Do you want to know if you are a transvestic fetishists?

[Lorileah]

The APA ( american psychiatric association) has adopted T.F. as a dis-order ..They have with a swipe removed it from being a G.I.D. ( meaning a Gender Identity Disorder)

thanks to who you quote or are referring to here, Dr Blanchard who is not really getting support from the majority of therapists. And fetishists have a different reason to dress...normally not a problem until they start harming themselves or others. The fact that he has basically put bisexual and(if they have transitioned) homosexual TSs into a fetish group is abhorrent. He rejects the fact that a TS can be attracted to the same sex and NOT have a mental disorder. In his reasoning, homosexuals are fetishists.

So for the sake of argument I do not understand why the T.G. community would want such a LABEL that has been grouped with harmful behaviors such as pedophilia?

And this is how you define yourself. In that group. Answer your own question. You want to be grouped with them? Paula made a point above, if crossdressing is the only way you can achieve sexual arousal and gratification, then you may want to explore moderating that but the vast majority here, even those who do get aroused dressing, do not need it. As with any fetish (and unless they have changed the definition...it means that you use whatever to achieve sexual gratification...) if it becomes the sole source or harms others, it can be a problem (ie your pedophilia example).

But you are describing a very small population (especially if you look at the members here). You also point out two "cures" with antidepressant medication. That just indicates that the subjects were depressed (out of how many patients that were treated BTW? Were there 4-so 50% or were there 100-2% which is not significant or 1000-.2% which would not even be noted in real science). You don't know they have quit thinking about or desiring to crossdress. They may have very well have told Dr Blanchard what they thought he wanted to hear (sort of like Ex-gay therapy).

Stevie summed it up. If you don't want to be in the group, OK, don't be. But don't try and marginalize others with your ideas.

[NicoleScott]

I'm pretty sure that whatever I was before the APA made their definition change, I still am. Oh wait, I didn't have a disorder then and now I do. I need HELP!!

Lucy_Bella, really, what's your point?

[27th Jennifer]

Is that in the DSM V?

[Lucy_Bella]

thanks to who you quote or are referring to here, Dr Blanchard who is not really getting support from the majority of therapists. And fetishists have a different reason to dress...normally not a problem until they start harming themselves or others. The fact that he has basically put bisexual and(if they have transitioned) homosexual TSs into a fetish group is abhorrent. He rejects the fact that a TS can be attracted to the same sex and NOT have a mental disorder. In his reasoning, homosexuals are fetishists.

As I stated so many times that I do not agree with Blanchard as a whole for many different reasons ..His research was very flawed due to learning the the variations of cross dressing and from other studies that have PLACE EVERYONE AS A WHOLE.. I do ,however give Dr. Blanchard credit for "blazing the trail " if you will..even tho his research had flaws it was a start and MANY Psychologist ( the licensed professionals ) agree with a majority of his research even tho some was flawed..It was a start

And this is how you define yourself. In that group. Answer your own question. You want to be grouped with them? Paula made a point above, if crossdressing is the only way you can achieve sexual arousal and gratification, then you may want to explore moderating that but the vast majority here, even those who do get aroused dressing, do not need it. As with any fetish (and unless they have changed the definition...it means that you use whatever to achieve sexual gratification...) if it becomes the sole source or harms others, it can be a problem (ie your pedophilia example).

No not true that this is the only "sexual gratification" a transvestic fetishsts has.. It wasn't even worth fully answering the question ..If you have read Dr. Blanchards work ,you would have known that statement was far from the truth..Talk about stereo typing..

But you are describing a very small population (especially if you look at the members here). You also point out two "cures" with antidepressant medication. That just indicates that the subjects were depressed (out of how many patients that were treated BTW? Were there 4-so 50% or were there 100-2% which is not significant or 1000-.2% which would not even be noted in real science). You don't know they have quit thinking about or desiring to crossdress. They may have very well have told Dr Blanchard what they thought he wanted to hear (sort of like Ex-gay therapy)..

