Hillary Sends Message Of Support To Trans Woman Assaulted On NYC Subway

[monstereo 1,232]

Get that trans vote Hillary!

[LebaneseDude 6,146]

Just now, NOT Marinara said:

 

Mess @ me 

[Chic 20,830]

2 hours ago, Morphine Prince said:

@Chic Educate me. 

There are certainly physical cues that may alert you as to whether an individual is trans or not. These can be fairly obvious such as an unusual amount of facial hair on someone with breasts, that being an atypical mixture of secondary sex characteristics. Certain conditions can cause this, but them being trans is as likely a possible option as those. The voice of the individual is also a possible tip-off, but not the be-all end-all of categorizing them as trans. And some people have quite subtle cues of both genders that might lean anywhere in the range of masculine, feminine or androgynous, and then assumptions may not seem as solid.

Non-passable or hardly-passable transwomen are generally easy to pick out if you're used to identifying male and female physical characteristics, like me. Often, a combination of these cues will be the deciding factor in one's assumption. For instance, a combination of facial hair and a deep voice on a woman would seem quite unusual, so much so that the idea of them being trans becomes a viable option.

Even cis people look all sorts of ways in between, and I've seen cis women that would have never passed as women if they had a deeper voice or lack of breasts.

That being said, "look trans" isn't the most socially appropriate terminology. You could say she looks more stereotypically trans. But even then, be cautious of the situation you say it in.

[Morphine Prince 109,654]

12 minutes ago, Chic said:

There are certainly physical cues that may alert you as to whether an individual is trans or not. These can be fairly obvious such as an unusual amount of facial hair on someone with breasts, that being an atypical mixture of secondary sex characteristics. Certain conditions can cause this, but them being trans is as likely a possible option as those. The voice of the individual is also a possible tip-off, but not the be-all end-all of categorizing them as trans. And some people have quite subtle cues of both genders that might lean anywhere in the range of masculine, feminine or androgynous, and then assumptions may not seem as solid.

Non-passable or hardly-passable transwomen are generally easy to pick out if you're used to identifying male and female physical characteristics, like me. Often, a combination of these cues will be the deciding factor in one's assumption. For instance, a combination of facial hair and a deep voice on a woman would seem quite unusual, so much so that the idea of them being trans becomes a viable option.

Even cis people look all sorts of ways in between, and I've seen cis women that would have never passed as women if they had a deeper voice or lack of breasts.

That being said, "look trans" isn't the most socially appropriate terminology. You could say she looks more stereotypically trans. But even then, be cautious of the situation you say it in.

Ok, thanks. I'll use different vocabulary then  

 

[LebaneseDude 6,146]

12 minutes ago, Chic said:

There are certainly physical cues that may alert you as to whether an individual is trans or not. These can be fairly obvious such as an unusual amount of facial hair on someone with breasts, that being an atypical mixture of secondary sex characteristics. Certain conditions can cause this, but them being trans is as likely a possible option as those. The voice of the individual is also a possible tip-off, but not the be-all end-all of categorizing them as trans. And some people have quite subtle cues of both genders that might lean anywhere in the range of masculine, feminine or androgynous, and then assumptions may not seem as solid.

Non-passable or hardly-passable transwomen are generally easy to pick out if you're used to identifying male and female physical characteristics, like me. Often, a combination of these cues will be the deciding factor in one's assumption. For instance, a combination of facial hair and a deep voice on a woman would seem quite unusual, so much so that the idea of them being trans becomes a viable option.

Even cis people look all sorts of ways in between, and I've seen cis women that would have never passed as women if they had a deeper voice or lack of breasts.

That being said, "look trans" isn't the most socially appropriate terminology. You could say she looks more stereotypically trans. But even then, be cautious of the situation you say it in.

What an eloquent response