[SIZE="3"]I keep having Da Ja Vu!!!!!
I keep having Da Ja Vu!!!!!!!!!
I keep having........[/SIZE]
[SIZE="3"]I keep having Da Ja Vu!!!!!
I keep having Da Ja Vu!!!!!!!!!
I keep having........
[SIZE="2"]"Tell me why I can't where a mini 'kilt' to work?"[/SIZE][SIZE="3"][/SIZE]
And therein lies the problem. We are all conditioned to seek out masculinity or femininity and lust after it. However both are ultimately artificial and superficial. We are all transgendered, including all non-cds, so masculine men and feminine women are really just facades, the social masks worn to get ahead in society. It is like lusting after an actor or pop star because of their public appearances, but often the real person is nothing like their public persona.Originally Posted by raverbabe gg
If you are looking foremost for masculinity in your partner then of course crossdressing is going to be problematic. If you are looking foremost for a soul mate to share your life with then crossdressing can be accommodated after a period of adjustment.
Also consider this. Over the last few decades women have adopted many masculine traits, behaviors, attitudes and looks. The modern woman today is far removed from the classical feminine idol men lust after. But despite this men still women attractive, men have accepted the "transgenderness" women now exhibit. So it can be done because it has already happened.
With regard to the issue of unattractive features, is this not something we all possess. Who is lucky enough to have a partner who does not have annoying or unattractive features and behaviors? But if you love the person, you look past these, your attraction should not be focused on those details which you dislike, rather your focus should remain fixed on those details you love.
I like it, Di.Viva La Difference...............every relationship is different in my case I am attracted to the girly side..and do not consider myself bi or gay.
Maybe thinking about love in this way...it might help............I think
The way a person looks, their physical appearance,or what they wear isn’t as important as their inner looks, or soul. We fall in love with someone’s soul, And We fall in love with their heart. With their inner self. With their true being. And that’s what matters most.And if you look at it that way.....regardless of the clothes or hair or whatever...they are the same person.I've always said that it's what's inside that counts. People with such an attitude do tend to share secrets like CDing quite early in the relationship. To me, it makes sense to find someone I trust deeply, someone who is compatible with me, not someone who will merely tolerate my idiosyncrasies & me theirs.
But Sobe is discussing CDers who come out after the relationship is already long-established. It creates such a different dynamic in the relationship when the revelation doesn't happen until much later. If a CDer doesn't come clean up front, the SO is entitled to compensation in the form of compromise, IMHO. And the CDer should have no expectation that the SO will find any of this attractive. If she does, great, if not, well that's what you get for false advertising.
Of course, things aren't always so cut & dried. Some CDers don't blossom until well after they are married, so they can't be blamed for hiding anything. And lots of us think we'll be cured by the love of a good women, & are too embarrassed to mention this "hobby" we intend to give up...
Robin
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
Diagonally parked in a parallel universe
Do relationships come with warranties as well?If a CDer doesn't come clean up front, the SO is entitled to compensation in the form of compromise, IMHO. And the CDer should have no expectation that the SO will find any of this attractive. If she does, great, if not, well that's what you get for false advertising.
I don't think concepts like entitlements and compensation within relationships is a good idea. I had better get some relationship insurance otherwise
A lot of good thoughts and feelings expressed in this thread. I do agree with Satrana, however, that if we fall in love with a facade(due to conditioning by society) rather than the person, we are eventually doomed to some kind of disappointment.
Sorry, I don't agree society is to blame on this one. The CDer has to take the responsibility of not being honest with himself and passing that dishonesty down the line to spouse, etc. Now I will 100% agree that dishonesty was probably not done in a deliberate, or vicious light - he was just not aware or in denial about his TGness. Denial is subtle, yet powerful.A lot of good thoughts and feelings expressed in this thread. I do agree with Satrana, however, that if we fall in love with a facade(due to conditioning by society) rather than the person, we are eventually doomed to some kind of disappointment.
I think the subject of this thread is how important is attractiveness in your relationship. CDing dramatically changes the physical traits of someone, and those traits may have been very important to their partner when establishing the relationship. I don't think that is as superficial as it sounds. Our relationship was very physical from the word go - the physical attraction was almost palpable. And over time, yes, we've changed physically - subtle aging process - but we still find each other attractive. Is it the most important element? No. But the possibility of completely losing that attraction because of CDing is very real and could be catastrophic (for the relationship).
