A different perspective on female stereotyping

[AllieSF]

I agree with that. I think there are very few people here who would degrade women on purpose. What I am trying to call attention to is the subconscious, ingrained idea that housekeeping is a feminine task. I don't think that crossdressers who like to clean when dressed start their day by saying: "Today is a good day I think for reinforcing antiquated gender stereotypes!" I do not wish to accuse them of bad intentions.

I just think it would be nice to live in a world where it is not assumed that the woman will clean and cook. The key word there is "assumed". It is not the action of dressing up and cleaning that I find hard to digest. It is the fact that for so many people, it makes perfect sense to express their femininity by cleaning.

Not by fixing the car, or playing some Skyrim, or getting a degree, or performing brain surgery, or interpreting the philosphical implications of wave-particle duality, or writing an opinion piece for the paper, or running for office, or painting, starting a business, tending to the garden, competing in the triathlon, or even baking a cake.

Cleaning.

I understand what you are saying and yes, sometimes women's roles in society get stereotyped into the cleaning and raising kids area. However, when I grew up and then got married and then worked and supported my family, not many women were in the work force, because during that time period most males supported the household with their own salaries and the wives did not need to work to provide additional financial support. Yes, times have changed significantly, but not so much the stereotypes ingrained in some people's minds. But, even that is changing albeit at a slower rate. Yes, it would be nice that people did not assume that those are women's roles. Also, remember that many women enjoy taking on those roles too. I would love to see some studies (summarized of course) about what the majority of women and men would like to do if they could do whatever they wanted with no economic worries relating to working to support the family or staying at home to take on the domestic chores and raise the family.

As for males "owning" the world, that is very bad stereotyping on your part, and in my opinion is just as incorrect as males thinking women should clean. Maybe that is from your culture, upbringing and personal experience. It is definitely not universal and not mine. I rarely run into males like that, emphasizing rarely! Are some like that? Yes, unfortunately, but they are definitely in the minority. Some of male privilege comes from being the prime support for the family and was not taken, it just came about because of that role. I wouldn't even call it a privilege. I think it was more, for me at least, an obligation in life. That was my job, my role in life, and I think that I did my best to carry it out.

Your views that we treat women with as much dignity as we want and that we can represent them they way we want are very confusing to me. Where do you get this belief? Is that how you feel or maybe felt before? Now, "presenting" as in crossdressing, well all of us can portray whoever we want, however we want. It very well could be an incorrect representation, but remember this is our own individual fantasy world, not yours, nor theirs, whoever they are.

What I sometimes find interesting in some of the posts on this site is how some of members here when trying to emulate the opposite gender take on the cause to become the defenders of that opposite gender regarding how others post here. It is like, treat women with respect, GG are always right, don't talk about these women subjects, don't dress like that or act like that, etc.. You will notice that those examples are more from the MtF side, because out FtM brothers do not post much here anymore. I think that the vast majority of members here have a great common sense view of the world and about what we do that brings us to this site, and that they do have great respect for others, including the opposite gender. There is no pedestal for women, period. Nor, is that a pedestal for men either, period. In the overall scheme of things we should all treat each other with respect and equality, and should be able to expect the same in return. I am no better than anyone else!

[ReineD]

It may be that GG's would take exception to many things that I do or feel. But I'm trying to explore myself now--again something that I've never done before. So if my initial attempts are clumsy, what really would anyone expect? And yes, I'm not happy with the idea that someone should attempt to judge me or my behavior at this point. I've had too much judgement. Right now, I'd like the freedom--freedom that I've never felt before--to try and figure out who exactly I am and where I want to go.

I can't speak for all the GGs, since we are as varied as there are CDers and it's difficult to give my opinion about "GGs in general" without painting with a broad brush. But, I can see the quandary between a CDer feeling the need to express his own particular level of femininity based on where he's at along his journey, and (many? some?) GGs taking it the wrong way and saying that he has a false idea of what femininity is all about. It boils down to a basic difference in perception and error in communication, and also a lack of understanding of what a CDer goes through. I cannot blame the GGs for not understanding it as well as the CDers who actually live it. We really have no frame of reference for how it must feel to want or need to express femininity from within a gender that is socialized not to. We don't grow up having been exposed to men who feel this need, and this is why communication (and patience) is important not only between couples in their relationships, but in forums where both CDers and GGs live side by side.

Another issue: there are (many?) CDers who don't do this to express an inner femininity but who rather do this for kicks or fetish. These are the CDers who put on the highly sexualized maid uniforms, school girl outfits, short short skirts with fishnets, lingerie, disproportionate breast forms, etc and who behave as if they believe this is what the ideal woman is all about, all while fantasizing having sex with men. It is likely that any member GG's husband doesn't do this, but when a GG sees it here and in other online sites it brings up a certain fear, this sense of disquiet that I mentioned in another post and she wonders if her husband doesn't feel like this secretly as well. As much as we like to think that every couple communicates effectively, there is still a lot about the CDing that most husbands find difficult sharing with their wives which leaves the wife wondering what he is not telling her. And again, this is why thorough openness and communication is paramount.

I'll confess that I myself like pretty, frilly stuff--stuff that most GG's wouldn't be caught dead in. But I don't apologize for that. My initial expression of this long repressed side of myself may be exaggerated, but that's just an effect of repression. If I get the time and freedom to explore, no doubt my self-expression will evolve and mature. But most people don't live what we've lived through--this concerted, desperate attempt to close off and deny a part of yourself. They shouldn't judge us too harshly because they have no way of understanding what we've been through.

You state your position and your motives clearly and objectively, and I admire this.

[AllieSF]

ReineD: "Another issue: there are (many?) CDers who don't do this to express an inner femininity but who rather do this for kicks or fetish. These are the CDers who put on the highly sexualized maid uniforms, school girl outfits, short short skirts with fishnets, lingerie, disproportionate breast forms, etc and who behave as if they believe this is what the ideal woman is all about, all while fantasizing having sex with men."

Reine, I understand what you are saying here, and agree to a point. I do not think that these fetish CDers "believe" that is what an ideal woman is all about, but rather maybe how they would like their ideal woman to be, or how they want to fantasize about themselves being that way. In other words, I think that they really know how the majority of women are and act, generally speaking, and know that their portrayals, imitation, fantasy and or fetish dressing is a very large exaggeration from the real world. Again, it becomes their own fantasy world, which can be said also for couples into swinging, BDSM in a formal way, and those couples who do role playing with costumes and toys.

[ReineD]

ReineD: "Another issue: there are (many?) CDers who don't do this to express an inner femininity but who rather do this for kicks or fetish. These are the CDers who put on the highly sexualized maid uniforms, school girl outfits, short short skirts with fishnets, lingerie, disproportionate breast forms, etc and who behave as if they believe this is what the ideal woman is all about, all while fantasizing having sex with men."

