Passing, Fluidity

[LeaP]

I've found myself looking at people lately with an eye toward gender - meaning trying to see if what I was seeing as male or female was in their actual physical appearance or due to all the other cues such as dress, deportment & carriage, makeup, body language, and so on.

The more I do this, the more fluid people actually appear. That is, a certain largish percentage of the population appears, by any standard, indisputably male or female only. But a good proportion of the population does not, and the more I look with this in mind, the easier it is to see.

It's far more than androgynous featured people, e.g., males with softer features, females with angular features. It's really surprising how many people there are that would look 100% passable presenting as the opposite physical sex and how much commonality there is in actual physical appearance between the sexes, especially considering facial appearance and general body shape. This *despite* all the literature about secondary sex characteristics such as brow shape, eye depth, hip development, and so on. By my estimation, perhaps 30-40% of people could as easily present as either sex, and another 10-20% close, or perhaps would leave one wondering.

Has anyone else spent time looking and analyzing along these lines? If not, spend some time sitting at the mall sometime. You might be surprised.

Lea

[Cynthia Anne]

I find your thought quite interesting! Although I've never done this it might be an interesting way to kill some time if needed! Hugs!

[Savannah Daniels]

I tend to agree. In fact, I'm going to the mall this afternoon and will definitely pay closer attention.
Thanks for sharing that!

[audreyinalbany]

I agree with Lea. I'm always looking at people with an eye towards their androygny and i really think most of us fit (especially as we get older) into a sort of 'in-between' category with very few of us having completely male or completely female features.

[Rachel Mari]

I have noticed that also, especially since I've been coming to this forum. Before I don't think I ever noticed anything about anyone, but recently I've started looking at how people present themselves and wondering who/if or not is TG.
It has been a long time since I went to a mall and just sat and watched people, maybe it's time to do it again sometime soon.

[Stephanie47]

Just yesterday when I was at a mall with my wife, I found myself searching out tall ladies. I wanted to check out their faces and body type to assess whether I could pass. All the tall women had definite feminine faces. Even if they were heavy set and large framed, they did not have angular shaped faces. Best I stay out of malls en femme, and, stick to evening strolls.

[Sallee]

I have noticed that a lot There was recently a link to some photos of couples just switching clothing no make nothing fancy just one shot the couple in thiere everyday dress and then another of the same couple in each others clothing. I found it really interesting.
Fluidity is a good word The dress for each wasn't meant to be androgonus but it turned out that way. An interesting study

[BLUE ORCHID]

I've looked at people for a long time to figure who would make a better looking oposite sex.

Orchid

[carhill2mn]

Yes, I have been doing the same for many years and agree that there are many people who require a second or third look!

[ReineD]

It's really surprising how many people there are that would look 100% passable presenting as the opposite physical sex and how much commonality there is in actual physical appearance between the sexes, especially considering facial appearance and general body shape. This *despite* all the literature about secondary sex characteristics such as brow shape, eye depth, hip development, and so on. By my estimation, perhaps 30-40% of people could as easily present as either sex

I agree with you. I think that many people, if they took the time to carefully transform or had it done professionally, could pass at least from a few feet away. But I think very few people can pass at 100% (this is partially why TSs need to take hormones), especially if they are being observed for awhile or if they are interacting with someone.

Bear with me, but these have been my observations:

When I see a group of same-sex people sitting together (whether they are men or women), I can determine which have a more feminine vs. a more masculine energy compared to their companions. For example, one of the guys might have a more rounded face and fuller lips compared to his friends, while one of the girls might have more angular facial features compared to hers.

But, in (most) every instance, when you compare a more "feminine egergy" guy, to a more "masculine engergy" girl, the guy will still have more masculine engergy than the girl. And this is why a single CD might pass better if seen alone or compared to the men in the room who are not crossdressed. It is when he is in a room with other GGs and the observers make the subconscious comparisons (we all do this), that small flags pop up causing people to stare, and then notice the more subtle gender cues. Generally speaking. Of course some people have more noticeable gender cues than others.

There are many studies that show that most of us can accurately determine whether someone is male or female. Here's just a taste:

Near ceiling degree of accuracy, even when cues from hairstlyes, facial hair, and makeup are eliminated:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8474840

96% proper gender identification accuracy from photographs, even when hair is hidden:
http://www.perceptionweb.com/abstract.cgi?id=p220153

One of the differences between males and females is, there is more facial contrast among females and this explains why makeup works, since makeup increases the contrast by emphasizing individual features. :)
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/10/091020153100.htm

[LeaP]

...

When I see a group of same-sex people sitting together (whether they are men or women), I can determine which have a more feminine vs. a more masculine energy compared to their companions. ... the guy will still have more masculine engergy than the girl. ... Of course some people have more noticeable gender cues than others.

There are many studies that show that most of us can accurately determine whether someone is male or female. Here's just a taste:

Near ceiling degree of accuracy, even when cues from hairstlyes, facial hair, and makeup are eliminated:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8474840

96% proper gender identification accuracy from photographs, even when hair is hidden:
http://www.perceptionweb.com/abstract.cgi?id=p220153

One of the differences between males and females is, there is more facial contrast among females and this explains why makeup works, since makeup increases the contrast by emphasizing individual features. :)
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/10/091020153100.htm

Thank you for your response in several respects, Reine. I appreciate the thoughtful aspect on my basic theme - pure physical aspects - then expanding with some really good cites. The cite on 3D modeling was interesting, particularly as it overlaps with the makeup & contrast article in some ways. The complexity of gender determination was well-put in one of the abstracts: ... "this most basic of facial categorisations may be multiply determined by a COMBINATION [emphasis mine - Lea] of 2-D, 3-D, and textural cues and their interrelationships." But the most telling point on the physical aspects was this: "the best discriminators were derived from simple distance measurements in the full face (85% accuracy with 12 variables) and 3-D distances (85% accuracy with 6 variables)."

I can accept all of this intuitively. I'd love to see a statistical study on facial variation across the population, however, which is more to my point. That is, I can easily believe that humans can discriminate sex based on the criteria cited. The question is, what proportion of the population really fits the criteria. One of the studies mentions facial recognition software, which suggests broad applicability. No stats are available in the abstracts, though.

A lot of us have masculine facial characteristics that must be addressed if the goal is to pass, or nearly so. It seems that behavioral cues are important, but not enough. There are threads and posts on the forum that would have it otherwise. Seems like studies do not support that. And, short of surgical feminization (which, IMO, is not the province of the CD'er), makeup is the only real answer, which is also the same place your post ended.

Last, but not least, your comments on masculine energy in groups was something I'd never considered. I'll look for it.

Lea

[Karren H]

I'm a prolific observer and it still amazes me that so many women fall outside of what we think is the atypical female ... But there is one thing they all have that almost instantly (or after a few minutes) tells you they are female. Its their attitude... It shines through no mater what they look like or what they wear...

[Joanna41]

Lol...and all I have ever done is to just try to even be passable. Still a long way to go...sighhhh

Joanna