To be honest through research they do not know what percentage of the population has transvestic fetishsts from what I have read it could be a small percentage or it could even out number people with GID.. There is just no way of knowing because the disorder is harmless people with it never seek professional help..

Stevie summed it up. If you don't want to be in the group, OK, don't be. But don't try and marginalize others with your ideas.

To be honest I believe I am the one being " marginalized" by other people and closed minded opinions..As this thread stated it was a discussion ..I do not jump into all those fantasy threads and tell them how silly they are..I simply pass them by no comment..

[sandra-leigh]

Autogynephelia is a postulate, a conjecture at best. There is no evidence for it and so it does not yet rise to the level of a hypothesis. To become a theory it would have to have evidence, and would have to pass all known tests as of the time it was formed; there are those who go further and say that if it does not offer testable predictions then it should not be considered a theory ("String Theory" falls into that category at present, whereas "The Standard Model" makes some predictions that scientists are hoping are not true!)

The fact that one transvestic fetishist was "treated" (not cured) with some particular drug does not offer any useful support for Autogynephilia. I fit Blanchard's diagnostic criteria (which many many TS fit), but my "condition" was not even slightly cured by taking cyproterone -- the main other use of which is as the "chemical castration" drug for sexual offenders (I think the drug you mentioned was the alternative drug for that purpose.) [Edit: Ah, possibly not. But it is used to treat obsessive compulsive disorder.)

[SharonDD]

For me at least it doesn't matter either I am or not. I get up, pull my panties up the same way, label or not. I choose NOT! I am different that way or any other way for that matter. I am uniquely me in every way.

[Lucy_Bella]

Autogynephelia is a postulate, a conjecture at best. There is no evidence for it and so it does not yet rise to the level of a hypothesis. To become a theory it would have to have evidence, and would have to pass all known tests as of the time it was formed; there are those who go further and say that if it does not offer testable predictions then it should not be considered a theory ("String Theory" falls into that category at present, whereas "The Standard Model" makes some predictions that scientists are hoping are [I]not[I] true!)

Yes and I agree that Autogynephelia is a flawed theory.. But if you relate changing sex because you feel you should be that sex and always have been verses because you are in love with that sex (Autogynephelia there are four types BTW ).. That is were many T.S. find the flaw in the study because by definition T.S. is their term ..They own it !They do not want any other theory involved with it period...

The fact that one transvestic fetishist was "treated" (not cured) with some particular drug does not offer any useful support for Autogynephilia. I fit Blanchard's diagnostic criteria (which many many TS fit), but my "condition" was not even slightly cured by taking cyproterone -- the main other use of which is as the "chemical castration" drug for sexual offenders (I think the drug you mentioned was the alternative drug for that purpose.) [Edit: Ah, possibly not. But it is used to treat obsessive compulsive disorder.)

Please do not misunderstand that treatment as the main source ..This was an example to answer other nay sayers that science lost interest..The main focus should be on treatment or how to treat it..If you would like to know more about treatments and the progress of treatment follow this link..http://www.searchmedica.com/search.h...nnelback&ds=21

[Asche]

I just happen to find real science fascinating

Actual science, yes. Not quack "science," which is what this sounds like just from what you've written. The fact that it's popular on the net does not speak in its favor.

I don't like hearing we are stuck with what we were dealt and if there was a slight chance for a cure,treatment or advancements in either ..I would love to know about it wouldn't you ?

Even assuming I thought I was the one who needed curing, why would I subject myself to the very substantial risks of serious harm for the "slight chance for a cure"? The very idea reminds me of "gay conversion therapy," which has done so much harm (and had so little "success") they're trying to outlaw it in some states.

I'm hearing a lot of self-hatred here.

[Lucy_Bella]

Actual science, yes. Not quack "science," which is what this sounds like just from what you've written. The fact that it's popular on the net does not speak in its favor.

Now now.. Why would you say that? How do you know this? The American Psychiatric Association Quacks? hmmmm.. Okay I may live my life as a crossdresser and it sorta makes me a professional in my field of why I dress...Keep in mind it makes you one too right and our opinions of why tho are so far apart..