Reine, I understand what you are saying here, and agree to a point. I do not think that these fetish CDers "believe" that is what an ideal woman is all about, but rather maybe how they would like their ideal woman to be, or how they want to fantasize about themselves being that way. In other words, I think that they really know how the majority of women are and act, generally speaking, and know that their portrayals, imitation, fantasy and or fetish dressing is a very large exaggeration from the real world. Again, it becomes their own fantasy world, which can be said also for couples into swinging, BDSM in a formal way, and those couples who do role playing with costumes and toys.

Yes, I realize this. I'm rather wanting to explain the reasons that GGs feel a knot in the pit of their stomachs when they see a GM gleefully representing himself as a female this way. The GGs get the impression he is doing his best to emulate his idealized form of womanhood. I believe the GGs who criticize this (or the ones who suffer in silence) subconsciously transfer this utopian view of womanhood onto their husbands, which may make them feel insecure since they know that they don't come close to fitting the image. In the GGs' views, such an image is not realistic. In other words, GGs have a real close look in this forum at the CDer fantasies and they imagine that all or most CDers share similar fantasies, similar utopian views even if some CDers such as their husbands do not express them. And again, I emphasize that CDers with wives need to be aware of this possibility so that they can be proactive and reassure their wives about what THEY want, what the CDing mean for THEM. In other words, lots and lots of communication.

And as I tried to explain earlier, my point here is not to criticize the various ways that CDers want to present, but come up with an explanation as to why the GGs are less than 100% supportive. I'm trying to bridge the chasm between the two.

[Foxglove]

I can't speak for all the GGs, since we are as varied as there are CDers and it's difficult to give my opinion about "GGs in general" without painting with a broad brush. But, I can see the quandary between a CDer feeling the need to express his own particular level of femininity based on where he's at along his journey, and (many? some?) GGs taking it the wrong way and saying that he has a false idea of what femininity is all about. It boils down to a basic difference in perception and error in communication, and also a lack of understanding of what a CDer goes through. I cannot blame the GGs for not understanding it as well as the CDers who actually live it. We really have no frame of reference for how it must feel to want or need to express femininity from within a gender that is socialized not to. We don't grow up having been exposed to men who feel this need, and this is why communication (and patience) is important not only between couples in their relationships, but in forums where both CDers and GGs live side by side.

Another issue: there are (many?) CDers who don't do this to express an inner femininity but who rather do this for kicks or fetish. These are the CDers who put on the highly sexualized maid uniforms, school girl outfits, short short skirts with fishnets, lingerie, disproportionate breast forms, etc and who behave as if they believe this is what the ideal woman is all about, all while fantasizing having sex with men. It is likely that any member GG's husband doesn't do this, but when a GG sees it here and in other online sites it brings up a certain fear, this sense of disquiet that I mentioned in another post and she wonders if her husband doesn't feel like this secretly as well. As much as we like to think that every couple communicates effectively, there is still a lot about the CDing that most husbands find difficult sharing with their wives which leaves the wife wondering what he is not telling her. And again, this is why thorough openness and communication is paramount.

Reine, in this post and your next one, just as you often do on this forum, you've very well stated the concerns, worries and fears of GG's, and I always enjoy reading what you have to say. I've learned some things from you, and I totally sympathize with what you have to say.

I can give you an analogy, not completely apt, but close enough perhaps, to show you where I am. I was a single parent for a number of years. Now I'm a fairly quiet type, pretty much a stay-at-home, never been much into carousing and partying. When my son finished school, he went off to the university in a city a fair distance away, and there he began exploring his new-found freedom. And he didn't go about it half-way. He got up to a lot of stuff (none of it illegal, I hasten to point out) that really got me worried. What can you say? He was young, full of life, looking to let himself go and really explore the world. He's a bit older now and is beginning to settle down. He's realized that wildness of that sort is really not good for him, and so he's turning away from it.

Now on those rare occasions when I've had a chance to indulge my own tendencies a bit, I've no doubt got carried away a bit--dressing in a way that would make GG's cringe. But I've never had the chance to really get into this side of my personality. If I had that chance, I have no doubt that sooner or later I'd settle down a bit and take a more sober approach to things.

One thing I'd like to point out--though I can only speak for myself here. Let the other girls speak for themselves. When I dress, I am not thinking, "I'm going to be a proper lady now," or anything of the sort. I'm not thinking about women at all, I'm not trying to pattern myself on them. I'm simply doing what makes me happy. What I do in no way reflects how I perceive women and their lives in the real world. I'm simply letting myself go with no reference to anything but my own feelings.

It's occurred to me recently that if society were a bit better ordered, there would be, for one thing, clubs for kids that they could join as soon as their desire to CD becomes apparent. Such clubs could be led by older, experienced CDers who could give these kids some guidance and some insight into their condition so that they could start to explore it and get to know themselves. I feel like some of the exploring I've done has been unhealthy in ways. But I've never had any wiser head to guide me and help me find myself. I also think it wouldn't be out of place to let young CDers, male or female, live a good part of their lives dressed as they wish, so that they could get to know who they are and perhaps start figuring out where they want to go in life, what sort of lifestyle they see themselves living.

This is just a dream, of course. The reality for the CDer is very different. I myself think that a fair bit of what some CDers do is unhealthy. But we're simply never given any options. I think our personalities (or maybe here I should just speak for myself and say "my personality") become warped, and hence we go in directions we wouldn't go otherwise.

And so you see where the difficulty in communication comes from. If you were to ask me where I want to go with this, what I would like to do, where I see myself in the future, I couldn't tell you. I don't know where I am now, I've never known where I was, because I've never had the chance to figure it out. All these things that I feel inside me, are they feelings of femininity that I've never been able to express? Am I part woman and badly in need of allowing the woman side of me freedom of expression? I haven't a clue. I haven't a clue what's going on inside me. GG's might say that I know nothing about women and what it's like to be one. Very true--but I'm not even sure that being more womanly is what I really want anyway. I often have "feminine" feelings. But what does "feminine" mean? Does it have anything to do with real-life women or is it something purely personal to me? That is, does my definition of "femininity" have anything to do with yours, and if it doesn't, is that wrong? Would it be OK for me to try to come up with my own definition of my "femininity"? I don't know. I would need the true freedom to be totally me for quite some time before I could begin to identify all the turbulent feelings and instincts that I house within me.

Which all the more justifies the fears and worries of the GG who discovers that her husband is a CD. She wants to know where he is with his CDing and where he sees himself going with it, and more than likely he can't tell her. She wants communication, but maybe he can't communicate because he himself doesn't know exactly what he wants to communicate. With the best will in the world and with all her love and support, she'd like to help him, but perhaps she can't because he can't say exactly what will help him. The obvious thing to do is to allow him to explore the feelings he's never been able to explore before so that he can at long last start learning who he is. But where will that lead him? Perhaps he doesn't know himself--something that's hardly likely to comfort his poor wife.