Looking past the wig, the make-up, the padding is difficult to do at first. Sure the God given form is still under there, but some days it's just hard to see. The feel, the smell, the taste, the sound are still there - and most importantly the eyes & smile. As long as I can see those, it's OK and I'll remember what's there & feel the joy when it's easily accessed visually.
Absolutely a good relationship is full of guarantees, compensations and entitlements. We are both entitled to respectful and loving treatment, we have the right to be compensated with love and empowerment, and should be guaranteed that no matter what, we will do our damnedest to work through it and remember our partner's feelings are equally as important as our own.
I agree Tree that in a committed relationship, each partner has the responsibility to show love and commitment to each other. It's an ongoing process and showing concern for each other's needs (and not being selfish) is essential. You are sharing your life with someone after all and working towards a common goal. Getting to really know someone and understanding them is quite different. I was mainy referring to fulfilling society's "model" of what it's generally thought that a "man" or a "woman" should be which most of us realize is just not so. Those of us who accept and appreciate one another for who we are as people are way ahead of the game in this regard.
You have a valid point sobe this is why I go drab on the weekends so she has her man
Angie
Don't forget Tree that most of us became crossdressers as young children and there is no way a young child could or should be expected to stand up to the overwhelming intolerance and prejudice aimed at us. Any child who admitted they were a crossdresser would literally have the s**t kicked out of them, the emotional scars would be horrendous. There is only one possibility, to go into the closet. This is not a choice for us, it is 100% the fault of society.
After spending your childhood in the closet, the routine is set. It is only as adults do we realistically have the opportunity to reverse the damage and work out a way to climb out of the closet. That is often a long process of self-realization and self-confidence. And in the meantime many of us will get married long before that process is completed.
It is society which forces us into the closet, it is society that fills us with shame and guilt. Dishonesty only comes into play if the man knows what he is and understands that this is not just a passing whim but a permanent part of his personality. And until the advent of the internet, many CDs did not know where to look for answers to these questions. You cannot be dishonest about something you do not understand.
I have a different definition of what constitutes a good relationship: mutual love, respect and trust.Absolutely a good relationship is full of guarantees, compensations and entitlements
If my wife started asking for guarantees, entitlements and compensations from me I would walk out the door as these concepts are contrary to mutual love, respect and trust. Maybe we have a different understanding of what these words mean.
Last edited by Satrana; 06-06-2007 at 08:42 AM.
[QUOTE=But the possibility of completely losing that attraction because of CDing is very real and could be catastrophic (for the relationship).[/QUOTE]
I'm scared to death that this is what my wife is experiencing. After 29 year of marriage, it's been building for a long time. I didn't know. I would have given up cding, as I have now. I don't know how to recreate the attraction. I found out 12 days ago. It's been hell. She doesn't want me to touch her. We try to talk about it. I'm sure I come across as desperate. I am. She is emotionally numb. No tears. Whatever I got out of cding for all these years was not worth it. Wish I could undo it. I love her with all my heart. She has a lot of difficulty saying "I love you" now. She tries, but I get the feeling it is more or less to pacify me. She says she doesn't know if she can stay with me. Thankfully, she's made no plans to leave. It has been hell. I never could imagine this happening to us. It is hell. I don't want anything in this world but her. I'm not sure that matters to her now. I'm going to do everything in my power to win her back. I won't accept that it's over.
If anyone has been through this and survived I'd like to hear how you did it. This is the worst experience of my life. I cannot face the end of this relationship. I think she may already have. But, as she'd said, "If I was ready to leave I'd already be gone." That's the only glimmer of hope I've been giver
I must agree that all your points are wll made, and taken, however let me add this as a side dish of food for thought.
From day one of my relationship with my wife we have grown. As we have just passed out 20th year we still continue to grow...While I'm sure it was a shock to her when I came out it done two things that were in both our opinions were well worth it.
1 There were no secrets
2 The strength of our love was re-enforced
If the relationship is and was built on love and respect there is always room for growth...That is not to say there won't be rough spots in the road of life, but if willing the love and respect will over come all...
Let me add one more thing that I assumed, and we all know what that makes of you.
There must be an agreed medium on all parts of the relationship, including dressing. Which my wife and I have reached...
Last edited by Marcie Sexton; 06-06-2007 at 08:55 AM.
I fully understand and appreciate why a CD goes in the closet.
