Nature vs Nurture? Is CDing genetic, or learned (or both!)

[Sue101]

It could simply be the desire for a particular type of pleasure.

It could be and if it were a non taboo subject then I would say that it is almost certainly the case. But you cannot ignore the taboo in male crossdressing. As boys were were conditioned to never think of such a thing. We were conditioned to consider it demeaning to our self-esteem. We understood the dangers if we dared to step into the minefield that surrounds femininity.

Here is the bigger picture. There are forces which attract us and forces which repel us. In a binary system like gender that means there are factors pushing us away from masculinity and towards femininity. Crossdressers always focus exclusively on the forces of attraction. "I am this way because I am part female so naturally am attracted to femininity" Everyone seemingly totally ignores the factors that repelled them from masculinity. I think both factors are always in play but obviously the balance is different for everyone.

Femininity absolutely does offer huge power and privilege but boys are conditioned to be blind to that. Instead we are trained to believe in the inferiority of girls. So if we cannot see the power of femininity and dare not voluntarily enter the minefield then I suggest that something needs to give us a push. Once we are in the minefield we discover it was just a ruse to scare us away and we walk over and discover for ourselves the delights of femininity, after which we are hooked for life and all we remember is what appeals to us and gives us so much satisfaction.

[ReineD]

Since masculinity is a social construct most boys do not fit naturally into its borders. Like trying to insert a square into a round hole, it is necessary to knock off the corners to make it fit. That is why everyone needs to be conditioned so thoroughly. Some boys just become aware of the process, become aware that they may not end up as the masculine man society is trying to produce.

When I read this, I'm reminded of Neo who believed the world he lived in was real even though he always sensed a disconnect, until he discovered the ugly (or beautifully real, depending on how you want to look at it) world of subterranean warfare.

But, that was a movie. You are suggesting that the world has conspired to make boys' lives miserable. And for what purpose? Wouldn't the boys have had a say in this too, if they felt they did not universally and naturally fit within the confines? Just like women in the western world rebelled against the idea of being chattel and hopefully others in less developed nations will follow suite? (They did not rebel against being feminine, even though the style of femininity has changed since then.)

When you say that masculinity is a construct, you are ignoring all the biological differences between boys and girls, that do play a role in their personality developments, and I'm not just talking about genitalia. Even medical science doesn't have all the answers. The jury is still out on the role of hormones in utero for TGs, or if there is evidence of trans or gay genes. At any rate, there is much more out there that we don't know, compared to the little that we do. Until then, I suppose it is open for interpretation, but you'll be hard pressed to convert everyone to a theory that goes against thousands of years of having had gender as the major separator of the human race, without any proof other than speculation.

But then again, you may have an entirely different definition of masculinity than I do, and perhaps this forms the basis of our disagreement.

[Sue101]

Reine it is hardly a conspiracy to make boys' lives miserable. Gender roles are designed to make society more efficient. Everyone knows their role, their place, knows what society expects of them. Follow the rules and you are accepted and rewarded. Following gender roles usually makes you happier. But there is a price to pay in such a black and white division between the sexes. Women know all about that, men do not except for the ones (ie us) who woke up one day and realized that it is ok to cross the gender divide.

Women rebelled against their gender role because it was too constrictive and it ended up robbing them of equality. Women did not fight against the gender system itself - women still want to feel feminine and men masculine.

Biological differences do exist and have an impact on how you develop. I am not disagreeing with you at all. But masculinity/femininity are social constructs and only have context within a social setting. They change from culture to culture and change over time. This is something you have to learn and copy and perfect to attain conformity and be rewarded. Remove society and masculinity/femininity becomes meaningless and irrelevant. It is like claiming men and women are different so this means one gender are better drivers or derives more pleasure from driving than the other etc. It is seeing differences because we expect them.

As for a theory stretching back thousands of years this has no bearing on its factual truth. Believing it does is merely flat earth syndrome. In fact any belief stretching back thousands of years is almost certainly wrong since it originates from a period of ignorance and superstition. And this is not speculation. This is why I suggested buying books covering this subject so you can read about the numerous studies that have been conducted into what are the real differences if any between the sexes.

Social gender division is broke. Feminism proved that it was an archaic superstition grounded on beliefs that males and females were fundamentally different. Similar to the idea that people of different ethnicity were different. Whether it was gender, race or religion, people were always using superficiality to claim fundamental differences. We all know white people think differently from black people......

[kendra_gurl]

A better comparison would be a girl dressing as a man because she wants to project a masculine persona and feel like a man.

Again you are validating my point. Yes your example would be more like a Crossdresser but my point was about everyone having traits of both their parents.

Females dress masculine all the time WITHOUT it be overtly obvious. No they don't play dress up and apply fake beards and tape their chest down trying to present as men like FtM's do. These are the ones your example would apply to.

