one of these is not like the other, according to tmz.com.
apparently, over 75% of the respondents couldn’t tell, at least as of this writing. i guess that exposes the common myth that all men are different than all women, that men and women are mutually exclusive groups, that everyone can tell the difference at any time, and that it actually matters. geez, next thing you know, people won’t be able to tell the difference, and the patriarchy won’t know who to oppress. and people may start to love each other based on, well, who they are, instead of “what” they are.
hey, i can dream, can’t i?
and speaking of statistics, if you put a bunch of monkeys in a room, and asked them to randomly choose one, you’d get the same results, each choice getting 25% of the total. which is further evidence that humans evolved from monkeys. or something.
I got it wrong because I failed to recognize Candis.
And yeah, I forget how many times I’ve heard someone say or seen someone post that they can usually spot trans women with 100% success. What they really mean is they can spot some women who may or may not be trans women, and totally miss many others. Their proclamations are limited by a pervasive selection bias, since they can’t tell when they’ve got a false positive or negative.
Comment by Lisa Harney — December 7, 2007 @ 9:10 pm
yeah, i suppose the presumption is that “real men” can tell a “real woman” with 100% accuracy. unfortunately, there is no such thing as real men or women.
Comment by nexy — December 8, 2007 @ 11:20 am
I guessed right, which means that maybe I was the fourth chimpanzee. The point stands that one can’t necessarily “tell” - like “telling” means anything, anyway. (And I know I can tell only sometimes - which is maybe similar to gaydar.) The whole subject is fascinating for me when I try to ascertain what is masculine or feminine, because when I look at it closely, none of it makes any sense. (Even less “what is man” or “what is woman”.)
Comment by salspua — December 8, 2007 @ 1:27 pm