IMO, we're discussing a physical attraction & relationship between just 2 people here. Sure these people were influenced by the society they were raised in, but in a private, singular relationship, I still maintain that each party is ultimately responsible for how they presented, communicated and interacted with the other.
Society's influence is less (or should be, IMO) when behind closed doors together.
Great thread Sobe! You bring up some interesting points from a woman's point of view, that some may not always see.
That's the way I've always felt about a relationship. It has been said... "The clothes make the man." So what if it makes him a bit more feminine. He's still the same person you fell in live with, and probably always will be.
My SO is the same way. When I climb in bed with her, I BETTER be Sam or nothing is going to happen. I can respect that.
We definitely change every day. We need to adapt to the things that are constantly changing around us. After all, a flower doesn't grow over night. Nature is in constant flux. Some may not notice the the subtle changes in people , but they happen just the same.
Yes, we are definitely conditioned from the moment we are born to look and act the way society expects.
Yes, I think that we all (CDers) have been in denial at one point or another in our lives. And yes... That is really lieing... To ourselves as well as others.
We must continue to develop and change, as everything and everyone around us does. Even a simple stone changes over time. Unfortunately, Some erode into nothing, while nature polishes some beautifully.
Some plants close their petals at night and re-open them beautifully every day, but they are always slightly different looking than they were the day before. So it is with all people. If we can't adapt to the daily changes of life, then we will slowly erode away too.
We may not like, notice, or care about all of the changes around us, but they happen all the time none the less. Some for the good, some not.
It is nice, however, that we are all different in some way or the other. It surely would be a dull world if we were all the same and had the same opinions about everything.
Again, thanks Sobe, and everyone else for bring your thoughts to light here.
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
I think I know where you're coming from, Satrana. And I don't like to make a relationship sound like a business partership.Do relationships come with warranties as well?
I don't think concepts like entitlements and compensation within relationships is a good idea. I had better get some relationship insurance otherwise
But if there has been conscious dishonesty on the part of the CD, that's hardly fair on the SO, no matter how she feels about the dressing itself. So the couple needs some way to adjust to a new balance that both partners feel is fair and are comfortable with.
Compensation for how the SO feels about the dressing is an additional issue. Revealing that one is a CD in a long-term relationship instantly changes the perception of the balance of masculine & feminine energies in the relationship. Some women may not be able to cope with this shift at all, and some may need much time & assistance. If the CD told up-front, the SO wouldn't have to go through this turmoil, so he is obliged to compromise to some degree, IMHO.
I'm not trying to attack anyone. And I know how hard it can be to tell anyone that you CD. And I'm certainly not trying to tell all those in the closet that must immediately come out to their wives; that decision is theirs alone to make.
But I do encourage people to tell as early as is practical in the relationship, when you feel you can trust her, but neither are too attached that it will be too painful to split if things don't work out. That could be after a month, or after 3 months. I generally have told my girlfriends around the six week mark, although some I told earlier.
Robin
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
Diagonally parked in a parallel universe
Well put... I think it would be good for us CDing guys to read this periodically as a reminder of what we are putting the women in our lives through...
While it is the reponsibility of the CD to come to terms with that aspect of themselves we can't judge those who have yet to suceed. That is unreasonable blame flinging. It is also not the fault of the CD, even one stuck in the closet, for what the SO goes through, that is seriously unsound. If we chose to be crossdressers, if we fully understood ourselves and then kept it hidden only then would we bear that responsibility. Otherwise it is simply a circumstance. Now I realise that in general human beings have trouble with circumstance as causation, we need things to be someones fault. In reality it's something that just happens. Yep, just happens. We can't point at those who are unable to bring themselves to confess before marriage and say 'you are to blame'. It just doesn't wash. Sure some of us are luckier than others, some are more virtuous than others, some are more self aware than others, some are brought up in a more open minded atmosphere than others.
These are human beings, we can't expect them to be supermen! Yes in an ideal situation the SO should be told. In an ideal situation humans should not eat animals either but until they grow cloned meat in vats I'll just strive for free-range wherever the option is available to me.
There are times when it's just too glib to throw moral lines across human behaviour as a standard.. good ideal yes, fair standard no.
If the SO were told early or late they still have to come to terms with it, the sooner is the better but it also makes it easier for people to reject, run away and wash their hands of human beings. Irrespective what the SO is going through is caused by their expectations not matching reality. Expectations created by a society that fails to prepare them for the possibility that prince charming will wear a pink frock on the weekends. It is the circumstance that puts the SO through what they go through and not the fault of the CD.