After reading this thread I'm thinking that Enviroment is being left out of the equasion. If you keep in mind the very simple and general rule of accpetable dress code by everyday John or Jane Public, the enviroment your in plays a big part of how you can dress.

If men and women get togeather to play sports togeather they both can dress exactly the same and its always acceptable male attire. I doubt you will ever see a male playing in the lingerie football bowl.

As with REINE's example sure a guy can appreciate going to the art gallery with females all dressed to the nines and appreciate the art and wine but they can't dress the same way without causing a scene.

I am not saying this is right or wrong. My point is just that females can openly and freely express both sides of their gender and both their parents traits they got from nature and nurture.

Males can do the same thing too untill they try to dress the part and that is when they get noticed and ridiculed by many for it but they are only doing what females take for granted and can do comfortably.

So what does the Crossdresser have left to do to satisfy his desire to expresses his feminine traits? Some do it very much with everyday actions. Those things that so many SO's of CD's love about them. For others they totally transform themselves into passable visions of a female to avoid the ridicule of others for looking like a guy in a dress.

[Lorileah]

100+ posts here and you still haven't reached a consensus? What is this Congress?

... when I close my eyes and actually picture the women that I know I can't think of anyone who would put down a male for enjoying art, appreciating fashion or design, wishing to decorate a room or bake a cake, or any other activities that some people here define as being feminine.

I don't believe that is a female issue at all I think it is the male issue and the desire to have your friends and co-workers accept you into the male fold. The only people I can remember specifically putting a man down for liking art, or nature (where it does not end in killing something or someone being injured or peeing on a fire) or cooking (except on a grill) are men who as part of the male ritual are required by law to "dis" other males. There is an exception to this rule and that is when a female requires her "man" fit a mold she has been taught since daddy read her fairy tales. The man must be big strong handsome and fearless. He fights dragons, and saves damsels in distress. Now it is OK for someone else's man to like opera but the women who buy into a fairy tale world want their men to not like anything but hard rock or classic country. (Yes I know all this is generalization but read the "My wife is leaving me" threads.) That is in this society nurture induced because no one has to kill to survive anymore. In general women say they want "kind sweet caring nurturing artistic funny compassionate...etc. men but then they go for the crude, rude and often overtly apish men (yes I know that is generalization but read the "My wife is leaving me" threads). This is not limited to females by the way, men want the hypersexual, great cook, submissive, my eyes adore you female, as long as she doesn't do anything more than kow-tow to him (I know this is generalization but read the "My wife never dresses up so I do" threads)

I've also read on a few occasions here that ironically, many CDers fall into stereotypically male professions, such as airline pilots, or in the sciences, engineering, or IT fields. I've long suspected that CDers (I'm reluctant to say "some" or "many") do build an inordinately strong male veneer while they are growing up in order to prevent the world from seeing their more vulnerable, feminine proclivities and so there is a stronger demarcation between what is "feminine" and what is "masculine" for them. This may make them shy about saying they want to bake a cake, or knit a scarf, or having a strong opinion about what color should go on the wall, or even think they will be rejected by others for doing these things?

My profession has become predominately female in the last 20 years so I don't know what that says about me. However, the professions you state may be the ones who are least tolerant or accepting of less than masculine behavior. Maybe the reason more are represented here is that the liberal arts community is more accepting of less than masculine behavior from men so the ones who are TG in those communities are less like to come here and look for support or to complain (gee that puts me in those categories). If you are artistic then quirks are accepted as part of the deal (cutting off one's ear, chasing prostitutes in Paris). The fact that we are incongruous with expected behaviors may actually be what drives many here to seek kindred spirits. Are there more TG's in masculine jobs? I doubt it, it is just more noticeable

Lots of our discussions here revolve around concepts and general statements, and it's true that some sections of the socio-economic strata may be more or less tolerant of a guy who bakes a cake, for example. It's very difficult to make statements that will be universally applicable since obviously what might fly in the middle of NYC won't fly in a small town in a conservative state. But still, I honestly don't believe there are as many "feminine" vs. "masculine" activities as many members here seem to think, of course other than actually dressing or presenting in the gender opposite than birth, especially once people move away from the often less tolerant teen-age or young adult age.

True that but things are changing toward the better. Assigned tasks 200 years ago had a purpose. Strength was important in some while detail may have been important in others. Aggression vs compassion. This set standards that we are still redefining.

This argument will never be resolved. If it is it may signal the end to life as most on these boards know it. If it is nature then it could be bred out. If it is nurture it can taught differently. Is it the water? Is it the chemicals in our deodorant? is it just that we are cutting edge and are the ones moving to be who we are and trying to enjoy who we are because we are less involved in the day to day struggle to survive (also we are living longer and guys get bored quickly and need new challenges like trying really hard to "blend in" as a female.