Even assuming I thought I was the one who needed curing, why would I subject myself to the very substantial risks of serious harm for the "slight chance for a cure"? The very idea reminds me of "gay conversion therapy," which has done so much harm (and had so little "success") they're trying to outlaw it in some states.

That does seem to be the favored opinion of this disorder verses those under the TG umbrella many do not seek help because they are happy with having it and it in most cases cause no harm and sexual preference has nothing to do with any of this, why compare?

I'm hearing a lot of self-hatred here.

I'm not placing misleading thoughts about what you post why are you diagnosing me for?

[Nicole Erin]

Doesn't matter what someone wants to call something. I mean are labels really that important?

I think some people here are labelistic fetishists.

I certainly am. I am still in the closet though. I only hope one day I can live full time as a trans-lableler.

[Taylor Ray]

the definition of diagnosis:

the process of determining by examination the nature and circumstances of a diseased condition.

the entire argument is based upon the premise that cross dressing is a diseased condition.

the entire argument and subsequent analysis is erroneous

[MarinaKirax]

I don't generally believe that labels are useful because they group people into artificial categories - BUT, what I have been amazed by, since I joined the forum, is the spectrum of 'crossdressers' here at crossdressers.com.

When I originally thought about my dressing, when I was mature enough to have some perspective, was just that the term 'crossdresser', or 'transvestite' fit me.(thank you Rocky Horror, and how did you know I love basques and garters?) But then, I did come across transvestic fetishism, and I wondered if that fit me better. I am aroused by dressing, and often ofter dressing, there is a (ahem) consummation of sorts. That made me think it was all about the clothing. Often I felt shame after dressing - certainly the desire to present as female utterly disappeared, for a short time. I felt silly. That didn't sound like someone who wanted to become a woman. I often thought how unhappy I'd be if I actually transitioned. But also disturbed by how attracted and blinded I could be by the idea......(but I dont want to transition).

So I began to think my attraction was to the clothes - but though I love my stilettos, the shoes don't make me aroused - its the vision of me wearing them that is arousing. Back to thinking about myself as a tranny, or (possibly) am I part of the transgendered 'quilt'? I don't want to be a woman, though - not really - I want to have long nails, high heels, long hair, makeup, breasts (sometimes), and wear lingerie, skirts, and appear as an attractive female. But I dont want to have periods, yeast infections or grow old as a woman. I dont want a husband, or a male lover.

Then I came across the term 'autogynephilia' and it clicked. I'm not fetishistic about the clothes as objects, and I don't want to transition. I am in love with the idea of myself as female, but the idea only. I love to put on the visage, stand in front of the mirror, and turn myself on. Sometimes the image I'm inlove with is me walking down the street and blending in as female, and so passing becomes important. I dont care about the labels, because so many of us here have so many different reasons they dress. I've tried to be honest about mine, and I'm interested in the exact causes of why I behave this way. Not because its wrong, but because it is undeniably unusual, and risky for me. Its also intrinsically illogical that I can be consumed by the pink fog and take terrible risks to dress, (in terms of being found out by those other than my wife) but after I dress, I feel ashamed, and I cant sometimes get the clothes off fast enough. So go figure. I'm the way I am, and I'm a happy person, gals, but I don't understand myself, so I'm interested in this.

[ReineD]

Lucy, this is a no-brainer. A person will know they are a transvestic fetishist if they need to get out of the clothes after release. They dress strictly for the thrills and release.

There is no dispute, everyone agrees that pure, sexual fetichists don't fall under the TG umbrella. As you say, a fetish is a fetish is a fetish, whether it is latex, leather, panties, stilettos, fuzzy sweaters, or sexy clothes, boobs, and a wig.

As a side note, the people at the other end of the spectrum who also do not fall under the TG umbrella are the transitioned TSs, since they are women now and no longer trans-anything except for their chromosomes. So, this leaves everyone else under the TG umbrella, no matter what they call themselves.