Absolutely the CD has to come to terms with who they are, absolutely the CD can't realisticly expect the unconditional acceptance that morally they deserve just as the SO can't realisticly expect the honesty that they morally deserve. Sigh.. it's two sides of the same coin, the situations are soo similar.
Yes attraction is that shallow. It is extremely superficial.. it is also deeply hardwired into human beings through millions of years of natural selection to be superficial and it is a particularly human trait to (occassionally) rise above that and not move on to the younger mate when the current one gets old, grey or gains weight.
Just because what the CDer did (in not telling, or telling way late) may be an accident or unintentional, it doesn't mean they didn't do something wrong.
If I accidentally kill someone, I'll be going to jail. My sentence will be lighter, but I'll still be punished. And I should.
If you hurt someone, whether intentionally or not, that's a bad thing. It's terribly rude to say, 'well, I didn't mean it, so get over it. You are superficial and a bad person for getting upset.'
CDers do something wrong to their ladies when they don't tell them what's going on up front. Now, this sometimes can't be helped and everything. That's fine. I understand that. But I still have the right to be upset if that happens to me. You still did something wrong.
----
Also, I would like to reiterate my intentions from the original post. I am not talking about love. Only attraction. I don't love my boyfriend any less now that he cross dresses. It's the attraction that's affected. I think that's the case with a lot of ladies here.
I am also NOT advocating leaving the relationship if he messes with the attraction quotient. Unless an extreme situation happens (like 24/7 TS all of a sudden) it would be a little weird thing to break up for.
And as for the people who say, 'well, you're going to get old and grey! That's the same!' No it isn't. Getting old and grey is gradual. You don't just suddenly become wrinkly one day. That's also only one aspect of a person. That's nothing like cross dressing, which changes a LOT of things about the CDer (to the eyes of the SO) and changes a LOT of things about the relationship. All in one day.
Then again, I think all GGs get flack here for having a problem with this. That's unfair. People say, 'If you guys break up, she was terrible and a wench and unaccepting...' so on. Maybe... JUST MAYBE, the breakup could have been the CDers fault? Yes, cross dressers can do bad things as well. They are human after all. But that never seems to be the case here. Even if it's the GG bringing up the relationship problems in the forum, it's still her fault(to the league of thread responders). *shakes head*
Sorry... that was a bit of a rant.
Sobe
Last edited by sobe1ove GG; 06-09-2007 at 10:27 AM. Reason: Clarification
Not always. To be punished you must be negligent and lots of accidents occur without negligence and those people aren't punished. Now firstly I'm reffering to the causative factor which is essential to determining right action... and if looked at accuratly we can see that if the CD is incapable of informing the SO (and yes psychologically incapable is valid here) then the CD is ruled out of the causative function. So simply the CD is then not hurting the SO. Yes the SO is hurt. It's just not the CD who caused the hurt. Even if they are capable of informing the SO but don't they are only guilty of failing to ammeliorate the proportion of hurt of the SO! They are still not guilty of a direct causation of hurt to the SO. If the CD tries to hide and 'cure' themselves in their ignorance they have acted on a mistaken premise but there actions are morally right, not morally wrong. They are acting to ameliorate the suffering that they can reasonably predict the SO will suffer, the very motivation required for being up front. Once they discover (and fully realise) that a cure is impossible then they tend to come forward. They are guilty of being wrong about something and therefore making decisions poor only in hindsight not doing the wrong thing.Just because what the CDer did (in not telling, or telling way late) may be an accident or unintentional, it doesn't mean they didn't do something wrong.
If I accidentally kill someone, I'll be going to jail. My sentence will be lighter, but I'll still be punished. And I should.
If you hurt someone, whether intentionally or not, that's a bad thing. It's terribly rude to say, 'well, I didn't mean it, so get over it. You are superficial and a bad person for getting upset.'
CDers do something wrong to their ladies when they don't tell them what's going on up front. Now, this sometimes can't be helped and everything. That's fine. I understand that. But I still have the right to be upset if that happens to me. You still did something wrong.
Now the SO isn't a superficial or bad person for getting upset.. we are talking about multiple victims here, not a villain and a victim. You have the right to be upset, but is the blame justifiable? Is it reasonable to expect your average CD to be capable of understanding themselves enough at the start of the relationship to be upfront? Things just can't be viewed that simplisticly. Morally an argument could be made that it is wrong to not love someone unconditionally and instantaneously accept a CD.. but that is equally a simplistic and unrealistic ideal.