The only truly gender specific thing is the ability to impregnate and the ability to conceive and give birth. The first may be gone by the time we all reach old age. The second part can be eliminated soon after. So after all the arguing I have to give nurture the upper hand because without societal rules we would just be members of society who are accepted. Do I feel like a woman? Do I feel that I have gotten the short end of the stick? Do I feel that I am misunderstood? There is one thing I feel, and right now I feel like a cheeseburger, must be about lunch time

[Sue101]

100+ posts here and you still haven't reached a consensus? What is this Congress?

I will only repsond to the lady from Denver is she agrees to reduce taxes, raise spending and lower the debt all at the same time.

That is in this society nurture induced because no one has to kill to survive anymore.

I am in whole-hearted agreemnt with everything you said except this one line. The point about hunting was to provide for your family. Today the hunt is for money. Men still have to prove to women we can provide. Ask a single unemployed man with no money in his pocket how many dates he gets. Unless he is a hunk the answer will be zip all.

Are there more TG's in masculine jobs? I doubt it, it is just more noticeable

In fact almost certainly it will be less since most of us are not interested in entering into a macho environment where we would feel both uncomfortable and nervous our secret will somehow be unveiled.

is it just that we are cutting edge and are the ones moving to be who we are

I wish we were on the cutting edge but I doubt it. We do what we do because we feel compelled to do so. It is a different motivation from men in general comprehending the male gender role is constrictive and sexist and wishing to break out and grab some equality. But on the off-chance that will happen some day we can always pretend to be the heroic explorers into the gender jungle. We can proudly say "Been there, done that!"

[ReineD]

As with REINE's example sure a guy can appreciate going to the art gallery with females all dressed to the nines and appreciate the art and wine but they can't dress the same way without causing a scene.

Females dress masculine all the time WITHOUT it be overtly obvious.

Now it is OK for someone else's man to like opera but the women who buy into a fairy tale world want their men to not like anything but hard rock or classic country. (Yes I know all this is generalization but read the "My wife is leaving me" threads.)

But that's just it! We're talking about two different ways in which people express gender or gender roles: activities and presentation.

Lorileah, you suggest that judging by the "my wife is leaving me" threads, women are intolerant of men who like to bake cakes for example. I disagree. First, if you get both sides of the story from these threads, I'd bet my bottom dollar there is much more that OPs either don't discuss, or they are unable to see because there is not enough communication. Second, give me a man who gets up on Saturday morning and has fun in the kitchen, and believe me most women would not complain. There may well be some activities that in some circles are viewed with a raised eyebrow if a man engages in them, maybe joining a quilting bee in small town America with senior women for example, even though there are no doubt quilting groups in NYC where both women and men participate. But over all I think the division of female vs. male activities has changed considerably, especially now that more women are in the workforce and there are more men and women who are divorced or single and must undertake a variety of tasks in order to be self-sufficient.

As to presentation, I agree that a man who presents feminine is not accepted. Presentation is a major indication of how we see ourselves, and when a man wishes to present as a woman, it looks to those who are unfamiliar with the concept as if he is saying he does not wish to be a man. A guy wearing a man skirt (like Jive Turkey) I think has a better chance to be accepted than a guy wearing makeup and a frilly dress, who aims to present as a woman. And although FtMs might not be as villified as CDers, they do not find universal acceptance and they are often rejected by their families. But to say that a woman who wears pants is masculine is just not true, not in our day and age. Besides, Kendra, in your avatar you are doing a lot more than just wearing a skirt.

So, we have two camps in the presentation debate: those who wish for an outwardly looking gender neutral world and who say there should be no gender separation into how people should present and everyone should be allowed to wear what they please, and those who say there is a difference between how most men and women see themselves, and this will never change.

[GingerLeigh]

After reading all the replies to the OP, anything I say here is just too simplistic but here goes. I've been fascinated with women's clothing since before I really understood sex, gender, etc. It only became a sexual thing after puberty, then the sexual aspect waned in my 30's. Sure, nurture played a part in my crossdressing, but like it has been said time and again. If I wasn't predisposed to this behavior, I would be as normal as the next swinging d@#k.

[Sue101]

those who say there is a difference between how most men and women see themselves, and this will never change.

Reine sorry if this looks like I am always picking on you, I'm not, you are just a good debater! but I cant let you get away with this one. There has been a huge change in how women see themselves over the past 100 years. A woman alive in the 19th century would be shocked how masculine today's women are. Everything from clothes, attitude, social roles, sexual roles, work roles - they have all seen a massive upheaval with women moving lock, stock and barrel into male territory. Things do change.

Which leads me to my second point. Kendra discussed women wearing masculine clothes, you repsond with the sole focus on pants. Masculine clothes are much more than just pants. Everything from shoes to hats, waistcoats and suspenders, even male hairstyles, military gear and underwear ALL of it has been integrated into female fashion. There isn't anything left that women have not acquired. Lets leave behind the question about if this crossdessing or not and focus on the pertinant point why so much of the female wardrobe mimics male clothes. If we agree that clothing sends out important messages about who we are then what message are 21st century women telling us about themselves?

