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

[NicoleScott]

There are two key criteria before a psychiatric diagnosis of "transvestic fetishism" is made:[2]
Recurrent, intense sexually arousing fantasies, urges, or behaviour, involving cross-dressing.
This causes clinically significant distress or impairment, whether socially, at work, or elsewhere.
Thus, transvestic fetishism is not diagnosed unless it causes significant problems for the person concerned.

Not to argue the point, but this sounds strange to me. If crossdressing, completely transforming or wearing only "favored" items, causes arousal on a recurring basis, I would call this transvestic fetishism. Lots of guys do this and have good control of it. But the APA won't call it this unless it "causes significant problems".
It sounds more logical to call it what it is, but don't consider it a disorder unless it "causes significant problrms". But I guess I'm not seeing it from the APA point of view. I guess if it's not a problem it doesn't exist.
To me, it's like stealing money is not stealing unless it's for a certain amount, or it's not eating if it doesn't cause me to gain weight.

[Lucy_Bella]

have you ever experienced the urge lessening before and then getting stronger?

Yes many times as it progressed and as I said only time will tell, but I am sure stopping is not in my future or trying to stop alone . But then again do I want to go in and see a "specialist" to help me stop? No, it's not really interfering enough with my life at this time in fact it's probably one of the most entertaining part of my life right now besides things that are closet to me.. But if it causes major problems with what are closest to me is when I will look into solutions.

To me, it's like stealing money is not stealing unless it's for a certain amount, or it's not eating if it doesn't cause me to gain weight.

Great analogy Nicole and in a way you answered it yourself ..You can eat without gaining weight but stealing is stealing period. How much and who from would stealing fit the crime. You stole a nickle from a friend or you stole a few million from the bank..

[mary something]

But then again do I want to go in and see a "specialist" to help me stop?

Any specialist who would promise to help you stop should be avoided. I was only going to mention that if it has waxed and waned before then most likely you will feel that way again if you don't now. A therapist who is acting ethically would never have any certain goal in mind for you other than to understand yourself better.

The word fetish by definition implies an impairment of the individual. To be diagnosed one has to suffer distress, most commonly from the inability to experience intimacy without an artifical object present. Sometimes things are called fetishes when what we mean are that they are arousal triggers. I make this distinction because it is very important for self understanding.

[ReluctantDebutant]

From Dictionary.com

fet·ish
[fet-ish, fee-tish] Show IPA
noun
1. an object regarded with awe as being the embodiment or habitation of a potent spirit or as having magical potency.

2. any object, idea, etc., eliciting unquestioning reverence, respect, or devotion: to make a fetish of high grades.

3. Psychology . any object or nongenital part of the body that causes a habitual erotic response or fixation.

Why does the word fetish have to imply an impairment?

[NicoleScott]

Why does the word fetish have to imply an impairment?

So the psychiatric pros can justify treatment?

[ReineD]

Why does the word fetish have to imply an impairment?

It's an impairment when it gets to the point of having a negative impact on a person's life.

Some people take it so far as to not be able to concentrate enough to work if for example they can't stop thinking about how they'd look wearing certain clothes, or if they can't stop imagining having sex with a man and they have frequent urges to masturbate. Or, if it ruins relationships. I've read blogs by people who became so dependent on masturbating to their fantasies that it severely impacted their relationships with their wives. Another negative impact: if the obsession and fantasies begin to isolate a person to the point where they no longer enjoy spending time with friends or engaging in any other activity or hobby that was once of interest to them. Their worlds become severely constricted, and these people are no longer able to reach their full human potential. Also, if the obsession causes financial strain due to the sheer volume of purchased clothing, jewelry, accessories, shoes, etc, or even if there develops a hoarding mentality to the point where the items way exceed the ability to wear them (and the purchases continue), making it difficult to know where to store it all ... and the person still can't get rid of some of the items to make it all manageable.

It is an impairment to the quality of a person's life when there is no longer any balance between the crossdressing and the activities associated with it, and the rest of the person's life.

[mary something]

Lucy I'm surprised at your response. I don't think I've expressed a negative opinion nor been an asshole. If I sounded judgemental then accept my apology, I don't think there is anyone who doesn't contribute here for av reason. What specifically did I say that bothered you?

[Lucy_Bella]

Lucy I'm surprised at your response. I don't think I've expressed a negative opinion nor been an asshole. If I sounded judgemental then accept my apology, I don't think there is anyone who doesn't contribute here for av reason. What specifically did I say that bothered you?

Sorry Mary ,

I just re read it my self and it comes across as that but that is far from what I meant.. What I meant wasn't directed at you personally..

