Do men recognise the sex of a stranger as well as women?

Does that follow?

If one female spots that the gorilla in the distance moving towards the group is a silverback, not one of the other females in the group, before another then presumably she can take steps to minimise her chances of being the one who ends up pregnant?

Obviously the why is much less important than the observation that seems to be true that women, in general, are better.

I think the PP was using "nurture" in the sense of "nature vs nurture", in other words: is this trait due to our nature (in our genes) or has it been nurtured by our social environment (a socially learned trait)?
So PP is suggesting that women are better at accurately recognising sex due to their own life experience/social environment, rather than it being written into our genes through thousands of years of evolution.

Ah yes, sorry, misread it.

This

It's not at all funny. It sickens me how gender non-conforming people are at increased risk of being miss-sexed or viewed suspiciously as a result of the trans movement.

I agree with op.
Women much better at detecting the opposite sex because its a potential threat. The reverse isn't true.
There would be evolutionary reasons for detecting men trying to pass as women. They are so rarely successful.

All the men you know must be really thick or they're gaslighting you.

What I find distressing in myself is my vigilance. When I clock someone who sets off my spidey senses I give them a lot of space, observe them sideways, and am extremely cautious.

I hate that. I hate that I'm so attuned to deception in others. I hate that I'm hyper vigilant. I hate that I may be avoiding some lovely people, because they 'don't fit' my pattern recognition.

That said, it's very rarely butch women that trigger me. I think it's actually men that I react to, with an extra dose of caution for 'men who are behaving suspiciously'.

I'd have thought that men would be able to recognise one of their own no matter how they're dressed.
Interesting conversation though.

Sorry that was my response to the article posted.

Sure they were!

I think the PP was using "nurture" in the sense of "nature vs nurture", in other words: is this trait due to our nature (in our genes) or has it been nurtured by our social environment (a socially learned trait)?
So PP is suggesting that women are better at accurately recognising sex due to their own life experience/social environment, rather than it being written into our genes through thousands of years of evolution.

Further thought. If, as suggested above, the big dominant silverbacks always have their way with the females. it doesn't matter what discernment skills any particular female has, she isn't going to be able to pass the advantage on in preference to the females without those skills.
But in this thread, mention has been made of why modern women may be better than men. Women look at faces, at body language, at what people are doing. Men can be looking at, well, we know what they look at (it took me ages to work out why they thought that I, acting president of the local NUT, attender at car maintenance classes, might be the sort of woman to simper at how clever they were to know what a carburettor was, but I got there in the end).

The number of times GC people incorrectly think GNC cis women are trans is laughable, and of course, if the only people you think are trans don't "pass" then that's simple confirmation bias.

www.newstimes.com/local/article/Woman-mistaken-for-transgender-harassed-in-7471666.php

I agree - I thought I'd just put it out there, though.

Most trans women whose pics you see online are very obviously male but there are a few who look more convincingly female, like Munroe Bergdorf. But then Bergdorf has had facial feminisation surgery, and clearly puts a lot of effort into maintaining their appearance.

Love this thread. I think women would do well to see the frightening reality. We are animals and mammals, with a mind and so, very unique.

There is an evolutionary arms race between males and females. Well known in biology.

Through our minds, we have created culture.

Through culture, men dominate and seek to control, and perhaps even enslave us for the benefits they receive. So nature reflected in culture.

Makes sense that females can recognise males, a potentially mortal danger.

Of our species type, most males would die in war or scarcity of resources and not procreate.

They are always coming after us, using physical force and culture. Shame also plays a big role, a handy tool embedded in culture to subdue females. Telling women who they are by creating images of ideals in culture works too.

But we will continue to fight the good fight. Mother nature puts her best into females because we gestate and nurture the infants.

My DP doesn't always see it when a male trans person is on TV etc. I generally do.

If women are more switched on to notice men dressed up as women then I think this is far more likely to be nurture ie today's environment

Why? Nurturing random men isn't a female instinct. Nurturing children maybe.

I'm really not sure that one example of one man spotting one other man proves that when men don't notice they must be gaslighting.

This is really interesting.

I buy a specific make-up brand and they have a group on FB where people post selfies of themselves in the make-up, to share tips and tricks, etc.

One person, let’s call her ‘Ella’, posted a selfie of herself made-up - the make-up creates a very natural look - she didn’t look any different from anyone else, in terms of this very natural, well-blended look.

But it was 100% obvious to me that Ella is a man. Ella has chin length blonde hair, a pretty blouse on, the outline of a bra just visible underneath, and lovely, understated make-up. Chin down, I can only assume to obscure an Adam’s Apple. Ella is a man dressed up as a woman.

Off the back of this thread, I was interested to see what a man thought.

I found the photos, complete with Ella’s name clearly visible. I showed the post, with name + two selfies to DH, and said - what do you think? Nothing else.

He glanced, and said: it’s a man.

I’m sure there is, as a PP said, a spectrum of observational ability. But any man who doesn’t have a vested interest in gaslighting us can definitely tell.

If evolution is involved in the differences in perception then it will be because women are the social mediators and generally read body language and emotions in others better than men. They also have better facial recognition. If women are more switched on to notice men dressed up as women then I think this is far more likely to be nurture ie today's environment than in the genes to protect against men as if they were predators.

Because many really are blindingly obvious.

but if you see someone out and about presenting as a women and recognize them as 'male' how do you know if you are right. maybe i'm just particulary bad but i've known a small number of women whom i've been surprised to discover later on were born male. i also know a couple of women that as far as i know were born female but actually i wouldn't be that surprised if you said they had been born male. and i spent an evening in the company of someone with a unisex name that i honestly couldn't decide.

i'm not convinced women are as good at telling as they think they are.

@JulesCobb I didn't know that, that seems very sad for such a young child to go through that

Georgie Stone’s parents went to great lengths to trans Georgie pre-puberty for this very reason. Georgie started hormone blockers at 10.

Generally I think I'm good at spotting but the younger the person the more difficult I think it can be. There was a character in neighbours McKenzie a female presenting character played by a biologically male transwoman , if it hadn't been part of the storyline and I hadn't read about the actor's personal experience, I wouldn't have known