[Adriennegrl]

Not to interrupt the debate but I had another thought to add to my basic viewpoint (still haven't read this thread in detail). I mentioned my learned memories earlier and another thought came to me today; my parents told me they were trying for a daughter when they had me. That may not hold up to genetics but it's a thought... they also gave me a bisex name, go figure.

[Lorileah]

Lorileah, you suggest that judging by the "my wife is leaving me" threads, women are intolerant of men who like to bake cakes for example. I disagree. First, if you get both sides of the story from these threads, I'd bet my bottom dollar there is much more that OPs either don't discuss, or they are unable to see because there is not enough communication. Second, give me a man who gets up on Saturday morning and has fun in the kitchen, and believe me most women would not complain. There may well be some activities that in some circles are viewed with a raised eyebrow if a man engages in them, maybe joining a quilting bee in small town America with senior women for example, even though there are no doubt quilting groups in NYC where both women and men participate. But over all I think the division of female vs. male activities has changed considerably, especially now that more women are in the workforce and there are more men and women who are divorced or single and must undertake a variety of tasks in order to be self-sufficient.

You know we agree on this. Having been here 2 and 1/2 years we have been on the same side most if not all the time. And I agree that in MY experience, the females in MY relationships loved my cooking and taking on other jobs especially when it was a surprise (and I wasn't told to do it...over and over an over). But when I do read the "My wife doesn't..." threads I believe that maybe I am in a minority more often than not. I know that is not true because if the sea is calm and the boat steady, very few boast that on the boards. The point is that society (nurture) does put a heavy burden on both sides. You have to give tons of credit to the GG's who look beyond that. And as you know I believe that love trumps anything you are "told" is correct.

Like in my profession, it was often considered that women could not ever do the work. After all how could a 100 pound female wrangle a 1500 pound animal, the answer..drugs Now more than half are female and I am encountering the flip side of that coin. I have been told I could not possibly be gentle enough or compassionate enough to do the work. That's Ok I know what I am what I can do and to be honest I think being a bit more"femme" has advantages to my bedside manner. I look forward to the day when labels of gender are not part of doing the job. I also look forward to end of "Man up" "Grow a pair" and "Take it like a man" as well as "Don't be such a girl" or "You are such a princess." (OK I like being called a princess).

[ReineD]

Reine sorry if this looks like I am always picking on you, I'm not, you are just a good debater! but I cant let you get away with this one. There has been a huge change in how women see themselves over the past 100 years. A woman alive in the 19th century would be shocked how masculine today's women are. Everything from clothes, attitude, social roles, sexual roles, work roles - they have all seen a massive upheaval with women moving lock, stock and barrel into male territory. Things do change.

Sue. I say this with all the possible love and goodwill in the world, but ARRGGH!

Lol. I don't mind you picking apart my posts. Forgive me, but in plain English, I am convinced there is something you simply don't get, which is, women have not forgone an iota of femininity by changing with the times and styles during the 20th century. They still see themselves as women and if they are hetero, they still want to be in relationships with men. It doesn't matter who does the laundry and who mows the lawn, or the fact they both make as much money and this is required to send their kids to college.

(BTW, I think that a woman of the 17th century would be just as shocked to see a woman of the 19th century.)

If a man wishes to wear a skirt sans makeup, forms, wigs, etc, (like Jive Turkey in most of his pics) then you might make a case that he would be on par with the fashion changes among women in the last hundred years. BUT, if he wears breast forms, hip pads, makeup to look feminine, and otherwise attempts to emulate a woman's form and mannerisms, this is not at all parallel to the change in fashion in women's clothing over the last hundred hears. You don't see the average non-trans GG who wears a pantsuit, or jeans & Tshirt, attempting to adopt a "male walk", nor does she purposely belch, pass gas, scratch herself in the groin, color on a 5 o'clock shadow, or pack, or do anything that she might think the stereotypical male does.

Fundamentally, gender is not a question of what one "does" in terms of chosen activities such as jobs or pastimes, nor is it a question of who is smarter at math and who is better at knitting, nor is it even a question of who is the most nurturing, since men are fully capable of raising kids by themselves. Innate gender is rather how one "sees" oneself, and the way we exercise our choices of self-presentation reflects at a very deep level how we see ourselves. A non-trans guy who identifies solidly as a guy will not want to wear anything that fashion dictates is clothing designed for the contemporary woman, even if it is just wearing a girl's Tshirt and jeans.

Last Saturday I went to a bar to hear a local band and I saw a woman and a man dancing together, both wearing jeans and Tshirts. It was unmistakable who was the woman and who was the man ... from their facial features, their body shapes, the way they moved, the way they looked at each other in the eyes and smiled, and if you looked very closely, even the style of their jeans and Tshirts. It is beyond my power to accurately describe this very commonplace image in just one sentence. And, there was no way this woman dancing was any less feminine or more masculine than the girl dancing right next to her wearing a short dress. She just was dressed more casually.

