How do we present before we fully realize we are transgendered

[Kathryn Martin]

We are all familiar with the saying: " I think thou dost protest too much".

I have at various times in my life de-feminized/masculinized myself to meet certain challenges. I have also noticed that those of us who feel truly uncomfortable with themselves because they have trouble dealing with the idea of not being a complete man, often put much effort into being more masculine than they are. Of course such behavior cannot go unpunished and often the stories are that they suffer terribly.

What makes men in our society fear to be perceived as feminine or even effeminate. Why do we eye with suspicion a nurturing human being who is a man? Or do we? Is this an aspect that with few exceptions is simply in our head? How real is it that males that are feminine in their behavior, their activities, their preferences are ostracized?

And if we are not, why do we not behave as who we are?

What do you see and think?

Kathryn

[Kathi Lake]

Why? Because women are perceived as the "weaker sex" and for a man to "demean" themselves and take a step downward from their vaunted perch on top of the pile (of what, I'll decline to mention), would be an insult to manliness overall.

Personally, I don't care. I get so many compliments from women on how I'm different, rare, and one of the illusory "sensitive males." I don't mind it! Tonight, at a church auction, I saw a friend of mine and said, "OK, girl - let's see the shoes!" She always wears the most incredible stilettos! She lifted up her jeans and showed me (they were gorgeous, by the way). Her friend asked her what she was doing (I guess she didn't see/hear me). She said, "Oh, he always compliments me on my shoes. Isn't that great? My husband never even notices what I wear. Actually he has incredible taste in women's shoes." She then turned to me and said, "We should go shoe shopping sometime!"

Now, that said, am I - the sensitive male - the type that gets the girl? Nope. Her husband is about 6' 3" - in both height and width (all muscle). That is the kind of guy that cares about getting on top of the pile. The rest of us? Heck, let's go shoe shopping!



Kathi

[Jay Cee]

Gay men are stereotyped as having feminine characteristics, and very few men want to be mistaken for a homosexual.

Any man who denies or buries his nurturing side is depriving not only himself of more joy and happiness, but also his family and friends. It is a ridiculous notion that a man should not show feelings (except maybe anger and other "manly" emotions).

[Sophie86]

Now, that said, am I - the sensitive male - the type that gets the girl? Nope.

The good news is that you only have to get the girl once, if you get the right one. Good luck!

[Jolene]

I think it is how most of us were taught growing up. The " boys don't cry " stuff etc. It just feels better being myself and having my own feelings but yet having to cover them at times depending who I happen to be around.

Why? Because women are perceived as the "weaker sex" and for a man to "demean" themselves and take a step downward from their vaunted perch on top of the pile (of what, I'll decline to mention), would be an insult to manliness overall.

Personally, I don't care. I get so many compliments from women on how I'm different, rare, and one of the illusory "sensitive males." I don't mind it! Tonight, at a church auction, I saw a friend of mine and said, "OK, girl - let's see the shoes!" She always wears the most incredible stilettos! She lifted up her jeans and showed me (they were gorgeous, by the way). Her friend asked her what she was doing (I guess she didn't see/hear me). She said, "Oh, he always compliments me on my shoes. Isn't that great? My husband never even notices what I wear. Actually he has incredible taste in women's shoes." She then turned to me and said, "We should go shoe shopping sometime!"

Now, that said, am I - the sensitive male - the type that gets the girl? Nope. Her husband is about 6' 3" - in both height and width (all muscle). That is the kind of guy that cares about getting on top of the pile. The rest of us? Heck, let's go shoe shopping!



Kathi

That is a nice post Kathi. It is always fun to read about your experences.

[Lucy_Bella]

I think it is how most of us were taught growing up. The " boys don't cry " stuff etc. It just feels better being myself and having my own feelings but yet having to cover them at times depending who I happen to be around.

That's it right there.... Then having to keep those feelings at bay even longer because you married thinking it was something you could control and handle .. I really think if I was to have been supported by my family at the early age I was caught it would have been a different story. But I can't entirely blame my parents they didn't know I continued when I reached puberty ..