Everything is all wrong from the very start. The condition of the CDer needs to be taken in hand from an early age, and of course that's never done. He's left on his own to gnaw away at himself for years, which doesn't do any good. Yes, by all means, open and honest communication is needed between CDer and wife, but more importantly communication between the CDer and society is needed, communication of the CDer with himself. If we had that, communication between the CDer and wife/potential wife would be so much easier. And a CDer (unless he's just a total jerk) wouldn't go into a marriage without the position being clear both to him and his SO.

I realize that in this post I sound like I'm speaking for CDers generally. I'm actually speaking for myself, so please take it that way.

Best wishes, Annabelle.

[Noortje]

Hello, Noortje! Excuse me, but perhaps you're speaking for yourself here. You're certainly not speaking for me. I've never felt that I owned the world or that I had the right to represent anyone in the way of my choosing. If you're talking about MtF crossdressers, then perhaps you should say "some of us", or perhaps "a few of us", or "I and perhaps some others". In this post and your next one, you're preaching a bit, telling us what we supposedly think about women. Before you include me or anyone else in your assumptions, you might get to know us and what's going on in our minds a bit better.

On this thread that you started, people are proposing explanations of the behavior you were questioning. But I'm wondering if you're reading the answers you're being given, because in these two posts you're simply repeating what I've been hearing all my life--the clichés about how men view women, views which in our part of the world at least are just that: clichés, with little truth in them.

Best wishes, Annabelle.

Ah, sorry, I should have written that a bit clearer. I was basically rephrasing the principle of "male privilege" as described in the article at Kotaku. The idea is that all men feel this way subconsciously, because it is what we experience all the time in daily life. Because it is supposed to influence all men's thinking, and because there are a lot of men here, I used the word "we".

Have you read the article? There is a passage I think about why men immediately go on the defensive when someone mentions "male privilege".

Of course I have read all the responses. I just don't believe that being able to explain a behaviour is the same as being able to justify it.

[Foxglove]

Ah, sorry, I should have written that a bit clearer. I was basically rephrasing the principle of "male privilege" as described in the article at Kotaku. The idea is that all men feel this way subconsciously, because it is what we experience all the time in daily life. Because it is supposed to influence all men's thinking, and because there are a lot of men here, I used the word "we".

Have you read the article? There is a passage I think about why men immediately go on the defensive when someone mentions "male privilege".

Of course I have read all the responses. I just don't believe that being able to explain a behaviour is the same as being able to justify it.

Noortje, you’re not saying anything here that I haven’t been hearing all my life. Basically, what you’re throwing at us on this thread is anti-male stuff that comes from certain anti-male elements that have been around for some time, and I myself find them truly tiresome.

One of their most common tactics, which you’re employing here, is to lump all men together as if we’re indistinguishable parts of one vast male machine, so that if you find something that’s true about a few men, you can attribute it to all men.

“All men feel this way subconsciously”: neither you nor anybody else who’s ever lived knows what all men feel subconsciously. You don’t know me, for example, and you don’t know anything about anything I feel, consciously or subconsciously. So I will repeat: you’re not speaking for me.

And “male privilege”: Noortje, you don’t know me, and you don’t know the first thing about any privileges I’ve enjoyed in my life. Again, you’re trying to lump all men together. If a few men enjoy some privileges, then all men enjoy privileges. Which is totally wrong: your average Joe throughout history has been no more than that. Your average Joe, who goes out to work every day to try to support himself and his family and has never enjoyed any influence, power or privileges to speak of. If you want to talk about “male privileges”, you’re talking about a few boys at the top. And while you’re talking about them, you might talk about the few girls at the top and their “female privilege”.

And this notion that “men go on the defensive when you mention male privilege”: this is a clever little trick. If he denies he has any privileges, then obviously he must feel guilty about the privileges he knows he enjoys. This sort of trick is fairly commonly employed. Just last night I watched “The Crucible” again. If you denied that you were a witch, that meant that you were a witch and you were hanged. The only way to save your life was to confess to being a witch. Not much way you could win, was there?

I just don't believe that being able to explain a behaviour is the same as being able to justify it. Sometimes it is. Would you condemn a child for acting like a child? When you understand the reason for their frequently annoying behaviour (their youth), then you can accept it, which is close enough to justifying it. If certain CDers (like me) don’t always express ourselves in the best way that we could, and if we see that our behaviour is largely due to inexperience and lack of guidance and lack of opportunity to really explore ourselves and find out where we are, not to mention the immense psychological pressure we’ve been under all our lives, then perhaps our behaviour can be considered a bit less reprehensible. If you refuse to take these factors into consideration, I really think you’re being a bit harsh.

I’ll say this, Noortje—if you want to know why your thread has upset me. This anti-male stuff that you’re throwing at us and that I’ve been hearing all my life is just an attempt to make us feel bad about ourselves. We’re supposed to feel bad about “our attitudes”, even if we don’t actually have them. And I’m tired of feeling bad about myself. I’ve had a huge guilt-trip loaded on the feminine side of my personality all my life, and as for my masculine side, it’s heard too much of this sort of superficial and unjustified carping for far too long to take it kindly. I don’t have the attitudes that you say “we” are all guilty of. And so I refuse to feel bad about something that I’m not guilty of.

If it makes you feel good about yourself to plead guilty to having such attitudes, it’s your choice. But you don’t speak for all of us. You speak for yourself alone. OK?

Best wishes, Annabelle.

[ReineD]

Which all the more justifies the fears and worries of the GG who discovers that her husband is a CD. She wants to know where he is with his CDing and where he sees himself going with it, and more than likely he can't tell her. She wants communication, but maybe he can't communicate because he himself doesn't know exactly what he wants to communicate.

This is very common. My own SO was unable to answer some questions about why he does this, what is it that triggers the desire to dress on any particular day, where exactly does he see it going in the future, what informs his decisions to present a certain way, etc.

But, he does know some things: that he wants to lead a balanced life, he wants to continue to be engaged in his many other interests than the CDing, he is a genetic male and he has no wish to change this, and also he is heterosexual even though he has on occasion had homoerotic fantasies associated with the crossdressing.

Communication does not mean always providing exact answers to pointed questions. It is more about reassurance that the relationship or the couple's future is not threatened, no matter what that looks like. Different couples have different concerns and needs, and the importance is to find a meeting ground, wherever this may be.