Getting back to the crossdressers, I have no idea what proportion of the total are fetishists. BUT, if you google "crossdresser dating porn sex", there will be about 19 million results centered around sexual websites. If you google "crossdresser support forum", the first few pages are support forums (many of the links are different pages of the same sites), followed by other forums where the girlfriends say, "Help, my bf is a CDer", and then start the sexual sites. So my guess is that the majority of men who enjoy wearing one or several items of women's clothing are fetishists and I agree, they do not have gender issues.

HOWEVER … most of the people who hang out here and in other support forums (you included perhaps?) are here for deeper reasons than sex. Don't you think? They have questions about the CDing. They wonder how to label themselves. They want to know how to get their wives to support them or how to find girlfriends who will accept them (surely this must mean it is more than sex to them?). They like to talk to other CDers and make friends with like-minded people. They like to write about the CDing. They like to fantasize about being their particular brand of ideal woman. They like to talk fashion, makeup, clothes. They like to support each other's looks in the Gallery. The crossdressing brings them comfort. It brings them peace. It brings them joy. They didn't start out that way, they did start out with sexual release but what was once sexual fun has been rewired into a need to express the softer side of femininity, even if sexual release is involved just occasionally. Most of these members already go out presenting fully as women, or if they don't, it is because their wives disagree or these CDers feel as if they would never pass.

So would you say that most members here are pure transvestic fetishists?

Fundamentally, if anyone engages in non-sexual cross-gender expression, wouldn't you say that through their actions they are crossing (trans) at least one aspect of gender and this is the gender expression?

[Badtranny]

Well I don't recall if Lucy and I have ever had a go, but I think I'm feelin' her on this one.

I've noticed a few things in my time on this forum. One of the things is there seems to be an inverse relationship with the people who post the most about how fem they are and the number of pics they put up. Another is the people that seem to have the strongest opinions about transgender people haven't actually met very many.

In regard to "TS" women who are self identified lesbians; Some are wonderful people but I've met some who straight up creep me out. I have NEVER met a TS girl who likes men that I thought was creepy, but I have met several who were all very vocal about being lesbians, and if I closed my eyes they were indistinguishable from dirty old men.

I need to clarify that not every "trans lesbian" is creepy. Some are delightful and deserve everything great that life has to offer, but too many are bad seeds that need to do some serious self examination.

PS, if you're a Facebook friend I'm not talking about you. ;-)

[ReineD]

Autogynephelia is a postulate, a conjecture at best. There is no evidence for it and so it does not yet rise to the level of a hypothesis. To become a theory it would have to have evidence, and would have to pass all known tests as of the time it was formed; there are those who go further and say that if it does not offer testable predictions then it should not be considered a theory ("String Theory" falls into that category at present, whereas "The Standard Model" makes some predictions that scientists are hoping are [I]not[I] true!)

That's because no one has surveyed the members here! How often have we read posts from CDers who say that AGP describes them, and that imagining themselves as women proves to be the most intense sexual release of all? And then we get the older folks who say that it is no longer sexual for them. Assuming that people of all ages and phases post here, don't you think it is logical that younger CDers for whom it is intensely sexual, migrate away from this and in time as their libido diminishes naturally with age, what's left is an intensely satisfying, non-sexual expression of femininity?

Did anyone ever say that AGP remains static and it doesn't morph into something else?

[TinaMc]

It's a bit like Eddie Izzard's comments on weirdo transvestites vs executive transvestites.

[Lucy_Bella]

Lucy, this is a no-brainer. A person will know they are a transvestic fetishist if they need to get out of the clothes after release. They dress strictly for the thrills and release.

True Reine but as we get older and the "release" becomes a lesser part of the dressing so the dressing it's self becomes the erotic part of the experience.. Yes it starts by getting ones "Jollies" at first and in the earlier stages of a persons life who cded..But as a person ages this to grows from a 3-5 minute phase to a ???phase .. People shouldn't mistake how long the erotic part of the experience can last I.E. Erotic sexual denial, also known as orgasm denial.. Fetish dressers can under dress and be turned on by the experience all day everyday there really is no limit to how many times but there is some limit to how long and that varies to individually ..