[Joanne f]

I am wondering if this fight within some will diminish over time as the rolls of male and female are blurring , a woman can do most things that a man can do now so this attitude that i am more manly because i do "this thing" no longer applies so in theory it should help younger CDs to accept it more .
(Well that's my theory)

[dayna_nj]

This is actually something I struggle with constantly. Even though I enjoy CD-ing, I LOVE being a man just as much, and I have this constant desire to keep the 2 VERY separate. Meaning I will never sit at home and dress halfway. If I dress, its all the way, and rarely alone. Im embarrassed to be a CD. I think many here are very comfortable with it, and even feel more comfortable as a CD. I guess im different that way.

When Im my normal self, I dont want any connections to being a CD, no hints that I might be one or anything like that. Ive never fully embraced being a CD and Im not too sure I ever will. Its been 20 years and no change.

The reason for this is I dont believe that men doing this will ever be accepted. Some people can ignore, but most people in this world dont like it. I probably shouldnt care about that, but I do, mixed in with the fact that I like being male, and Im an example of a CD who isnt comfortable with it, even though when I do it Im like a different person. Its strange.

[cdwithplay36b]

Dayna, i understand your dichotomy. I too love being a man and the ramifications of it. I am very competitive in sports, especially tennis, and also love to hang with the "guys". Granted, there are competitive women as well., but i think this is generally seen more as a male trait. I have a great deal of fun being a man.

Kathryn and Kathy L, while I generally am a great admirer of so many of your posts, I think you are both maybe missing a big point here. Whereas males are generally expected to be manly and thus respected for it, so also I think women are expected to be "womanly" (is that a term?). It isn't so much an issue of being a man's man as much as it is expected for each gender to be true themselves. Society expects these norms because that is the definition of a norm; perceptions are indeed preconceived as to how we should be based on our initial gender. A change from this path is what is therefore uncomfortable to those inflexible in their ability to deal with variations such as ourselves.

[DameErrant]

I am wondering if this fight within some will diminish over time as the rolls of male and female are blurring , a woman can do most things that a man can do now so this attitude that i am more manly because i do "this thing" no longer applies so in theory it should help younger CDs to accept it more .
(Well that's my theory)

It may be because the roles of male and female are blurring that men, (all men,) are even more insecure than ususal and are trying desperately to find out what it means to be a man. And since masculinity seems to be acheivement oriented, (we are what we do, and only what we do well,) we end up trying too hard, creating rigid and arbitraty ideas of "maleness." Especially as more GGs "invade" t4traditionally male fields. (That does not really help us, however good it sounds in theory.)

And it seems that men, including me, don't feel they are "real" men until other men affirm that we are. Or at least that's what I get from Robert Bly, etc.

It doesn't help that GGs often can't seem to make up their minds what they want from men either.

Until I came out to myself that I was CD/TG, I never felt any security in who I was. Now as I mature, I can accept myself for who I am without worrying so much about other people's opinions.

This is my angle on this question. Can't wait to read all of yours.

[Kathi Lake]

Society expects these norms because that is the definition of a norm; perceptions are indeed preconceived as to how we should be based on our initial gender. A change from this path is what is therefore uncomfortable to those inflexible in their ability to deal with variations such as ourselves.

Yes. Society. The same society that treated women first as nothing, then chattel, then slaves, then lesser versions of ourselves, then "equals." Hopefully one day they truly will be. Until then, a man wanting to be like these smaller, weaker, less-useful copies of ourselves is immediately suspect, and less of a man. That's my point.

Kathi

[MissTelegothika]

This is actually something I struggle with constantly. Even though I enjoy CD-ing, I LOVE being a man just as much, and I have this constant desire to keep the 2 VERY separate....Im an example of a CD who isnt comfortable with it, even though when I do it Im like a different person. Its strange.

I really empathise with that comment & feel much the same way. I also feel like a different person when I dress up...my whole perspective changes & its absolute. I would prefer to be with a man & be his girlfriend & I'd like to be completely seen as girl. However, when I'm not dressed up, I feel VERY uncomfortable with even the idea of dressing up. I catch myself thinking "oh not the girly rubbish again" & other downright stupid & reactionary thoughts such as that.
At the moment, the people who I have told about my CD'ing are far more accepting about it then I am. I can't type in the word "crossdresser" without looking away instinctively. I'm my own worst bigot. Yes, it would seem I am repressed. Though I also do not have a problem with other men doing it, just myself.