People ( especially here ) tend to have blinders on ( meaning no negative thoughts about Cding allowed) and if you( meaning me ) bring up anything they feel is negative ( T.F. ) it makes you ( meaning me ) a big A- hole ( or so it seems).. I say this because there has been a big push to have this removed from the "APA" as a "Mental Disorder" The push made some success in removing "Gender Identity Disorder " and "Dual Gender " as mental disorders ( basically all the "APA" did was change the names)..

So where do you go from here ? If you need help or therapy and they diagnose you with having mild T.F. which is now considers T.F.D. I don't think that I would ever get to the point of needing professional help because my T.F.D. is pretty mild and the "APA" knows that it's rare that very many male cross-dresser will ever be diagnosed extreme .. People say labels are not important in here anyways but in the "real world " they very much are important, even in the T.G. community.. I would also like to thank the powers that may be for this site to allow this discussion to continue I really don't think that many people who are here understand .. We are being labeled by professionals and if we do nothing about being labeled( or take part) we may find how we are being labeled as unacceptable and completely wrong..


I am sorry how the original post came out no offense was intended ..In fact I will go and delete it

[Leona]

I have to admit not having read the whole thread (only skimming), but I haven't seen this mentioned.

Why is it either fetish or identity? Is there room to want to experience sex while dressed up? It's almost a kind of roleplay, but not really because it's part of identity.

[Taylor186]

There are two key criteria before a psychiatric diagnosis of "transvestic fetishism" is made:
1) Recurrent, intense sexually arousing fantasies, urges, or behaviour, involving cross-dressing.
2) This causes clinically significant distress or impairment, whether socially, at work, or elsewhere.
Thus, transvestic fetishism is not diagnosed unless it causes significant problems for the person concerned.

Not to argue the point, but this sounds strange to me. If crossdressing, completely transforming or wearing only "favored" items, causes arousal on a recurring basis, I would call this transvestic fetishism. Lots of guys do this and have good control of it. But the APA won't call it this unless it "causes significant problems".
It sounds more logical to call it what it is, but don't consider it a disorder unless it "causes significant problems". But I guess I'm not seeing it from the APA point of view.

Personally, I think that the APA is right to suggest that you do not have a "transvestic fetish disorder" unless "clinically significant distress or impairment, whether socially, at work, or elsewhere" is observed "for the person concerned."

Yes you may have a fetish for wearing woman's clothing but it is does not rise to the level of a clinical disorder unless it causes significant distress or impairment, as defined above, to the person concerned.

If you have your fetish under control and you are fine with it but your wife or partner has a problem with it, that alone does not suggest that you have a disorder. The partner can have all the issues they want including wanting a divorce but that still does not create a clinical disorder in you.

That's the way I see what's being said.

[JadeEmber]

Sorry, had to skip many replies. Not enough time in the day!

I'm not really concerned. I'm pretty sure I fall outside the category actually, but if it were shown otherwise it would just be a point of interest. I don't think it changes or affects anything.

One thing about this is people on all sides are wrapped up with their societal baggage. People talk about disorders, treatment, etc., and that in turn makes people annoyed as it suggests they're broken. People also want out of the category -- so people who have fully transitioned now say they are no longer transgender, because that the term transgender still feels like a perjorative. They're now fully valid women or men, right? Or people say that they were never transgender in the first place, etc., in the case of cross dressers.

So this is a volatile topic. I've certainly been in the middle of it as well before .

As has been mentioned, transgender itself is often used as an umbrella term so keep people together, just as LGBT (or more specifically LGBTQIA) is used. Nevertheless, it's far from uncommon to see people belonging to one of those letters throw fellow members of the same letter under the bus , much less people belonging to other letters (see, for example, the issues many have with the HRC). Unfortunately, transgender has also been used as a non-umbrella term, which is why people still react against it.

I find it interesting to consider the specific diagnostics. While it offends some people, I'll make comments in that regard, albeit not with the intention of shackling or offending them. In the end, though, the whole notion of gender is kind of silly. There's no fundamental male or female particle, just what biology and culture have made of us, and what you and I are now is also what biology and culture have made of us. Regardless of how we might be diagnosed, who truly believes that we are just the sum of these diagnoses? Once we have increased our understanding of our genetics and biology, everyone will become transgender, or at least agendered, possibly. And if that's a completely realistic end state to our understanding our ourselves and science -- that we could, for instance, change and create dysphoric states at will, then what does it matter except as an idle discussion? Eventually, we'll all be past this, and view out time as just another dark age.

Of course, any diagnostic association with conditions that cause harm is unacceptable (associations with pedophilia or violence). Historically, we -- as humans -- have difficulty differentiating those who aren't "typical" from those who are harmful (and are sometimes "typical" in all other ways).

So, there's been some hostility in reaction to this thread, and some outright rejection, and some agreement. A lot of it is a microcosm of the greater change we as a species are undergoing at large.

[docrobbysherry]

So, I can't call myself a TF because dressing by itself isn't the only thing that arouses me. And, my life is not messed up by a combination of dressing and sex.