HOWEVER … most of the people who hang out here and in other support forums (you included perhaps?) are here for deeper reasons than sex. Don't you think?

When I came here I didn't know why I cded being in a relationship with a disapproving wife ( still stuck in the first phases of dressing) .After separating and soon a divorce, I had a drive to further my dressing ..I wanted to find out why and learn more ( because I never could while I was in my marriage) . Yes my drive ( unlike most here) was to label myself and the degree of why I dress ?What is causing me to do this? Is this something I am stuck with and will I have to adjust my life around it? Can it or will it get out of control? I do not like the dressing after.I feel quilt and I find shame in doing it.. So I am here to learn.

So would you say that most members here are pure transvestic fetishists?

It's hard to say but from allot of the post I've read on here I will say people tend to have the signs of being one ( too hot to wear certain clothing or dressed to the nines or not at all).. These are tendencies of fetish dressers...But it could also be that they just like to wear certain things? I also see that people on here are comfortable with just expressing being/feeling feminine and it doesn't matter what they wear ( the key part "it doesn't matter what they wear" to feel feminine.... In other words they do not need the clothing to feel feminine ).. I also see when people post they reference to a" real GG" and maybe for the sake of argument or for that matter not having one they use that phrase .. But with respect of those being a GID person ( just as everyone likes to be called she) wouldn't you present as a "real GG" as well without needing to compare?( I understand it could be for clarity reasons).. I think it goes much deeper than people know and being a fetish dresser does or can grow into different realms of femininity as the feminine part becomes erotic ... I don't think people are aware of this because most really do not care or they do not want to know..

Fundamentally, if anyone engages in non-sexual cross-gender expression, wouldn't you say that through their actions they are crossing (trans) at least one aspect of gender and this is the gender expression?

With out a doubt and that's where the difference's lay.. "Gender Expression" ..You have feelings to be that of the opposite sex but for some people not all the time and you have found balance with the natural sex that you was born as ( GID).. Maybe if you were to look at fetish dressing in this way.. You have fetish dressers ( early stages of dressing ) certain items of female clothing as a start that you are aroused by.. Erotic dressers ( later stages of dressing) still has the same desires for certain items of female clothing and the material..( Keep in mind these are fetishes and it is important to know that when I say certain Items I mean what material the Item is made of ,what cut even color ..So it just can't be as an example "any pair of panties" it has to meet the criteria in order for the attraction to be effective)

But later stages have in time added more to the dressing to enhance the experience ( not all fetish dressers go this far for many reasons like married ,family etc..) .. We have seen people like this outside of cross-dressing people who actually have deformed their own bodies to look like Lizards or cats ( I just used this as an example I am not in anyway saying people do these things from sexual drives) Exotic dressers are more so in love with the object they see and feel and not so much with who they are..In other words attractions are not only visual they are or can include other senses like touch or feel so in an erotic stage you can say "I like the feeling of feminine" that's a sense ( feeling to feel) of the attraction ..You do not as much present but you do emulate.. Verses a GID stage "I like feeling feminine" that is only a expression you like expressing your feelings ( your inner self ego maybe) to be/feel feminine there is no attraction to that feeling .. GID is expressing who you are..

the definition of diagnosis:

the process of determining by examination the nature and circumstances of a diseased condition.

the entire argument is based upon the premise that cross dressing is a diseased condition.

the entire argument and subsequent analysis is erroneous

And I accept the diagnosis..

Imagine ( not suggesting this fits you ) you are a Trans Sexual...You life has been in shambles and filled with depression because your body does not fit your gender..Simple solution right? Transition ( SRS) right? Not really true it doesn't happen that way or that easy.. With insurance companies and legal identity changes among countless other obstacles in the way of your depression and transitioning to freedom, it's not that easy..