I also don't think men will ever be accepepted for this, as the role of the man in society throughout the ages is to be the dependable machine that simple to run & easy to understand. Naturally, there will be those who beg to differ wit what i've just said, which is fine as there are exceptions & I do not know the future. But the role of the man is not flexible. It would seem we are a sort of barometre for humans - a fixed point. If men can pick & choose how they are, then it seems to send people into panic with the line "well then, if men are not men, then what is assured in this world?"

This comment from earlier sums it up well: "Because women are perceived as the "weaker sex" and for a man to "demean" themselves and take a step downward from their vaunted perch on top of the pile (of what, I'll decline to mention), would be an insult to manliness overall."

Anwyho...therese some damn good & eloquent answers about this issue. I do enjoy this forum, it never disappoints.

[suchacutie]

This is a topic that is central to the adventure my wife and I call Tina. I am in the camp with a few in this thread who keep their masculine and feminine selves as completely separate as possible. The reason is simple: for 55 years these two sides of me existed as one entity. Looking back (20/20 hindsight?) it is clear that the feminine side of me (in this male body) came to the fore without me knowing it. For example, I was a manager of 160 professionals for 8 years of my professional career, and during that time I found that a large number of women were happy to move into roles of authority under my leadership because they were comfortable with my leadership approach. Many of the men who were immediately under me could not understand why I "put up with these women" by having long conversations with them, allowing them to build their own style of management...a style that the men in that same role could not and would not understand...ever! I understood it perfectly, but not at a concious level until Tina arrived.

So, it's not just "being" or "acting" in a "feminine" way that is considered negative by other men, I would go so far as to say that any understanding of a "feminine approach" is cast as a negative. It is as if they are saying, "you not only better not act feminine, you had better not understand them either!". It comes back to the fact that the genders do not think alike! Over time there has evolved different approaches to life, and men had just better not go there!

In the long run, I have come to believe that those of us who are transgendered, and, thus, very interested in all things of the other gender, will win out. How can we not? We know how to be men, and yet we are dedicated to our feminine selves as well, and all that goes with it. We have the edge...the advantage. When it comes to evolution, those with the advantage always win out!!



tina

[Karinsamatha]

I really empathise with that comment & feel much the same way. I also feel like a different person when I dress up...my whole perspective changes & its absolute. I would prefer to be with a man & be his girlfriend & I'd like to be completely seen as girl. However, when I'm not dressed up, I feel VERY uncomfortable with even the idea of dressing up. I catch myself thinking "oh not the girly rubbish again" & other downright stupid & reactionary thoughts such as that.
At the moment, the people who I have told about my CD'ing are far more accepting about it then I am. I can't type in the word "crossdresser" without looking away instinctively. I'm my own worst bigot. Yes, it would seem I am repressed. Though I also do not have a problem with other men doing it, just myself.

I also don't think men will ever be accepepted for this, as the role of the man in society throughout the ages is to be the dependable machine that simple to run & easy to understand. Naturally, there will be those who beg to differ wit what i've just said, which is fine as there are exceptions & I do not know the future. But the role of the man is not flexible. It would seem we are a sort of barometre for humans - a fixed point. If men can pick & choose how they are, then it seems to send people into panic with the line "well then, if men are not men, then what is assured in this world?"

This comment from earlier sums it up well: "Because women are perceived as the "weaker sex" and for a man to "demean" themselves and take a step downward from their vaunted perch on top of the pile (of what, I'll decline to mention), would be an insult to manliness overall."

Anwyho...therese some damn good & eloquent answers about this issue. I do enjoy this forum, it never disappoints.

I seem to be the opaset, I feel like I am lying when I am dressed as a male - not very comfortable with myself. This is a change that started about 3 to four months ago. It is unfortunate that women are viewed as the weaker sex. If the GM out there only new how much pain can be involved with looking good ie epalation. I think many of the "hard core" males would be a quivering pile of jelly. Or to walk long distances on uneven ground wearing shoes with 3 inch heals!