Now. Having said all of this about women wanting men, etc, this does not mean that I am saying that CDers shouldn't express freely who they are. I think there is a segment of our society that acknowledges non-binary gender because they've been educated about it, and I include myself. CDers should express themselves and just own who they are! But to say that if men were not socially constructed to behave a certain way, they would naturally wish to look less male and more female from within the fashions of their time, is way beyond the reality that I see and know, no matter who theorizes what in popular books about gender roles.

[SweetIonis]

Again you are validating my point. Yes your example would be more like a Crossdresser but my point was about everyone having traits of both their parents.

Females dress masculine all the time WITHOUT it be overtly obvious. No they don't play dress up and apply fake beards and tape their chest down trying to present as men like FtM's do. These are the ones your example would apply to.

A little book keeping here. What you said exactly was:

We who enjoy crossdressing and expressing our feminine side are being held hostage by our perceptions of how others will react when in reality we are not much different from the average female living her life expressing both her parents traits.

Here first person plural is used. What is the activity that is enjoyed? Crossdressing and expressing a feminine side. So what we have so far is a man who enjoys two things:

1. Crossdressing
2. Expressing a feminine side

Then you make the comparison to the average female living her life expressing both her parents traits. My point is that there is substantial difference in the average female you mentioned, and a man engaged in crossdressing and expressing a feminine side. The difference is so substantial that to say that they are similar is a distortion. The thing that you appear to fail to see is that motivation makes the manifestation of the external behavior to project quite different things to an observer. Not only for the external observer is there a substantial difference, but internally for the performer, there is a substantial difference in state of mind. And because of these internal and external differences, the comparison is a distortion. Therefore, if you are going to compare a man engaged in crossdressing to express a feminine side, a more accurate comparison would be to a female engaged in crossdressing to express a masculine side. Otherwise, your comparison is simply bending reality by turning MtoF crossdressing and expressing femininity to an AVERAGE girl who may simply like to do some things that a boy would like to do. Unlike a man engaged in MtoF crossdressing, that AVERAGE girl is not trying to express masculinity and that's a BIG difference. To give a simple example, a person who has taken a knife and cut someone in malice, cannot say that he is no different from a surgeon who cuts a person to heal him. Although both are cutting someone else, there is a substantial difference in motivation. And because of the difference in motivation, the comparison is a distortion.

[SweetIonis]

Here is the bigger picture. There are forces which attract us and forces which repel us. In a binary system like gender that means there are factors pushing us away from masculinity and towards femininity. Crossdressers always focus exclusively on the forces of attraction. "I am this way because I am part female so naturally am attracted to femininity" Everyone seemingly totally ignores the factors that repelled them from masculinity. I think both factors are always in play but obviously the balance is different for everyone.

I suppose my point is that I feel that you have placed an over emphasis on the "pushing away from masculinity" stuff while brushing off the pulling towards femininity. As you indicated the balance is different for everyone, and that balance can vary in the individual depending on the time an circumstance. I want to put forward the notion that the phenomenon of crossdressing can be instigated by an intense desire to feel the pleasure experienced by the opposite sex WITHOUT a substantial component of wanting to escape some pressure being felt due to perceived duties associated with ones sex that are of an imperative nature. That is not to exclude the case where there is a substantial component of wanting to escape those duties. However, I don't think it's accurate to say that feature is a NECESSARY component to have the behavior manifest.

[Alice Torn]

It might be. My dad, and all his sons have fetishes, and I have found a few old wigs in th garage, and other places. My dad was upset, that my mom's clothes were thrown away, when the feds raided the place a few yrs ago. My mom is in a nursing home.

[Speck]

I think it's interesting to speculate but there's a point at which a puzzle is too difficult to maintian my interest. I've spent countless hours on researching this topic. There's just not enough information but all theories are good ones until proven wrong.

So in the spirit of just tossing out some thoughts...

I'm a GG who is a feminist. I was convnced that nurture accounted for women being viewed as "the weaker sex". So when I decided to have children, I swore that whether I had boys or girls, I would not do anything to direct their play toward anything male or female. Then, I had a boy. The only TV show he was allowed to watch was Barney. My ex husband (his Dad) was not into sports. Guess what? When he was just a toddler in his high chair, he made a gun out of a piece of toast and pretended he was shooting. That's just one example. So in my opinion, there are differences between the sexes that start in the womb and continue throughout development. But I also believe society has magnified the differences to ridiculous proportions. I believe that none of the world religions did us any favours. I believe there are more differences between culture and race than there are between the sexes. If society didn't have such a hard time with TGs, I bet there would be some who got the best of both genders and would be revered and some who got the worst of both genders and would make horrible people...and everything in between. I see it on this site. Male/female anatomy is fairly easy to determine. Gender identity...not so much. You have those who just like the feel of the fabric, those who do it to relieve stress, those who have found living two lives comfortable enough to be happy and those whose "bell goes off". Some have had healthy childhoods and some come from troubled homes. To me this topic is fascinating. On a good day, I feel that knowing a TG has brought a certain richness and colour to my life. Other days...I just want to scream at the insignficance of gender when the things that matter most seem to have no gender.