I'm not a fetishist because I don't have any fantasies about particular things, other than adult women, that excite me.

So, what should I call myself here? Sex is an important part of my dressing. If I refer to myself as a "fetish dresser", I think people know what I mean. Even tho I'm not one.

Can anyone think of another way to describe myself if I dress, sometimes get turned on by it and respond, but am not a TF? I know there r a lot of us here. If u can think of another term, I'd like to hear it!

[Lucy_Bella]

So, I can't call myself a TF because dressing by itself isn't the only thing that arouses me. And, my life is not messed up by a combination of dressing and sex.

I'm not a fetishist because I don't have any fantasies about particular things, other than adult women, that excite me.

Sherry ,

Yes you can call yourself this if it fits you ..You would be ..T.F. mild form of transvestic fetishists... If your life has become impairment from being a T.F. then you would be this T.F.D. transvestic fetishist disorder..

[Leona]

So, I can't call myself a TF because dressing by itself isn't the only thing that arouses me. And, my life is not messed up by a combination of dressing and sex.

I'm not a fetishist because I don't have any fantasies about particular things, other than adult women, that excite me.

So, what should I call myself here? Sex is an important part of my dressing. If I refer to myself as a "fetish dresser", I think people know what I mean. Even tho I'm not one.

Can anyone think of another way to describe myself if I dress, sometimes get turned on by it and respond, but am not a TF? I know there r a lot of us here. If u can think of another term, I'd like to hear it!

I don't think you have to. I think it's self-evident that a person experiencing any gender wants to also experience that gender sexually. It's pretty basic. Especially if your primary attraction is to women and you see yourself as an attractive woman, then when it dawns on you that can sleep with yourself, it's pretty logical to do that. For those of us who have SOs that are involved with it, it's logical to want to have sex with them, too.

On a side note, if I don't want to get hit on while dressed up, but try to pick myself up, would that be considered sexual harassment?

[NathalieX66]

I think every transgender person I ever met wants to/needs to experience the feelings of the other gender rather than their birth gender. There's a bit of me in that.

I have fetishes too, but I feel like those fetishes are more like the video/song Lotion by the Greenskeepers http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jm86I_kezVY, featured in the film Silence of the Lambs with Jodie Foster & Anthony Hopkins. They don't make me feel like a girl the way I need to feel like a girl.

When I want to be a girl, it's because I want to feel what girls be, and do......just like that famous quote in the movie When Harry met Sally "I'l have what she's having".

[NicoleScott]

Sherry ,
Yes you can call yourself this if it fits you ..You would be ..T.F. mild form of transvestic fetishists... If your life has become impairment from being a T.F. then you would be this T.F.D. transvestic fetishist disorder..

The idea that you can be a TF (mild, not impairing) is new to the discussion. Previously, it wasn't considered TF unless it was impairing. Now, it's TF with or without the disorder.
ReluctantDebutant's question "why does the word fetish have to imply an impairment?" hasn't been answered. Reine explained all sorts of ways a fetish can be disruptive to a normal life, but not why it can't be called a fetish unless it is impairing. It may be nit-picking, but I would think the distinctions are a lot more important to the psychology disorder diagnosis and treatment folks than for us.
A lot of this boils down to words and their definitions. Is there really a difference between "fetish for dressing" and "transvestic fetishism" (except to those in the psychology biz)?

[Lucy_Bella]

The idea that you can be a TF (mild, not impairing) is new to the discussion. Previously, it wasn't considered TF unless it was impairing. Now, it's TF with or without the disorder.
ReluctantDebutant's question "why does the word fetish have to imply an impairment?" hasn't been answered. Reine explained all sorts of ways a fetish can be disruptive to a normal life, but not why it can't be called a fetish unless it is impairing. It may be nit-picking, but I would think the distinctions are a lot more important to the psychology disorder diagnosis and treatment folks than for us.
A lot of this boils down to words and their definitions. Is there really a difference between "fetish for dressing" and "transvestic fetishism" (except to those in the psychology biz)?

It's not a " disorder" is the difference ..Hope this helps in explaining it..

FETISHISM
Fetishism is use of an inanimate object (the fetish) as the preferred method of producing sexual excitement. However, in common parlance, the word is often used to describe particular sexual interests, such as sexual role-playing, preference for certain physical characteristics, and preferred sexual activities.

Common fetishes include aprons, shoes, leather or latex items, and women's underclothing. The fetish may replace typical sexual activity with a partner or may be integrated into sexual activity with a willing partner. Minor fetishistic behavior as an adjunct to consensual sexual behavior is not considered a disorder because distress, disability, and significant dysfunction are absent. More intense, obligatory fetishistic arousal patterns may cause problems in a relationship or become all-consuming and destructive in a person's life.