Someday the perceptions may change, but I don't see that in my lifetime. It will take all of us speeking out together to accomplish it. And many years after that for acceptance. There is so much misinformation out there, and by nature many of us live in the deep dark closet! Some are forced to come out by need, others never will for one reason or another.

Just

[Rachel Morley]

I agree with pretty much with everything Kathy has said. It's the social and gender hierarchy within our society. When a woman dresses in a way that is perceived to be masculine it's not considered a problem because she's going "up the scale". However, when a man dresses in a way that is perceived to be feminine it is a problem because (especially amongst other men) he's lowering himself because in their eyes dressing feminine is being less of a man, and being less of a man is considered a bad thing.

[sometimes_miss]

I agree with pretty much with everything Kathy has said. It's the social and gender hierarchy within our society. When a woman dresses in a way that is perceived to be masculine it's not considered a problem because she's going "up the scale". However, when a man dresses in a way that is perceived to be feminine it is a problem because (especially amongst other men) he's lowering himself because in their eyes dressing feminine is being less of a man, and being less of a man is considered a bad thing.

This topic has been done to death in the past, and if you use the search function, you can find all the information already posted.
But for those who cannot seach, here goes. Again. I used to believe what Rachel wrote, too. But that changed as I learned more about the different roles which define the sexes, especially when it comes to sexual attraction, and social responsibility in humanity's past.
Very, very few people have any idea of what turns them on; most just term it 'chemistry', and leave it at that. When you study it, though, it all becomes pretty clear. We are, more than we'd like to admit, strongly influenced by our genetics; and evolution has 'pushed' us to become what we are today. Historically, women are attracted to strong, dominant, alpha male types; and even those who have learned the down side to being attracted to a male who is more likely to stray, are still attracted to him. Those who cannot 'capture' the top dog will often satisfy herself with having a male who displays at least some of those dominant characteristics, even if they're only demonstrated on her!
Feminine traits in a male were always suspect; femininity was (and is) strongly associated consciously or subconsciously, with submissiveness and weakness when compared to stereotypical male behavior. Males were primarily responsible for protecting both the female mate and the rest of the society he lived in, and that is still the case today. Any visible signs that he may be 'lacking' in maleness decreases his attractiveness to the very vast majority of females, whether they are able to take care of themselves or not. It's not a choice; it's just something they 'feel', and if there's anything we've learned, women usually follow their feelings even when all other logic says not to (witness all the women who are physically struck by their mates, but don't leave them; it's an astounding percentage). And, the same applies to displaying any femininity to the males in the society; it makes them question his ability to be responsible for his duty to defend (to the death, if necessary), and fight beside, the rest of the men.
And that is why so much of the world feels uncomfortable with crossdressers. It's not going to change any time soon. There may exist enclaves of 'enlightened' folks where we can exist in peace, but most of the 'plain' folks don't want us anywhere near them.

[aunifex]

I can't disagree with the majority of posts here, but I too wish that our society at large could be more accepting. I feel a lot of it is ignorance or misunderstanding where you gurls are coming from. As for myself, I have been blessed with a great circle of friends and a large family, they are all very accepting people. All I can say is that I will try MY best to make this world a better place for CDers or anyone with a more fluid take on gender than the norm... keep at it, ladies!

[Kathryn Martin]

These are very good comments. I think that questioning our perceptions of the gender divide is very important. This is particularly true since research into the development of gender shows that in fact we evolve as females to about the 5th week of gestation as a foetus. At that point the hormonal environment in the uterus sorts the guys out so to speak by reducing feminizing hormones and increasing androgen hormones. After birth in the 12th week of life there is a hormonal surge in the newborn that will further determine male and female assignment of the child.

If you consider that these hormonal environments are as imprecise as nature tends to be you realize that gender is not a dichotomy but rather a continuum. Where we are located on that continuum is determined by how the hormones "organize" the predetermination.