That said, I acknowledge that as a GG, I have no clue what being TG'd is really like. My hat goes off to all of you who are making a positive impact on the universe regardless of what gender you happen to feel on the inside.

Speck

[Badtranny]

I've long suspected that CDers (I'm reluctant to say "some" or "many") do build an inordinately strong male veneer while they are growing up in order to prevent the world from seeing their more vulnerable, feminine proclivities and so there is a stronger demarcation between what is "feminine" and what is "masculine" for them. This may make them shy about saying they want to bake a cake, or knit a scarf, or having a strong opinion about what color should go on the wall, or even think they will be rejected by others for doing these things?

This hit so close to home that I had to stew on it for awhile before I could comment.

I remember being very young (6 or 7) and wondering why I was being treated like a boy. Just a few years later I was being treated by the alpha males as an object of derision. I learned quickly that I was indeed a boy and I'd better start acting like it, thus began a life of pretending. It's funny to look back on it, because most of that macho stuff didn't come naturally to me so I was doing my best to emulate what I THOUGHT a guy would be like. Think about that scene in the Birdcage where Robin Williams is trying to teach Nathan Lane to walk like a man. I wasn't that cartoonish of course, but the principle is the same. I was trying to be "like" a man and in doing so I clearly wasn't comfortable in my own masculinity.

So even though I loved shopping, I would never admit it because that wasn't manly. I didn't really like sports, but I could never say that because it wasn't manly. It gets so silly that even innocuous things like music would fall victim to my manly test. I loved Culture Club as a kid, but guess what? I would never admit to such a thing in public. I didn't want to do anything that would lift the veil of my charade. I studied Kung Fu, I played Hockey, I raced Motocross, I got into construction. I was obsessed with proving to everyone that I wasn't the sissy that they said I was. I was so terrified of slipping that I didn't even drink alcohol throughout my entire 20's because I was afraid I would swish a little if I got drunk.

So Reine, you're dead on but it's not just for CD's it's for all of us who have struggled with our identity or sexuality. The pressure to be a "man" was enormous when I was growing up and I believe that I'll be forever damaged to a certain extent because of it.

[SweetIonis]

Biological differences do exist and have an impact on how you develop. I am not disagreeing with you at all. But masculinity/femininity are social constructs and only have context within a social setting. They change from culture to culture and change over time. This is something you have to learn and copy and perfect to attain conformity and be rewarded. Remove society and masculinity/femininity becomes meaningless and irrelevant.

Sorry to jump in here Sue, but I have to disagree strongly with this. It's more accurate to say that masculinity and femininity are MENTAL constructs that are affected by the social setting. They are products of sex desire, without which they would not exist, at least not as we understand them. They are things that are innate, within us from birth and grow a particular way depending on our environment. It's just like a flower, there are different ones, and they will grow different ways, depending on how you take care of them, but they share certain characteristics by which one can differentiate a flower from say a tree. Furthermore there are different types of flowers, and one can differentiate roses from gardenias.

Some males have that thing in them to behave in a feminine way as females. The fact that they naturally feel that way, despite environmental factors, indicates that masculinity and femininity are not SOLELY products of environmental factors, for if it were, then the environment should produce BASICALLY the same result for males. However, you can put two males in basically the same environment and get DRASTICALLY different results with regards to masculine and feminine behavior. One will behave in the most masculine of ways, while one will behave in the most feminine of ways. This result is impossible to explain by assigning the causality to environmental factors alone.

I would dare say that many men who crossdress are stunned when they find that putting on a piece of a women's clothing can all of a sudden make them feel so extremely feminine, with little prior experience. If it was something that was the result of environmental factors, we should observe such strong feelings only after years of conditioning. The fact that they CAN take place without such conditioning indicates that it is something that is innate, an internal mental construct, as opposed to being a social construct that is imposed on the individual.

[retrofitme]

As the OP, I'm really intrigued by all this debate! Good Stuff!

That said, I do want to emphasis that I want this to be a constructive conversation. My goal here is to help people work out for themselves and come to terms with their development as CDers (myself included). I want to help people answer these questions and know others' experiences and views, so they might grow towards self acceptance. Honestly, I have not entirely accepted my CDing tendencies. I have not come to terms yet with who I am - but seeing other's perspectives on the topic helps me to learn more about myself, and that's a good thing.