Transvestic fetishism: Heterosexual males who dress in women's clothing typically begin such behavior in late childhood (see Sexuality and Sexual Disorders: Gender Identity Disorder and Transsexualism). A more common term for transvestite is cross-dresser. This behavior is associated, at least initially, with sexual arousal.

Cross-dressing per se is not a disorder because this behavior does not always cause distress or impairment. Personality profiles of cross-dressing men are generally similar to age- and race-matched norms. When their partner is cooperative, these men have intercourse in partial or full feminine attire. When their partner is not cooperative, they may feel anxiety, depression, guilt, and shame associated with the desire to cross-dress.

Most transvestites do not present for treatment. Those who do are usually brought in by an unhappy spouse, referred by courts, or self-referred out of concern about experiencing negative social and employment consequences. Some transvestites present for treatment of comorbid gender dysphoria, substance abuse, or depression. Social and support groups for transvestites are usually very helpful. No drugs are reliably effective; psychotherapy is aimed at self-acceptance and modulating risky behaviors.

[NicoleScott]

Thanks for telling me things I've known for decades. It's no longer a discussion when you copy from others' work. So I'm done with it.

[Lucy_Bella]

Thanks for telling me things I've known for decades. It's no longer a discussion when you copy from others' work. So I'm done with it.

You asked I provided...Normally if I was to post ( which I have several times) in my own words people then ask for proof ..So I just did us all a favor and btw discussions are usually based from other peoples work or experience) ,it's how we learn.. So I am very sorry the reply upset you

[mary something]

Is there really a difference between "fetish for dressing" and "transvestic fetishism" (except to those in the psychology biz)?

I'm not a psychologist, but my opinion is yes. If someone has a fetish for dressing (as the word is commonly used here) then I would think that behavior is performed in order to express some part of feminine gender that is inside that person. It might be to express feminine gender sexually or in other ways.

A fetishist isn't trying to express something inside them, they are substituting an inanimate object for a real person as the focus of their desire. They have a problem with forming a bond with someone on an emotional level.

That is why I think it's important to understand the difference in terms of being able to understand ourselves better. It's fine to call yourself whatever you want to, but we need to remember the distinction especially if you ever wish to work with a gender therapist it will save you some $ in sessions to discover this.

[Taylor186]

A fetishist isn't trying to express something inside them, they are substituting an inanimate object for a real person as the focus of their desire. They have a problem with forming a bond with someone on an emotional level.

Sorry, the many fetish definitions I've come across say nothing about the ability to form an emotional bond. It's all about sex.

[Lucy_Bella]

I'm not a psychologist, but my opinion is yes. If someone has a fetish for dressing (as the word is commonly used here) then I would think that behavior is performed in order to express some part of feminine gender that is inside that person. It might be to express feminine gender sexually or in other ways.

A fetishist isn't trying to express something inside them, they are substituting an inanimate object for a real person as the focus of their desire. They have a problem with forming a bond with someone on an emotional level. .

With all due respect and not in anyway saying that your opinion is wrong because you are probably right... But only if you have a "gender disorder" will that opinion be correct which I know for a fact I do not have..Also real people are or can be the "Object" of or with fetishisms ..

[mary something]

Sorry, the many fetish definitions I've come across say nothing about the ability to form an emotional bond. It's all about sex.

There is a prevalent theory about fetishes that it is actually linked to obsessive complusive disorder. If someone has a shoe fetish for example and they are being intimate with another person then they won't be able to do so unless they can actually see the object of their obsession. Of course that is evidence that they are not bonding with their partner in a typical way.

It is specifically the fact that it can get out of hand to the point that it can affect someone's work, friendships, and intimate relationships that it by definition has a detrimental effect on that persons bonding with others.

[Lucy_Bella]

There is a prevalent theory about fetishes that it is actually linked to obsessive complusive disorder. If someone has a shoe fetish for example and they are being intimate with another person then they won't be able to do so unless they can actually see the object of their obsession. Of course that is evidence that they are not bonding with their partner in a typical way.

This may be due to you looking up "fetish" instead of "Fetishism"

Fetishism is a Psychiatry condition .. Also this link here will provide some info on the subject ..http://www.rightdiagnosis.com/t/tran...hism/intro.htm

[mary something]

But only if you have a "gender disorder" will that opinion be correct which I know for a fact I do not have

I'm not saying that I think everyone who is a crossdresser has a gender disorder. Carl Jung referred to this as the animus and the anima, yin and yang is another example. Gender is not completely binary, men are capable of empathy, women are capable of logic. Some women like to butch it up, some men like to wear a dress and look nice. All humans like to have the opportunity to express themselves occasionally.

I agree that real people can be the object of a fetish also, an example would be pedophilia. The pedophile is actually autoerotic, he or she doesn't bond with who the child is but what they represent to that person in the same manner an object would have value to a person.