Now ... if there is a husband who cannot tell his wife that he is not TS, he tells her that he thinks he wants to be a woman or he thinks he wants to have sex with men but he's not sure, then this takes it to an entirely different level and the couple needs to deal with it however they will. But, I'm guessing these situations are rare, compared to the sum total of marriages where a husband crossdresses. And also, a married CDer who is invested in his life and who wants to stay married to his wife will prioritize his needs (as long as he is not TS), and he will be able to also prioritize his long term goals, more easily than someone who is single and who does not risk losing a relationship. In other words, a happily married man will be more interested in finding ways to strike a balance than someone who doesn't need to because he is single.

This is my opinion, and obviously it is a broad statement to make.

[Piora]

First of all, Noortje - what a great thread! I read through all the postings and there are many, many great views on the subject.

As a fellow gamer, your mention of the issue coming up in the gaming world reminded me of an article I saw on Kotaku the other day. It's discussing the same thing as the video; basically that there are few if any female characters in video games that are not over-sexualized, especially as the lead character. Just look at one of the original female video game leads, Tomb Raider. The one from Half-Life 2 (Alyx I think, but it's been a while) is the only one that comes mind that isn't.

Good point to bring up, Emily. But Alyx in Half-life 2 wasn't a playable character. For as long as I can remember, the games I enjoyed the most were computer role-playing games where you could choose your character's gender, as well as other attributes. I always chose a female character. But there was no 'sexual' motivation. The female characters in those games were represented as a 'standard' average-built woman, no sexy clothes....just dressed as how a woman from that period might dress. For me, there was just something about the role-playing aspect that it was great to play a woman who was showing what she could do in this 'mans-world' fantasy land.

I just think it would be nice to live in a world where it is not assumed that the woman will clean and cook. The key word there is "assumed". It is not the action of dressing up and cleaning that I find hard to digest. It is the fact that for so many people, it makes perfect sense to express their femininity by cleaning.

It never was for me. I never felt more "manly" or less feminine when I was doing housework. I was born in the early 50s, where the role was that the woman stayed home and "kept house" while the man went to work.....even although it was just after WW II, and women had already shown that they were every bit as effective in the factories and other areas where previously, men had been exclusive. I understand the frustration that women have, about this sort of stereotyping, even here today in 2011.

However, for me, I was never comfortable, even at an early age, with the stereotypical roles of male and female. It was customary at family gatherings, for example, for the women to prepare all the food, and then clean up afterwards. I recall never having a problem with pitching in with the food preparation, and the cleaning up afterwards. It was of course customary for the men to "retire to the den" and allow the "womenfolk" to do all the work of that nature, because, well " that's just what women are supposed to do. When I was married, I never expected my wife to do the housework all by herself just because in this man's world, it was expected of them.

Well stated Annabelle I agree. I have never knowingly disrespected GG's, or considered GM's as superiors. I consider them equals in society.

What is the real purpose of this thread?

Even although all through high school and much of my early manhood, I was bombarded with male concepts that included stereotyping and objectifying women. I always recalled being extremely uncomfortable being around any discussions where this was in play, with my peers. Of course, I was guilty of pretending that this was acceptable to me. But that was then, and this is now. For a long time now, I won't put up with it, nor will I agree with it just to save face, about any of that type of thing today.

I agree with Gabriella (post #15). For the pleasure dressers (as opposed to the identity dressers), it is about the clothes, and it's all a fantasy. So if someone wants to wear a maid's outfit while cleaning the toilet, they should, and it harms no one. For me, I clean toilets in guy mode. I like clean toilets. I also have and wear a maid's outfit, but I don't clean the toilet in it. It just doesn't enhance the fantasy (quite the contrary). When I assembled my maid's outfit, I even got a feather duster to use while posing for pics. But I don't use it for real dusting. I guess many of us have fantasies, with both great and subtle differences. Whatever does it for me might not do it for someone else, and vice versa. But I fail to see anything that offends women in all this.

<<<<< Yes, this is me in my Maid's Outfit. So, I feel that I must make a statement here about that. I agree with Nicole about what she said about maid's outfits. I don't wear that to clean in. It is simply a fantasy costume, that yes, I admit, feels very girly and feminine to be in. But I rarely wear it, and choose instead, while dressing, to wear what any average woman would wear, and likes to wear. By that, I mean regular everyday undies, tasteful tops, skirts, pantyhose/stockings and shoes.

I have been conditioned with the roles that women have in society. All my life, I have struggled to keep from making observations or assumptions about 'slots' that we put everyone - not just women - into. Hairdressers, doctors, politicians, nurses....these are all 'stereotyped' professions. When we say "the nurse" we assume, a woman. A doctor - a man, a politician....a man.

"Two Indians were standing on a hill looking out at the land. The little Indian was the big Indian's son. But, the BIG Indian was NOT the little Indian's father, Who was the big Indian?"

"A surgeon stood in front of the patient, that was scheduled for an operation, and exclaimed, "I cannot operate on this patient! He's my son!" The doctor was not the patient's father. How was the doctor related?"

Ask most men these two riddles and almost all of them won't think of the obvious: that in both cases, the answer is that they were their MOTHERS.

As crossdressers, we try to emulate women. Some of us like to think that we do a good job. But almost all of us will never BE women. Nor do most of us WANT to. Being men, we have male concepts, male conditioning, male hormones.....we're men, and will never have vaginas or actual breasts (unless transitioning) we'll never know how women feel about themselves while actually being women....giving birth, nurturing, the concept of being a mother, and what it is to BE a woman. And that's a role that perhaps we cannot ever fully grasp. We can only pay homage to women by emulating them to the best of our ability. Perhaps simply knowing that we're trying, will help women understand a bit more about what makes us tick.

[ReineD]

I’ll say this, Noortje—if you want to know why your thread has upset me. This anti-male stuff that you’re throwing at us and that I’ve been hearing all my life is just an attempt to make us feel bad about ourselves.

I just want to say that I've read the link that corroborates Noortje's point:

http://kotaku.com/5868595/nerds-and-male-privilege

I take it the "male privilege" referred to is nothing more than the male tendency to sexualize women in the media. This exists throughout our culture and it is evident not only within the CDing community (take a look at some of the pics in the Gallery and on CDer pages in Flickr), but in the gaming industry as well. And comic books. And the movies. And music videos. And in clothing outlets such as Victorias Secrets. And also obviously in the porn industry. Men are sexual creatures, and in terms of the sexualization of women in clothing catalogs, women want to be appealing to men. But at the same time we all know that the regular "Joe" doesn't walk around believing that the women in his life are all sex kittens and treating them as such.

I'm not saying that I agree with objectifying women, just that it is what it is.

[Noortje]

Dear Annabelle,

I apologise if my post offended you. As a scientist, I am used to discussing phenomena as if they apply generally, with the implicit understanding that there may be individual exceptions. I am also used to discussing theories and viewpoints with the implicit understanding that I personally may disagree with this theory or viewpoint to some extent. I should have made it more clear that it was my intention to discuss "male privilege" as a useful viewpoint that may give us more insight in the stereotyping issue. I did not mean to imply that every male alive is under the spell of "male privilege". In the future, I will be more explicit about what I am trying to communicate.