Did you know that Trans Sexuals only exist after transitioning and prior to that they are considered as part of the Trans Gender Umbrella? So lets make it harder for them transition by throwing in a newer disorder and one that is considered by professionals as a "Mental Disorder" under this TG umbrella.. Your depression is not cause by your "mental disorder" as a T.G. it is caused by your "Gender Disorder" and every level of the T.G. umbrella suffers from some degree of depression through gender identity.. It's just not as extreme or not enough for many to not transition .. ( please don't make me go through the depression levels if you are in denial any exist)..

This is why I see it important to remove the being of a" transvestic fetishists" from the T.G. umbrella it doesn't fit! Lets just say you are a T.G. looking to get SRS done.. You just can not live another day being the sex you was born as.. You have to seek professional help, you just can't call your insurance company and say "Okay I am ready lets get it done" ..No you have to see a Psychologist that specializes in that field for this to happen.. What happens when the Psychologist for what ever reason diagnoses you with having transvestic fetishists instead of extreme G.I.D.? Your treatment will change from having a gender disorder to having a mental disorder .. You will not receive SRS and good luck getting the diagnostics reversed you will need to follow up on the treatment that directs you to the diagnostics..

[NicoleScott]

This is why I see it important to remove the being of a" transvestic fetishists" from the T.G. umbrella it doesn't fit!

You walk into a club and see several CDers sitting around a table, fully transformed and looking good. One of them gets aroused by crossdressing, but you don't know that because he's not masturbating under the table. He keeps his sexual activities private. They all enjoy the company and the conversation, and none of them has crossdressing-related issues that disrupt their normal life's activities, and have no need for counseling/therapy.

Since the pleasure dresser is crossdressed as the others are, why is it important to remove him from under the TG umbrella, except as an exercise in labeling?

[Lucy_Bella]

You walk into a club and see several CDers sitting around a table, fully transformed and looking good. One of them gets aroused by crossdressing, but you don't know that because he's not masturbating under the table. He keeps his sexual activities private. They all enjoy the company and the conversation, and none of them has crossdressing-related issues that disrupt their normal life's activities, and have no need for counseling/therapy.

Since the pleasure dresser is crossdressed as the others are, why is it important to remove him from under the TG umbrella, except as an exercise in labeling?

I thought I have explained that ..Most fetish dressers do not even go out for one dressed fully in femme ..2. You may see erotic dressers out and about and most people including fetish dressers keep their sexual activities private.. 3. It has zero reasons for co existing with other dressers and has every reason to do with the disorder it's self "mental" "gender".. I would hope that dressers of all types can fit under the terms of the umbrella "Cross-Dressers"..T.G.s and T.F.s.. I hung out at a gay bar with friends that happen to be gay while dressed..Does that make me gay? Should I join the gay umbrella( if there is one)?

Look at the bottom of post 42 there is a good example..

But your point brings up a good analogy.. A short time back a thread came out on the main forum about who would want to meet with fellow Cross-Dressers? It caught my attention because I have met with some before and I surprised myself with my own reactions to meeting them.. I know and un understand my reactions better now but at the time I didn't.. I was uncomfortable being around them and I couldn't understand why.. Now it could have been just my personality but I really don't think it was.. Looking back I now think it was because of the differences of why we dress.. They enjoy being a lady and presented as such.. I seen it at a bunch of guys who not only dressed as women but acting like them as well.. Don't get me wrong I am not a hateful person but we just didn't have anything in common other than we dressed like women.. I never went out since then and I don't think I ever will again or will never go out to meet-up as group again anyways..

[melanie206]

Read more: http://www.care2.com/causes/being-tr...#ixzz2WbibkKJ4 under their umbrella.. Why would you have a disorder

I haven't read every message posted on this thread but suggest people read the the above linked article that Lucy provides. We are all tired of labels but what the APA decides is an illness or not can have serious implications in the real world.

[Angela Campbell]

Did you know that Trans Sexuals only exist after transitioning and prior to that they are considered as part of the Trans Gender Umbrella?..

This is not true. According to WPATH and the SOC the diagnosis of transsexual is made prior to any HRT or surgeries. If you are a true transsexual you are from birth, through GRS and until death.

