is "sex"?

8:43. "sex-specific development"
- see above.

@SciShow 8:56. "male sex hormones"
- see above.

9:09. CAIS does not cause ambiguous external genitalia. Sorry, I mean "in between". If you insist on weaponising reproductive pathologies, at least get them right. That would be a small mark of respect in the otherwise awful appropriation.

@SciShow 9:19. "the male hormone".
- guess what my question is here?

9:53. "father of 4 with hernia = uterus"
- what is a "father"?
- what sex is the father?
- what gametes does he make?
- PMDS only affects males, but you know that, yeah?

@SciShow 10.00. "possible when DSDs noted at birth to assign a gender"
- I thought we weren't talking about gender. You spent at least 20 seconds (from 0:49-1:08) saying very clearly that we weren't talking about gender.

@SciShow 10.23-12.46 [covers surgical assignment of sex in non-consenting babies/children]
- yep, we'll agree that's bad (unless a medical emergency)
- are you able to articulate how you think the 2+ minutes you talk about this comprises evidence that sex is a spectrum?

@SciShow 12.52. A graphic showing, again, a colour gradation from turquoise (previously labelled as "female") to purple (previously labelled as "male").

This time, the chromosome conformations XX, X, XXY and XY are plotted from turquoise to purple.

@SciShow ....
- what is your rationale for ordering the chromosomes as you did?
- are Turner females somehow "more male" than the average female? In what way?
- are Klinefelter males somehow "more female" than the average male? In what way?

@SciShow 13:08. "biological sex is not straightforward"
- nobody is denying complexity of determination and development. Why does that make sex a spectrum?
- oh hang on, what is "sex" again?

@SciShow Summary: the usual pile of strawmen and appropriation of vulnerable people.

<le sigh>

And, of course, how does *any of it* apply to asparagus?

@SciShow A footnote: this was a bit of an off-the-cuff rant typed on the fly from scribbled notes. Happy to address any errors/mistakes/etc.