I totally agree that there are cases where an explanation of a behaviour is sufficient as a justification. But you must also concede that there are cases where this is not true.

Concerning "certain anti-male elements": I totally hear ya. Strontium, right? That stuff is out to get us.

[Badtranny]

I will be more explicit about what I am trying to communicate.

People are so quick to be offended on forums like this that being more explicit isn't gonna help.

That anyone would or could argue the existence of male privilege, or white privilege for that matter is nearly incomprehensible, but they do.

[Foxglove]

This is very common. My own SO was unable to answer some questions about why he does this, what is it that triggers the desire to dress on any particular day, where exactly does he see it going in the future, what informs his decisions to present a certain way, etc.

But, he does know some things: that he wants to lead a balanced life, he wants to continue to be engaged in his many other interests than the CDing, he is a genetic male and he has no wish to change this, and also he is heterosexual even though he has on occasion had homoerotic fantasies associated with the crossdressing.

Communication does not mean always providing exact answers to pointed questions. It is more about reassurance that the relationship or the couple's future is not threatened, no matter what that looks like. Different couples have different concerns and needs, and the importance is to find a meeting ground, wherever this may be.

Now ... if there is a husband who cannot tell his wife that he is not TS, he tells her that he thinks he wants to be a woman or he thinks he wants to have sex with men but he's not sure, then this takes it to an entirely different level and the couple needs to deal with it however they will. But, I'm guessing these situations are rare, compared to the sum total of marriages where a husband crossdresses. And also, a married CDer who is invested in his life and who wants to stay married to his wife will prioritize his needs (as long as he is not TS), and he will be able to also prioritize his long term goals, more easily than someone who is single and who does not risk losing a relationship. In other words, a happily married man will be more interested in finding ways to strike a balance than someone who doesn't need to because he is single.

This is my opinion, and obviously it is a broad statement to make.

I understand what you're saying, Reine. I suppose it's a question above all of showing a willingness to communicate, to do the best you can at it, and to do better at it bit by bit as you go along. I myself would not know exactly what to communicate at this time, but hopefully things will become clearer in my mind as time goes on.

[Foxglove]

I just want to say that I've read the link that corroborates Noortje's point:

http://kotaku.com/5868595/nerds-and-male-privilege

I take it the "male privilege" referred to is nothing more than the male tendency to sexualize women in the media. This exists throughout our culture and it is evident not only within the CDing community (take a look at some of the pics in the Gallery and on CDer pages in Flickr), but in the gaming industry as well. And comic books. And the movies. And music videos. And in clothing outlets such as Victorias Secrets. And also obviously in the porn industry. Men are sexual creatures, and in terms of the sexualization of women in clothing catalogs, women want to be appealing to men. But at the same time we all know that the regular "Joe" doesn't walk around believing that the women in his life are all sex kittens and treating them as such.

I'm not saying that I agree with objectifying women, just that it is what it is.

Reine, I've never posted any pics in the Gallery on or Flickr, and I'm not likely ever to do so. I've never had anything to do with the gaming industry. I don't read comic books, and I don't look at music videos, and I've never, ever been into pornography. As for the sort of films I watch--last night it was "The Crucible". The night before that, "Vertigo". Tonight, "A Night to Remember", and on Christmas Day we've got "It's a Wonderful Life". Those are typical of the films I watch, and I've never noticed much objectification of women in them. The books I read? Everything from Plutarch to Montaigne to Balzac to Jean Giono. Do you see why I object to people trying to tell me what I think? Let each person answer for his or her tastes. I'm perfectly willing to answer for mine.

[ReineD]

Do you see why I object to people trying to tell me what I think? Let each person answer for his or her tastes. I'm perfectly willing to answer for mine.

Annabelle, please don't take it personally. It is not uncommon, in general discussion forums, to make general statements when describing trends in society. It is understood there are people who don't exactly fit within the statements being made, but if a poster were to list each and every exception in his discussion, the thread would become unwieldy. You can't deny that women are sexualized in our society. This is what is being discussed in this thread, not the fact that you don't personally sexualize women.

[Mikaela]

To route this back towards the discussion that seemed awesome instead of defending who is offended and blah blah...

I do chores as a man. I love to cook. I don't consider them gender roles. Growing up, my dad, a fireman, was on shiftwork (24 hours at the station, 48 hours off) so I saw him do most of the "manly chores" (his words) around the house. I also fly planes, play video games, and ride/wrench motorcycles. These are considered 'manly', but I know women who do all these things and are not manly because of it.

It seems every time Reine posts something about her SO, I think "Whoa! Like me!"

I don't need to express my femme side with a ridiculous caricature. That's not how I perceive women. The most sexualized I get is because my girlfriend likes it for fun. Before that, I wore more soccer-mom type ensembles to blend. I feel such pity for the GGs, who we desparately want to support us, get to come on here and see some of the thread titles confirming their fears.


There's another recent thread about roleplaying games (old D&D type stuff, not computer RPGs in which really aren't) that got me thinking to when I first started playing female PCs (player characters). Even then , I saw how some guys would RP the females and it came down to a stereotype of the man-hating bitch, the **** who used sex as a weapon, or the demure princess. (later, I would see a lot of actual female players go over board with the pregnant character archetype) I loathed it and promised those would never be my archetypes. When I started chat based gaming in the mid 90s, where what you looked like/sounded didn't affect how your character were perceived, many believed I was a female player, as well as a female character. I think the video Noortje linked to was what I had processed even back then, that the stereotypes of gender are not only wrong, but boring and overplayed! I would tend to believe that most TS women on here don't act like stereotypes, they are just being who they are. Since most of us CDs aren't intentionally NOT being who we are, it breaks it for us. It puts us in the land of CD stereotypes (which is not flattering). I've seen brilliant men en femme as bimbos, stuck in this assumption. It's a shame.

[Foxglove]

Annabelle, please don't take it personally. It is not uncommon, in general discussion forums, to make general statements when describing trends in society. It is understood there are people who don't exactly fit within the statements being made, but if a poster were to list each and every exception in his discussion, the thread would become unwieldy. You can't deny that women are sexualized in our society. This is what is being discussed in this thread, not the fact that you don't personally sexualize women.

OK, Reine, I can accept this. But if you look at the beginning of this thread, you'll see that there were three other people who said more or less the same thing I said. It's as if this thread is accepting that a certain thing is true, and the testimony of those who disagree is being dismissed. I see no reason why those of us who have a different view shouldn't state it. And if dissenting views were taken on board, then perhaps a given situation wouldn't look as bleak as it might otherwise seem. In this case, we might see that the view that men have of women isn't actually as bad as it's often made out to be. If you think that the average Joe doesn't see the women in his life as sex objects, I'd certainly agree with that. I personally believe that the average Joe has a much better view of women than he's commonly given credit for.