[Lucy_Bella]

This is not true. According to WPATH and the SOC the diagnosis of transsexual is made prior to any HRT or surgeries. If you are a true transsexual you are from birth, through GRS and until death.

In clinical terms no it's not because you are in what they call " transitioning " thank you for the correction .But in medical terms as I have read and some are conflicting say that you are not a full T.S. until you have transitioned.. There are various stages of "transitioning" like living your life as the sex you are transitioning to for an extended amount of time ( I believe but not sure it's a year) but all stages have T.S. tied to them..That doesn't mean they are medically and legally considered a Trans Sexual ..

Trans = Crossed and Sexual meaning "sex assigned at birth" So a full T.S. can technically be considered out from under the T.G. umbrella but the argument or the on going conflict for people is the "transitioning stages" is that they do not want to be considered T.G. . Dr.s think they may have proof that T.S. ( or people who are more likely to become T.S.) can be diagnosed at ages before "puberty" which is very important but still not solid enough to set in stone yet progress has been made tho.. So people who may become T.S. are still considered under the T.G. umbrella .. These are only things I have read as I was searching for my own "Label" ..This doesn't in anyway make me an expert or have any expert knowledge of T.S.'s or what they go through ..

[Krystalina]

My two cents...I personally hate labels. I live in a mundane world where everyone has to like the same things, like if you are a man, you have to like sports, like and have sex with women before you are 20, stupid stuff like that. This place, this forum, is awesome...a place where I don't have to fit in some narrow, tiny box. Why complicate an already outsider status?

Whether one is a fetishist or "pure" transgendered, at the end of the day, we have yet to be fully embraced by mainstream society...and honestly? Mainstream society is overrated, anyhow...I say that 99% of drug and violence problems come from people trying to fit under labels and repressing themselves...repressed homosexuals, repressed crossdressers, repressed transgendered...

I see myself as an individual...no label is worthy of me.

*Picks up soapbox and goes home*

[docrobbysherry]

Lucy, while I tend to agree with much of what u have posted, I believe both u and the clinical studies haven't gone on long enuff. In my personal experience, I've been traveling down a constantly evolving road. At first, I was sure I wanted to become a female. But, that went away after some years. Now, I consider myself a TF and AGP seems to describe my condition. As, I only dress all the way as that is what excites me. Have never felt like I have a fem side. Aa a bonus, never thot about trying on ladies things until I was 50! Yet despite my age, my CD journey has never been static. So, I expect there to be much more flux in younger trans and dressers.

First: I was as u accurately described, a TF. For nearly 10 years I dressed completely alone in private. Every time, I got turned on, finished, and couldn't get the clothes and fem gear off fast enuff.

Next: After 10 years of this, I began wondering if there were others like me? And, came out here and on other CD sites. I found amazing folks in the CD/Trans arena!

3rd step: After chatting with so many interesting folks here, I was ready to meet other dressers. After refusing to meet a few local CDs that offered. I was worried about their motives. Even tho they wanted to meet in crowded venues in drab. So, I attended an SCC about 5 years ago. Meeting other dressers and going out dressed for the first time. Nearly a week of dressing and not one thot of dressed sex entered my mind!

And, that dichotomy of dressing continues for me. As I continue to be aroused at the end of practically every private dressing session. And, I'm now going out fairly often with other dressers. Which does nothing for me sexually. And, going out dressed is not about feeling fem, an expression of who I am, or an adreneline rush for me. I find it simply fun at best, stressful at worst! Mostly, it's becoming routine. I only do it to be with other dressers.

It is my opinion that others in our community r actually constantly in flux also. Except the very many who cannot explore their dressing, fem, or trans sides fully because of outside pressures that restrict them. If we were all allowed to freely travel our own CD/trans roads, I think you'd see we are mostly a hodgepodge of varying urges and motivations that r in fact all over the psychological and statistical map!

[Alexis.j]

Doc; very well stated. We all get pre-categorised before we can even figure out what exactly we are...