Shows how much you know, fake vaginas can't self lubricate so post op ts need to use lots of ky jelly for sex 
That was in fact my point and you can take the 'shows how much' back. There is a limit how successful such a subterfuge is going to be in practice and I would have expected it to be somewhat obvious. OTOH at that point a decision is being made on rather more evidence than a few pictures.
In this particular case there is also
Hidden Image/Members Only which shows no scarring which I find surprising. Might not be the same body.
How expensive is the operation?
How long does it take for the scaring (internal and external) to reduce to a point that anyone would be fooled?
How long to be robust enough to put up with being a prossie's breadwinner?
How many 'ops' are being done per year globally?
How many are being done to people young enough to pass as even a potential money earner (typically 'looks less than 35' after healing)?
How many of those want to work as prostitutes?
How many of those want to pass themselves as female prostitutes (mass market) rather than as TS (niche)?
How many of those are in the UK?
How many of those are on AW?
How many of those have been in 'looks like a bloke' threads?
The number of 'looks like a bloke' threads on here does not seem to me likely to correlate with any sane analysis.
I understand that there are significant numbers of ladyboys 'out there' and fewer 'over here'. But we're talking about generally poor people who can afford a non-trivial operation to a high enough standard to make a living out of it. That final step from pre-op is expensive in direct cost and lost opportunity costs during recovery.
Look at it another way. I have a hundred people dressed as women, a blue door, and a red door. I have to ensure that I get all people with XY chromosomes through the blue door.
Lazy option: make them all go through the blue door.
If you don't care about false positives, its easy.
My concern is false positives and lack of QA. If the only QA process is that you (ie generic assessor, rather than BM in particular) have a second look and come to the same conclusion, then its also easy to say that your QA process shows you are right every time. But some of us might think that your QA process is crap and if its that crap and you believe it, then what does that say about your opinion in the first place?
Having an opinion is one thing. Claiming infallibility in the complete absence of any actual proof of ever having been right even once is a bit strong. And the likelihood is that there will be no such proof, because you will have chosen the blue door for all of them and not actually punted and got any more evidence. And if you'd ever got it wrong and found out in a punt, well,you'd tell us, right?
