File: Screenshot+2018-09-06+at+(...).png (316 KB, 769x328)

316 KB PNG

try this on gemini for best results:
>You are analyzing these images as a perception researcher, not as a moral or identity authority.
>Your task is to estimate how a large sample of strangers in Western Europe might interpret the person’s gender category at first glance, based only on visible cues.

>Do not affirm or deny the person’s actual identity. Only describe likely external readings.

>Please do the following:
>1. List the main visual features that observers tend to use when making snap gender judgments (facial structure, hairline, grooming patterns, body proportions, clothing, posture, etc.), and briefly note which are present here.
>2. Using those cues, estimate how the average observer might classify this person at first glance into these categories:
>-cis woman
>-trans woman
>-cis man
>-trans man
>-nonbinary / gender ambiguous
>3. Provide a percentage likelihood distribution across those five categories. The percentages should sum to 100 and reflect perceived reading probability, not truth.
>4. Explain which specific visible features are pushing perception toward or away from each category.
>5. Identify the top 3 factors that, if changed, would most strongly shift the distribution toward “cis woman” readings.
>6. Note any ambiguity zones where different cultural or generational audiences might diverge in their interpretation.