Now if you're talking about the sexualization of women in popular culture, I'd agree with that. But my take on popular culture is that it stinks, and I have very little to do with it. For example, I rarely read a newspaper, mainly because what newspapers are generally concerned with is bad men. They love rape and murder and so on. The lives of your average, decent men who go about their business every day without doing any harm to anyone isn't news. If you want to know about men like that, you have to look elsewhere. Another example: while my son was little, I had a TV in the house. It seemed obligatory to me at the time, though I'm not sure why. But when he grew up and left home, I got rid of the thing, one of the main reasons being that I got tired of the many, many commercials that portray men as total morons. Popular culture stinks, some of it unfavorable to women and some of it unfavorable to men. I have little tolerance for either, so I've always turned elsewhere for what I want out of life.

It's just that when someone says, "This is what men think", I don't see any reason not to point out that that's not what I think when I don't think that. Isn't that what a forum is for?

[AllieSF]

To add another two cents worth to this topic of "sexualizing" women. I agree that men are obvious sexual creatures in the sense that sex, the feminine looks, touches and everything else are an important part of their being, whether or not they act on it, or even recognize it. But, you mentioned above about the male tendency to sexualize women. I believe that is true, but I would also like to see in a statement like that an equalizing comment that women also sexualize themselves for men, or maybe each other. Put sex in a beer commercial and the advertisers think, and are probably correct, that it will help sell more beer. Put a sexy article on how to please your man in Cosmopolitan, or sexy clothes in Lucky and In Style magazines and women go right out to buy these magazines and the products advertised from sexy red lipstick and nail polish to terrifically hot outfits, as well as the regular trendy day to day styles. In other words, and maybe where I am coming from and maybe even Annabelle, is that sometimes these comments seem directed only at men and are exclusive to men. It is definitely a two way street out there. So as much as men sexualize women, women also sexualize themselves to be attractive to others. No one forces a women to buy or wear sexy outfits, except in an abusive relationship. If the women did not want to sexualize themselves in some way, not necessarily the way a man may do it, whatever that really means, then they would not buy Cosmopolitan and not also buy sexy lingerie, tight jeans and dresses and skirts. Do and can men influence styles for women? Of course, because a lot of top women's fashion designers are men and probably the vast majority of the management of top fashion companies are men too. But women have always had a free choice in what they like and buy and wear in public. Money definitely speaks very loudly in the fashion industry.

Now addressing the idea of forewarning new SO's, in this case women, whose husband has revealed this feminine side of them, I truly do applaud what you always write here Reine and want you to keep doing that. You have one of the best writing styles here that comes from the heart and very good common and not so common sense. I still believe that these SO's need to be prepared to enter into the general forum which is the MtF section here. As I wrote in this thread or in another one, maybe even with a great Sticky, "Read This!, for New SO Members" at the top of the membership sign in page. We sometimes joke a lot here and in our own lives about the fickleness of women, their emotions, hot points and the like. But in the humor there is some truth. Men do tend to be more straight forward, logical and practical when trying to discuss something, make day to day decisions and just communicate in general. But when faced with the proverbial, "Do I look good in this outfit honey?" question from the SO, it is not easy for us men to always have a tactful response. You (women) ask us a question and we will mostly give you our honest opinion with no intention of being hurtful. So, I know we need to support the troubled new SO members here, but I also believe that they need to assume their part of understanding their own SO and what everyone else writes here. They need to be mature enough to realize that men and women have different interests and ways of expressing joys, sorrows, excitement and fantasies. I would hope that includes the ability to understand that this is a public forum inhabited by people who do cross most of the spectrum of human beings that we encounter everyday, and that we will have many different and sometimes very opposing points of view on a specific topic. Therefore, going back to what I said above about the sexualizing of women being a two way street, the same can be said about reading and understanding what some of us write here in the open forum. So, when I read some of your posts specifically on this topic, I tend to see a well written request that maybe we should self-censor what we write or put it in a different section so as not to shock that new SO member. I will repeat, I agree with your viewpoints, but believe that the new SO member also needs to use her head too and we cannot always be expected to hand hold, coddle and overly protect someone like that. Maybe their panic attack consists of a large part of insecurity or some other issue that existed long before the husband came out to her about wearing women's clothes, the surprising revelation being the straw that broke the camel's back.

[Mikaela]

It's just that when someone says, "This is what men think", I don't see any reason not to point out that that's not what I think when I don't think that.

We get it, but you've done more than point it out. In general strokes, anecdotes don't matter.
"Women have longer hair than men" is a general truth, but specifics break it down.
"Men like sex with women" is a general truth, but specific break down.

Can we go back to the original topic of oversimplification as a means to gender stereotyping? That was much more interesting.

[ReineD]

I see no reason why those of us who have a different view shouldn't state it. And if dissenting views were taken on board, then perhaps a given situation wouldn't look as bleak as it might otherwise seem. In this case, we might see that the view that men have of women isn't actually as bad as it's often made out to be. If you think that the average Joe doesn't see the women in his life as sex objects, I'd certainly agree with that. I personally believe that the average Joe has a much better view of women than he's commonly given credit for.

I think we're good now.

There is a difference between what is available to us in the media and how the average male perceives the women in his life (his mother, wife, sister, etc). There is also a huge difference between fantasy and reality. Even women fantasize and engage in stereotypes when they read romance novels about princes on white shining horses, that doesn't come close to the reality of their marriages.

And certainly you're free to say that you do not sexualize women.

[Asche]

I believe that most CD's admire women,....

Not to pick on you, but I see quite a few people writing things like this.

Statements like this always come across to me as kind of dehumanizing. I mean, there are an awful lot of women in the world (billions, I believe), and it's hard to see how you could "admire" them all, unless the only thing you're thinking about is what they have in common: a chromosome count and some general anatomical features, and not much else.

Or else if, when you say "women," you're not thinking of real women, but rather of some fantasy of "womanhood."

Personally, there are some women I admire, for various reasons; some who I can't stand; and quite a few I have mixed feelings about. But for most of those 1.5 billion (or is it 3 billion by now?), I don't know anything about them and don't have any opinion about them. (Other than that, since they're human beings, they deserve the basic respect that any human being is due.)

In order to admire them, I'd have to know enough about them to find something to admire about them.

[DebbieL]

From the most fundamental level, there should be no restriction, socially, legally on ANY behavior regardless of WHICH gender is doing it. Simply put, if you want to go to work in a miniskirt, heels, and hose, and other women coworkers are wearing similar clothing to the office - even it it only a subset of those women, then there should be no adverse consequences for a male wearing the same outfits.