In addition, we create through nurture gender expectations in our children. We have to question ourselves whether we subscribed to this theory as well. Who of us has actually let their boys play with dolls, let them develop play through imagination, fostered their artistic side etc. Who has shut them down with the words "boys don't cry" or some such comment creating the expectation of stoicism.

Who of us has refused to actually ridicule a fellow human being because they in some ways do not conform with our gender expectations.

These are real questions we have to ask ourselves. Change begins at home.

Feminine traits in a male were always suspect; femininity was (and is) strongly associated consciously or subconsciously, with submissiveness and weakness when compared to stereotypical male behavior. Males were primarily responsible for protecting both the female mate and the rest of the society he lived in, and that is still the case today. Any visible signs that he may be 'lacking' in maleness decreases his attractiveness to the very vast majority of females, whether they are able to take care of themselves or not. It's not a choice; it's just something they 'feel', and if there's anything we've learned, women usually follow their feelings even when all other logic says not to (witness all the women who are physically struck by their mates, but don't leave them; it's an astounding percentage). And, the same applies to displaying any femininity to the males in the society; it makes them question his ability to be responsible for his duty to defend (to the death, if necessary), and fight beside, the rest of the men.
And that is why so much of the world feels uncomfortable with crossdressers. It's not going to change any time soon. There may exist enclaves of 'enlightened' folks where we can exist in peace, but most of the 'plain' folks don't want us anywhere near them.

I must say that I found your post both off-putting and fascinating. Off putting because you say this topic has been discussed to death; obviously, not enough it seems and most definitely by asking the wrong questions.

This whole issue of males defend/protect and females nurture/submit, males recognize and women feel, and the associated stereotypes a crock of s***. If we keep buying into the world views of the toothless and stupid be they male of female we have no one to blame but ourselves. I have found that those that frequent trans-gender sites are mostly far from toothless and stupid. But we are so afraid of being ostracized, that we try to conform to what we perceive others expect. In other words, we do like the apostle Peter, when it counts we don't turn away making it clear that we despise what is being said, but rather deny we have any connection and often times even worth we cheer with the idiots, again either female or male.

This is why I asked: "Why do we eye with suspicion a nurturing human being who is a man? Or do we? Is this an aspect that with few exceptions is simply in our head?"

I have never found that expressing to another man my repugnance of a comment about someone who dances to their own tune has failed. I usually insist that it is not funny but offensive. Most of the time the idiot looks just like that.

I am a very feminine and even effeminate man and guys tend to think I am an easy prey in the male world I work in. Usually they think so until they find themselves bent over and have this un-manly feeling of just having been done up the woisoo.

These are complex issues and am concerned that we tend to use stereotypes to explain stereotypes. The debate over these issues gives us the opportunity to develop real judgments rather than the canned gruel of stereotypes.

By the way, who do think got the most action, the manly hunter or the not so manly dude that stayed at home and spent time figuring things out?

[ReineD]

Or sexism? Chauvinism? Patriarchy?

I've always wondered if it was hard-wired in order to assure propagation of the species .. survival of the fittest through natural selection. There are women who buy into it too. Maybe our ancestors did not know how to achieve balance with their human qualities.

Thankfully there are men who believe in gender equality and who don't beat themselves up for not being traditionally macho. There are men who are just as nurturing toward their young (and others) as women, and who don't feel they are lesser men because of it. We're evolving.

[Kathryn Martin]

Reine, I am with you on all of them. Except I think that survival of the fittest is also a misnomer in a sense because we tend to equate it with physical fitness, when Darwin was really talking about adaptability. So Mysogyny, sexism, chauvinism, patriarchy is definitely not hardwired but rather a dead end of human evolution.

[Schatten Lupus]

I use to body build, march when I walked, had a (very) fowl mouth, focused very much on physical strength, and tried in every way possibly to be very masculine. I havent necessarily "feminized" every aspect of my life, but I have taken a liking to doing things that aren't way up on the "manliness" scale, I don't swear nearly as much, and I have put more focus on strengthening my mind rather than muscles.

[ReineD]

I think that survival of the fittest is also a misnomer in a sense because we tend to equate it with physical fitness, when Darwin was really talking about adaptability. So Mysogyny, sexism, chauvinism, patriarchy is definitely not hardwired but rather a dead end of human evolution.