Actually my great aunt went snow white overnight and people can gain weight pretty quickly, sure the speeds might be different and there is less shock with something gradual but it's really just splitting hairs. The age someone is attracted too may not change relative to their own age, lots of people, men and women, are attracted to younger people when they are older. That's the primary reason why so many spend a fortune trying to look younger. It's basicly the same thing, something that is attractive on a surface level (yet still with a profoundly stong piece of biological wiring powering that) changes and ceases to be so attractive.And as for the people who say, 'well, you're going to get old and grey! That's the same!' No it isn't. Getting old and grey is gradual. You don't just suddenly become wrinkly one day. That's also only one aspect of a person. That's nothing like cross dressing, which changes a LOT of things about the CDer (to the eyes of the SO) and changes a LOT of things about the relationship. All in one day.
I've seen CD's criticised here for their attitudes and choices related to their spouses and I've not been here regularly untill reasonably recently. I've also seen folks being awefully understanding of their SO's after being rejected in the most fundamental way. I've seen plenty of folks choose to put themselves through profound agony by repressing this side of themselves because of their profound love for their SO's and compassionate understanding of their inability to accept. I'm not in a position to posit what the average or most frequent response is but I've read enough to know that your use of never is an exaggeration.Then again, I think all GGs get flack here for having a problem with this. That's unfair. People say, 'If you guys break up, she was terrible and a wench and unaccepting...' so on. Maybe... JUST MAYBE, the breakup could have been the CDers fault? Yes, cross dressers can do bad things as well. They are human after all. But that never seems to be the case here. Even if it's the GG bringing up the relationship problems in the forum, it's still her fault(to the league of thread responders). *shakes head*
I am a GG with a CD bf and whether he is dressed as a man or woman I still love him and feel the same inside. The eyes are the same either way and the way they look at me are the same either way.
I've told him there is no difference if he slips into bed in satin shorts or a satin nightie it's still his body next to mine.
I don't believe that appearance has anything to do with love. Sure we all like to look at things that look good to us....that's why we renovate or buy nice homes. Hang beautiful pictures. Maintain our lawns. But that gives us only a superficial satisfaction. It gives us nothing deeper. If you were given every nice looking thing in the world would you truly be happy? Look at your friends. Are you attracted to their looks? Probably not. Yet, do they make you happy to be with them? Do you insist they wear certain clothes or look a certain way when in public with you? Or maybe when they come to your house for dinner and a movie you insist they wear formal attire because, afterall, you'd rather have them look appealing to you or why bother being friends? When they look like slobs you can't laugh at their jokes like you do when they are beautifully dressed, you can't enjoy a good fishing trip with them or a day at the mall. Right?
I've always said, "to know if you truly love someone, if you went blind would you still love them? If they became wheelchair bound but still had their mind perfectly intact, would you still love them. If it was the other way around, would they still love you? Only if you can honestly answer yes to all of those questions do you really have true love."
Attraction to the inner beauty is all that really matters. Everything else can be taken away.
You made a good point in your last sentence there, Charmaine. Attraction is not just about physical elements. But I disagree with the assertion that attraction is superficial. There are superficial elements and there are deep elements. Love and attraction aren't one and the same, but they're interwined. Sobe loves me for many of the same reasons she's attracted to me (sense of humor, similar interests, same general political philosophy, etc.). Attraction happens on many levels, perhaps a large portion of wich we are not even aware.
You can love someone without being attracted to them, but we don't enter into romantic partnerships for this sort of love. If I became unattractive to Sobe overnight, she'd still love me, perhaps more like a brother or a friend, but it's love. But who wants to be romantically involved with a brother or a friend? Say what you will about attraction, but it's important.
Fortunately, attraction isn't static. I love things about Sobe I might not have agt the start of the relationship. Just ast attraction fosters love, love fosters attraction.
This is a great talk by Helen Fisher who's been researching Love, gender differences, and human emotions.
http://www.ted.com/talks/view/id/16
About a third of way through the video she explains the connection and evolution of sex, love, and romanticism.
Also relevant are her comments on gender differences about 10 minutes into the video.
The entire video is great (as are all the videso on the site) and worth watching.
Last edited by 5inchHeels; 06-09-2007 at 01:31 PM. Reason: edit: 17 minutes in gets more in depth about lust, romantic love, and attachment ... glad I went back and watched this again.