If there are safety regulations that make it unsafe for male or female to wear the short skirt and/or heels, then that would be a legitimate reason for restricting such dress for men and women equally.

But the reality is that Men, much more than women, are forced into gender conformity starting at a very young age. A girl should be allowed to do anything a boy can do, PLUS the things that are traditionally associated with being a girl (wearing pastel colors, wearing pink, wearing skirts, heels, tights, fashion in general...).

The Gender Conformity pressure is very subtle, and often passed down from generation to generation, and often very subtle. For example, a boy who wears a pink shirt might just be razzed, or he might be beaten to a bloody pulp by the school bully, who will not only not be punished, but will be given additional opportunities, should the issue arise again.

In many Christian Churches, young boys and young men are taught that it is their religious obligation to punish, beat, or even kill men who attempt to appear feminine, appear to be homosexual, or appear to be acting too feminine. The assumption is that, when threatened with a beating, they will lie about being transgendered or homosexual. Right Wing Fundamentalist Churches, such as Southern Babtists, Nazarenes, Assembly Of God, and even some Mormon groups, who consider the Bible to be the Word of God, and consider the King James translation to be the only valid translation - and these translations consider both homosexuality and posing as a woman - under ANY circumstances - to be a mortal sin and a capital crime. Hundreds of cross-dressers and transsexuals are beaten or killed every year, by these types of people.

When a male develops transgendered traits, his personality often "splits", with part of him yearning to do "feminine" things, like wear pretty clothes, put on make-up, have pretty hair, and so on. Many of these activities are those involving fine motor skills, attention to detail, awareness of cleanliness, and awareness of fashion, home decor...

When the personality splits, the male side often establishes a mental barrier between the masculine and feminine. Some men will actually have radically better penmanship, better posture, and in general be more aware of aesthetic aspects when in "feminine" mode, and will often have almost no such awareness or skills when in "masculine" mode. Initially, this may be rebellion against the inability to dress as they wish, or a desire to "fit in" with other males (boys, young men, older men...) and avoid persecution.

Since this conditioning starts around 5-6 years old, and continues intensely through high school, and often continues in college fraternities, athletic teams, and other environments where competition and winning are valued over individuality or individual accomplishment.

With 15-25 years of this type of intense conditioning, it's not unusual for repressed transgendered men, including cross-dressers, to refuse to do ANYTHING feminine, including so-called "woman's work" - which might include cleaning the house, decorating, and kitchen chores. They might cook, but it's more like throwing the steaks on the grill, or frying up some hamburgers.

For some men, the split becomes so deep that it impacts every aspect of their lives. They often over-eat, sit on the couch and watch sports all week-end, and in generally become a cartoon of a man. It's a foundation level rebellion, and it gets even more pronounced when a wife disapproves of her husband's cross-dressing. He may decide that since he can't wear the skirt, he won't run the vacuum, wash the dishes, or do anything he considers women's work, because his wife won't grant being to his feminine side. In some cases, it's so covert he won't even realize that he's doing it. In other cases, it's blatant and even very deliberate. If his wife asks him to do something feminine, he will "sissy up", and when she tells him to "man up" or "butch up", he will either stop doing the chore, or do such a horrible job that she will never ask him again.

In some cases, it gets so bad that the man will choose not to even have sex with his wife, because she refuses to accept his feminine side, and then he will seek out other sexual outlets such as prostitutes, pornography, or other forms of auto-sexual behavior. He might even go weeks without showering, refuse to shave all week-end and go to church with a 2 day "shadow", or just refuse to go to church, family functions, and anywhere else that his feminine side is not welcome.

The thing to remember is that for many cross-dressers, transgenders, and transsexuals, the issue is so much more than just the fabric of the clothing. It comes down to the core of their self-esteem, security, ambitions, sexuality, and relationships. Their feminine side hold a whole bunch of their self-esteem, ambitions, friendships, and their sexuality. When family, spouse, or others try to kill off the feminine side, to suppress it - it's as if they were trying to castrate him, mutilate him, disfigure him, and isolate him. And in many cases, this is because this has already happened, and all the well-meaning family or parent or spouse is doing is forcing them to re-experience trauma they have already experienced.

In the worst case scenarios - the transgendered male, forced to "kill" his feminine side, will try to kill himself, and often will lash out in fits of emotional outbursts, even violence against others, like screaming for help, acceptance, and support - of his feminine side. To a transgendered male, the very thought of being forced to spend the rest of his life forced to be a male, and forced to revoke his own femininity - is a fate that is WORSE than death. And they will often destroy themselves rather than live exclusively as a male. The smaller the box gets, the more likely they are to retaliate or self-destruct.

The Women's rights movement has helped millions of women around the world to deal with similar issues in their own lives. Many women, especially prior to the 1950s felt trapped in much the same way. They felt that they were forced to get married, even if they didn't love the man, to have children, even if they wanted more, and to raise the children, and to be slaves to their husband. Until the divorce laws were rewritten in 1976, American women who got divorced got most of their child support in the form of tax-deductible alimony. The problem was that because it was Alimony, she could lose all of that money being provided by the father for her children - if she was foolish enough to get married, or even get a really high-paying job. Even after the divorce, women were forced to remain "faithful" to their husbands, who had already moved on to some younger, cuter, woman.

By 1990, the pendulum had swung so far the other direction, that Men were paying half their after-tax income as child-support, and the amount paid wasn't affected by their ex-wife's income, by any marriage, or anything else. Furthermore, unless there was a stipulation stating no such increases, the child support could be increased if the husband/father started making more money because he could no longer do family obligations and couldn't afford to date other women, let alone marry them.

When women married effeminate men, then humiliated them, abused them, castrated them sexually and emotionally, and then started having affairs with other men, but threatened to expose their dressing, to have their visitation revoked, and worse, many men snapped. Some men even killed their wives rather than accept divorce. Others left the state, refused to pay anything, and when eventually arrested, would be killed in prison - rather than pay the woman who was the mother of children who MIGHT be his, who refused to have sex with them, refused to allow them to express their sexuality, and forced them to live the stereotypical male role.

If a woman told me that she loved me, wanted to marry me, and then 6 weeks after the day of the marriage, she chopped off my dick, my balls, my left arm, and shattered one of my knee-caps, then carved deep lines into my face with a butcher knife, had sex with other men, and once a year had sex with me that somehow led to 2 pregnancies - then when they were old enough to start school - demanded a divorce, 1/2 my after-tax income, and a "day care allowance" which would be paid to her boyfriend - soon to be next husband, can you wonder why I might be a bit upset?