It has to do with more than adaptability to the physical environment. Don't evolutionary psychologists believe that our brains are hard wired a certain way and this is what influences our behaviors? For example, wouldn't have man's need to be strong in order to protect the tribe resulted in a rejection of any "weaker" traits both in himself and others? And what about man's need to pass down his genes, thus acquiring and enforcing something similar to harems? Isn't this a root of the subjugation of women?

I know these thoughts are beyond the scope of your thread, but if the majority of cultures have historically cultivated sexist attitudes, it's got to be for deeper reasons than an error in human evolution. These behaviors were adaptive.

I'm glad that attitudes have and continue to change, and that more and more men don't feel they are lesser men by abandoning traditional behaviors.

[Kathryn Martin]

It has to do with more than adaptability to the physical environment. Don't evolutionary psychologists believe that our brains are hard wired a certain way and this is what influences our behaviors? For example, wouldn't have man's need to be strong in order to protect the tribe resulted in a rejection of any "weaker" traits both in himself and others? And what about man's need to pass down his genes, thus acquiring and enforcing something similar to harems? Isn't this a root of the subjugation of women?

I know these thoughts are beyond the scope of your thread, but if the majority of cultures have historically cultivated sexist attitudes, it's got to be for deeper reasons than an error in human evolution. These behaviors were adaptive.

I'm glad that attitudes have and continue to change, and that more and more men don't feel they are lesser men by abandoning traditional behaviors.

I would agree with you that it has to do with more than adaptability to a physical environment. What I am saying is, that adaptability is at the root of the survival of the fittest not physical strength. It is interesting that specialization always led to dead ends in evolution. I think it also problematic to equate misogyny and chauvinism with certain behavioral traits such as harems or behavior in passing down the genes. For instance, the much vaunted "presentation" behavior or the "taking" by the male are always interpreted as misogynist which attaches a value judgment (i.e. subjugation of the female)to something that should be taken as phenomenon only. The result is an interpretation how we, with our worldview would perceive the phenomenon. The interpretation is tainted and flawed because human beings during those times simply did not perceive the world as we do.

Take for instance matriarchal cultures, the adoration of the two spirited faculties of indigenous shamans and the fact of major developmental forces in human affairs embodied in people like Cleopatra, Elizabeth the first, etc. I believe and I am very open to be contradicted and shown wrong, that misogyny and chauvinism is a construct of 19th century culture. There is also the phenomenon of a developmental trait that once displaced into a time in which it is no longer necessary or relevant becomes an error. It's stuck for lack of a better word in the dead end of evolution.

And by the way nothing really is beyond the scope as long as it helps to create better understanding.

[Rachel Morley]

I used to believe what Rachel wrote, too. But that changed as I learned more about the different roles which define the sexes, especially when it comes to sexual attraction, and social responsibility in humanity's past.

I hear you and and I agree with you, but my wife says protection is not just about strong physical characteristics and (perceived or otherwise) physical masculine strengths, she says I protect her by earning enough money to enable us to have more choices and the ability to be able to make her feel "safe" without those physical attributes as well as her feeling loved.

[ReineD]

And by the way nothing really is beyond the scope as long as it helps to create better understanding.

I should have said it's beyond my scope!

My point was simply that as misguided as sexist attitudes are becoming (whether or not they are rooted in misogyny), they're entrenched in our world history. Even today there continues to be a wide gender gap in many parts of the undeveloped world and the gap favors men. I don't believe there have been major matriarchal civilizations despite there having been queens. These few women were more Godlike due to their birthright than having been heads of female armies and governments that enacted laws assuring property rights for females.

So where did all of this come from? The only explanation I have is that it served some primal purpose. The stronger males have throughout the ages exerted their domination over weaker males and societies ... and the weaker females. Has survival been at the root of this need to dominate? I don't know the answer, but it appears as if the gender gap is slowly closing and I don't believe it is a coincidence that in the last century physical strength is no longer a requirement for survival in the parts of the world where the gender gap is closing.