-Retro

[Sue101]

Reine

Please don't tear out any more hair but...

women have not forgone an iota of femininity by changing with the times and styles during the 20th century. They still see themselves as women and if they are hetero, they still want to be in relationships with men.

femininity has nothing to do women seeing themselves as women or sexuality. To me femininity/masculinity is a state of mind/being wherein the person through the numerous means of communication from presentation, body language, attitude etc conveys the core values that society constitutes as the exclusive gender characteristics. I don't believe men are automatically masculine or women feminine. A man could have a typical male attitude and mentality and have a masculine job but that has no bearing on whether he feels or projects masculinity. I don't know how you can say the enormous changes women have gone through in the last 100 years had no effect on their gender perceptions. Men are not as masculine as they once were and changes in male gender roles are significantly less altered then for females.

Then, I had a boy. The only TV show he was allowed to watch was Barney. My ex husband (his Dad) was not into sports. Guess what? When he was just a toddler in his high chair, he made a gun out of a piece of toast and pretended he was shooting.

Speck I absolutely agree with you that society exaggerates gender differences to a ridiculous degree and this is actually very unhelpful. Men and women do have differences but they are minor and irrelevant.

Your observation about your son reminded me of a similar scenario Reine spoke about. Despite your best intentions there is no way to shield your child from gender stereotypes, they are all around us. Even songs and fairly tales are loaded with gender messages. You say he was only allowed to watch Barney so where did he learn about guns? Clearly he has been exposed to other tv shows or other media sources. Unfortunately it is a futile exercise to try to shape his gender ideals because boys learn how to behave from other boys. No matter how much you isolate him as a baby as soon as he begins school all your efforts will be undone in an instant.

[Sue101]

I suppose my point is that I feel that you have placed an over emphasis on the "pushing away from masculinity" stuff while brushing off the pulling towards femininity.

Yes it probably does come across that way. I am having to fight against the prevailing wind in which popular theories on emphasize only the attraction factors so I end up shouting louder to make myself heard. I do agree it is not necessary there has to a repelling factor but I feel in most cases both factors are present. Moreover in these cases it is the factors repelling us from particular aspects of masculinity which kick-start off the entire process. Its significance is to help explain why a sudden feeling of attraction to femininity apparently occurs out of the blue for boys who are otherwise typical boyish boys.

It's more accurate to say that masculinity and femininity are MENTAL constructs that are affected by the social setting.

Are they not the flip side of the same coin. People create society and society's rules are imposed on the people who created the society. It is a revolving door where individual's wants are assimilated into the mixing pond and then an aggregate behavior is constructed that everyone has to agree to align themselves to. The problem is the aggregate behavior can be influenced by other factors like superstition and the need for the society to survive in competition with others. This ends up skewing the social behaviors into very artificial areas.

Some males have that thing in them to behave in a feminine way as females

What does this mean? Where does this feminine thing come from? You are correct to say siblings can have very different personalities but that is the key to explain why one can end up masculine and the other feminine. Despite sharing the same environment our unique personality traits will interface differently with the environment. So one brother may be up shy and submissive and end up developing into a crossdressers while his outgoing brother does not.

There are examples of twins where one brother is a crossdresser and the other not. These cases rule out the possibility that genetics or hormone washes as both have the same exposure. What we do know about twins is they always have unique personalities so they end up being as distinct a person as anyone else.

It is not environmental factors that create crossdressers but the interaction of unique personalities with the environment and the resulting feelings produced from that process which then have to be aligned with social gender expectations.

If it was something that was the result of environmental factors, we should observe such strong feelings only after years of conditioning

I disagree, you can instantly fall in love with something that you have no prior experience of. Happens all the time even if you are conditioned against something. For example a child raised as a vegetarian may be conditioned to find meat detestable but one day may break the conditioning, eat a hamburger and never look back.

[kendra_gurl]

But to say that a woman who wears pants is masculine is just not true, not in our day and age. Besides, Kendra, in your avatar you are doing a lot more than just wearing a skirt.
.

Reine: I'm not saying that makes them masculine at all. Just that they can dress in a more traditional male form of dress and not be thought of as trying to be male.

I did not intend to bring up the debate about girls dress like guys all the time argument, I'm only talking about the OP of Nature vs Nurture and how both sexes have got to have traits of both parents but females are the only ones who can express those traits in the form of how they dress.

So what does the Crossdresser have left to do to satisfy his desire to expresses his feminine traits? Some do it very much with everyday actions. Those things that so many SO's of CD's love about them. For others they totally transform themselves into passable visions of a female to avoid the ridicule of others for looking like a guy in a dress.