I finally finished paying about 4 years ago, and got married about a year after my daughter graduated from college. On her short list was, must be able to make her laugh, must be spiritual, and must like sushi. On my short list was Must accept Debbie 100%, must be feminine herself, and must be spiritual - and should do the Landmark Forum before we get married.

Imagine 6 years later when she tells me she can't accept Debbie, doesn't want her at church, doesn't want her at family functions, doesn't want her to do ANYTHING - but DOES want Debbie to clean the house, do the dishes, do the laundry, do the other "women's work" - but be dressed ONLY when she's not there? And somehow, I keep having to pay more and more of the family bills, while she keep more and more of her income for herself.

Cuticle scissors - carotid artery - hers or mine? - mine!

Fortunately, these are only the really bad days. Most days, she is accepting, or at least tolerant. She still doesn't understand why I want to dress up, and has finally admitted that she hates wearing dresses or skirts and really hates hosiery. And she's gained over 100lbs since we first met.

Any wonder I want to go for the sex change now?
Better yet -reincarnation.

[Foxglove]

There is a difference between what is available to us in the media and how the average male perceives the women in his life (his mother, wife, sister, etc). There is also a huge difference between fantasy and reality. Even women fantasize and engage in stereotypes when they read romance novels about princes on white shining horses, that doesn't come close to the reality of their marriages.

Yes, Reine, this what was I was trying to say, and perhaps I didn't say it very well, so apologies if that's the case. In my view, popular culture tends to sink to the lowest common denominator, and it can be misleading to look to it for what people really think on various matters.

One example: I've stated that I've never played any of the many computer games that are available these days, but my son plays them a lot, so I have seen the things. And the way the women characters are portrayed, the buxom, nubile sort, I can see how women would object to that. But my son just laughs at it. He plays the games, but that's not his view of women. There's a difference between a game and real life, and he knows that very well.

(I can also say I've always felt these games also mock men. Have you seen those male characters--the big, broad chests, the rippling muscles, the virile stance? There wouldn't be one guy in a million who actually looks like that. If women are sexualized there, the men are turned into a joke.)

So when someone suggests that we should look to popular culture as an indicator of men's attitudes towards women, or anybody's view of anything, I think it's useful to point out that it ain't necessarily so. So if I've sounded a bit annoyed on this thread, it's because I was: I don't want people to think that that sort of rubbish has anything to do with what I think. Now Noortje has confirmed that she didn't really mean to include everybody in that category, so I'm OK with that, and I hope she'll accept that I didn't really mean to come down so hard on her. It was really the viewpoint that I was opposing, nothing personal in what I was saying.

And Reine, another thing that bothers me about discussions like this. I firmly believe from my experience in life that men have a much better view of women than is commonly believed. I believe that men quite love women really, and discussions in which men's negative views of women are emphasized can be very divisive. I think if women looked harder to see the love that men have for them, they would actually see plenty of evidence of that. This is not to say that men's attitudes are perfect, nor is it to say that where men are wrong, the topic shouldn't be raised. But I do know this: I have seen scads and scads of threads, articles, books, and so on about men's bad attitudes about women, but I don't know when I've ever seen any discussion about the love that men have for and show to women. It's as if we only want to see the bad in men and not see the good. And does that really help anybody? Does it make women feel any more loved or secure? If we did focus some of the time at least on the good feelings that men have towards women, maybe it would help us all to feel better about each other. I don't like the constant negativity that I run into because I think it's exaggerated, divisive and unhelpful.

Best wishes, Annabelle.

[Asche]

In my view, popular culture tends to sink to the lowest common denominator, and it can be misleading to look to it for what people really think on various matters.

Yet it sometimes defines the terms of discourse. If some particular nonsense is repeated often enough, people will get a sense that everybody believes it, even if they don't really agree with it themselves. Eventually, they will simply accept that that is the way things are, and will start acting in accordance with the nonsense, so they won't feel like an outsider. It's called "groupthink." It's the principle behind propaganda.

I firmly believe from my experience in life that men have a much better view of women than is commonly believed.

Which men? And which women?

There are a lot of men out there; billions in fact. And a lot of men just at CD.com. And they're all different. As are women, and any subset of the set "women."

I have seen a number of threads here at CD.com in which posters have expressed themselves in ways which strongly suggest that they don't actually have any interest in what women think, say, or feel. There are posts which prefer to deal with women as stereotypes. Go elsewhere on the web, and it's a lot worse. Misogyny is rampant.

This isn't all men. But it's not a negligible number, either.

Even if we assume that everyone in this thread is englightened, sees women as individuals, and shows them the respect they are due as human beings and who they are as individuals, we need to keep in mind that the women in our lives deal with an awful lot of men who aren't that way. We may choose to ignore the existence of those men, but the women in our lives do not have this privilege. And it affects how they relate to us "good guys." (Assuming that "we" -- for some definition of "we" -- are, in fact "good guys," and not just kidding ourselves.)

[Foxglove]

Yet it sometimes defines the terms of discourse. If some particular nonsense is repeated often enough, people will get a sense that everybody believes it, even if they don't really agree with it themselves. Eventually, they will simply accept that that is the way things are, and will start acting in accordance with the nonsense, so they won't feel like an outsider. It's called "groupthink." It's the principle behind propaganda.

Yeah, this is kind of what I was saying.

Which men? And which women?

There are a lot of men out there; billions in fact. And a lot of men just at CD.com. And they're all different. As are women, and any subset of the set "women."

I have seen a number of threads here at CD.com in which posters have expressed themselves in ways which strongly suggest that they don't actually have any interest in what women think, say, or feel. There are posts which prefer to deal with women as stereotypes. Go elsewhere on the web, and it's a lot worse. Misogyny is rampant.

This isn't all men. But it's not a negligible number, either.

Even if we assume that everyone in this thread is englightened, sees women as individuals, and shows them the respect they are due as human beings and who they are as individuals, we need to keep in mind that the women in our lives deal with an awful lot of men who aren't that way. We may choose to ignore the existence of those men, but the women in our lives do not have this privilege. And it affects how they relate to us "good guys." (Assuming that "we" -- for some definition of "we" -- are, in fact "good guys," and not just kidding ourselves.)

I'm talking about the men that I've seen around me all my life--the ones who go out every day and work hard to support their families and treat them very well. The guys you never read about in the paper.

Nobody's denying there are lots of bad guys in the world. But which group is in the majority? I know this: if I want to find bad men, I have no difficulty in finding them. But if I want to find decent men, I have no difficulty in finding them, either.

Is it risky generalizing about decent men? Probably. But it's just as risky generalizing about bad ones. If we question statements about decent men, we can question statements about bad men on the same grounds. A lot of talk I hear is about bad men. That's OK. No reason not to talk about them. But I like good people, I enjoy observing them and seeing the things they do that make the world a better place. It depends on what you want to see in life, I suppose. I see them all around me every day.