I believe this statement defines very well my Avatar

[sometimes_miss]

The problem here is that people like to find ONE answer; the definitive reason for our behavior. But we crossdress for a variety of reasons, so you're not going to be able to pinpoint one reason as a cause for the behavior or desire for it. And, you will also find an assortment of combinations of reasons, which alters the 'experiment' even more. There are people who always felt they were the opposite gender, which supports the 'nature only' side, and then there are those of us who didn't start out that way at all, but were gradually conditioned into it. Then you have those who insist they have no cross gender feelings, yet feel the tremendous urge to dress up and act as feminine as possible, even to the point of trying to sexually attract the males that they consciously believe they have absolutely no interest in at all.
One thing we do know, is that our brains aren't 'finalized' at birth'; there is still a lot of development going on, and outside influences affect how we wind up just as our genes do (and we also know that some of the outside influences result in permanent changes in our personalities due to the way our brains respond to the chemical results of those occurances). The you have to add in all the repressed feelings that some of us have but cannot ever bear to admit to anyone, or even to ourselves, usually due to the immense guilt imposed on us by society regarding any homosexual thoughts or behavior.
Basically, I think it's more important how we deal with who and what we are, rather than forever dwell on how we got that way. But it does help to know where certain feelings and desires come from, which allows us to know how to react to them when they happen.
Confused enough now?
Sorry about that.

[Samantha B L]

I did some reading years ago and there are mental health professionals and researchers who beleive there is an inherited factor in CD'ing and that CD'ing is,a least in part,neurological or hormonal in nature. And there are those in the mental health feild who've thought so even back in the "dark ages" of the mental health interests in the thirties and the forties. I've noticed since I've been in the forum not many people agree with this. Just let me say that the "inherited factor" argument takes away a lot of blame that goes with the attitude that some people take that "those goddan perverts can help it, stealin' ladies underwear off the neighbors laundry line. Draft 'em into the service,that'll teach 'em a lesson". The inherited factor argument simplifies things and chases away a lot of demons.



As an afterthought I would be careful about going into any kind of talk therapy with a doctor or a counselar who isn't familiar with LGBT issues. You could find yourself being stuck with somebody who uses "shut up and do what I say" tactics in order to literally bend and twist you out of crossdressing. But the idea that CD'ing is definately for real and that it's just a part of some men and women's personalities and nothing to be overwrought about is,I think,in part,best promoted by the inherited factor argument. I know a lot of you m to f's and maybe a lot of you f to m's don't agree with me,but the argument simplifies things and makes a calmer atmosphere and after all,it pokes holes in the idea a CD can be locked up and cured. Which isn't what any of us want in the first place.

[SweetIonis]

Moreover in these cases it is the factors repelling us from particular aspects of masculinity which kick-start off the entire process. Its significance is to help explain why a sudden feeling of attraction to femininity apparently occurs out of the blue for boys who are otherwise typical boyish boys.

That may be true in some cases. But my particular case was out of the blue. Other than being somewhat scared of talking to girls when I started puberty, I had no aversion or fear of being a male. That's just what I was. I think this idea had very little application in me starting to dress. And I think the fact that I did very, very little until I got to be an adult is a confirmation of that.

Are they not the flip side of the same coin. People create society and society's rules are imposed on the people who created the society. It is a revolving door where individual's wants are assimilated into the mixing pond and then an aggregate behavior is constructed that everyone has to agree to align themselves to.

No, I don't think they are the same coin. Although people do indeed create society, society itself is the PRODUCT of the interaction of the various aspects of the mental constructs of many individuals spanning generations, influenced by external factors that include time, place, circumstance and very importantly the ability of certain individuals to assert leadership. It is also external to the individual. Masculinity and femininity are internal and although there may be some common aspects regarding these notions in a particular society, they are still confined to the mind of the individual, who can have quite different notions than the common notions accepted by society as a whole. Society however is an external affair and it's various aspects can be observed INDEPENDENTLY of reference to the mental state of any one individual. That's a big difference.

What does this mean? Where does this feminine thing come from? You are correct to say siblings can have very different personalities but that is the key to explain why one can end up masculine and the other feminine. Despite sharing the same environment our unique personality traits will interface differently with the environment. So one brother may be up shy and submissive and end up developing into a crossdressers while his outgoing brother does not.

There are examples of twins where one brother is a crossdresser and the other not. These cases rule out the possibility that genetics or hormone washes as both have the same exposure. What we do know about twins is they always have unique personalities so they end up being as distinct a person as anyone else.

It is not environmental factors that create crossdressers but the interaction of unique personalities with the environment and the resulting feelings produced from that process which then have to be aligned with social gender expectations.

Well it appears we agree that they do not EXCLUSIVELY come from environmental factors. I would therefore say that we must conclude that there must be a biological aspect that is either the cause or symptom.

I disagree, you can instantly fall in love with something that you have no prior experience of. Happens all the time even if you are conditioned against something. For example a child raised as a vegetarian may be conditioned to find meat detestable but one day may break the conditioning, eat a hamburger and never look back.

It's one thing to fall in love with something. It's quite another to be able to emote, act, and feel like the object of your affection. I can tell you for certain, that the first experience I had with this phenomenon was one of experiencing something I had never felt before. Even to this day, part of my experience is my amazement at how I can so effortlessly feel and behave in such a way when I am in that state of mind. I can assure you it is not the result of any prolonged conditioning.