So now we have come to a understanding that there is attraction to one's being, and to ones appearance. I think what makes attraction and love as far as a couple, is a combination of both. The biggie i think is the attraction to ones being, with time we age and get old together, and the appearance one diminishes or evolves over time naturally. On the other hand, there is a little thing called heterosexual relationships, involving a male and a female. I still think if one signed up for a relationship as a male, you cant really expect your mate to want to have a female as a partner. To have one come around from time to time, ya, sure, but to slowly watch the man she fell in love with, <both coming from a soulful connection, and a physical one> diminish and slowly die, has got to be a very very hard thing to live threw!! I think if you are a TG or TS, you may very well need to find a mate as your female self, weather it is a man you want, or another woman. especially if you want to be a woman 24/7. There are so many reasons to why a male and female partner help each other in a relationship, sexually, emotionally, and for balancing. Yes my female side is me as well, but my SO is totally not attracted to her, she loves her, but doesn't want to be sexual with her, or cuddle up to her, and i totally understand that, she needs to have me as my male self as well, and mostly. You cant blame our wives if they had left us because we had changed so drastically, if we had failed to give her what she needs. We have a need to dress, and some to even transform, but we must not neglect there needs, both emotionally, and physically.
Chantelle
Wow, what a thread! So much to respond to that it is almost overwhelming. (Guess my wife and I were en route home from Las Vegas when this thread was started.)
I want to play devil's advocate for a moment, Sobe . . . and see if a certain perspective can be introduced. You said:
Now, I understand that part of your thesis is based on those GG's who learn about the CDing after marriage -- often a good while after marriage. That aspect though, as crucial as it is, doesn't really matter in this particular responsive scenario if you will bear with me! Your initial statement went on to say:
Sobe, the main scenario I want to play out is as follows: a man and a woman meet on a first date. Perhaps they met on the internet and had been talking, developing a sense of commonality that they both found attractive enough to pursue. Perhaps it is a blind date, but they talk and find common ground to take another step.
NOW, on this first date, the GG wears a sassy skirt and an attractive blouse -- nice jewelry and shoes. The man wears a simple pair of slacks and a Polo shirt. The two have an interesting "first date" talking about things in common, general likes and dislikes, family, backgrounds, etc.
The two like each other enough to plan a second date. On the second date, the GG wears a coordinated flouncy, attractive skirt and blouse; the man, again, wears a nice Polo and slacks. Then there is the another date . . . she wears a cute pair of capris (he's again in a nice Polo and slacks).
The next dates are much the same . . . romance is budding. To paraphrase one famous sportscaster you, "get the picture." Now, without much planning, romance turns into the ultimate of physical consumation! Okay, so here is where I divide into two different scenarios . . .
Scenario One: things progress romantically. After their first romantic encounter (which was more of a "get a room" nature), the next romantic encounters are a little more planned. IOW, they meet, and in getting prepared, she always puts on a cute nightie; he just strips to bikini satin undershorts (they're men's -- or are they -- oh, who can tell when they're black and the lights are low).
In this first scenario, romance turns to commitment (I am not trying to skip over the vital components of a vibrant, healthy committed relationship -- presume for argument's sake that they are there). The passion of their initial dating and then becoming committed turns into everyday life. (There's a certain psychology to this change, but it isn't significant to this discussion -- that it is natural is all that is being said.) All of a sudden, she rarely wears a skirt; jeans become common attire -- and nighties give way to almost constantly wearing one of his t-shirts to bed (b/c it is more comfortable to her) -- even her silky bikini panties have given way to plain cotton ones. Given the few facts I have presented, has he married a CDer? Even a partial CDer? Is her wearing his t-shirts to bed -- b/c it is what she prefers for a myriad of reasons -- a deception??? She might even put on a pair of his boxers.
NOPE!!! She is considered "chic'," "en vogue," and sexy. (Think about the movie The American President, when Annette Benning's character goes to the President's bathroom and come out wearing nothing but one of his dress shirts! A CDer? NOPE!!! It was meant to be a sexy scene!!! (What if the "President Shepherd" character had then excused himself and come back out in a nightie. Sexy? NOPE -- he'd of been a freak by many! What if he had come out in a lavish Roman silk mini-like dress, like a Caesar (and there are nighties that emulate such attire) -- normal or something's wrong compared with what is society's current norms?!!
Our GM still goes to work in a Polo and slacks, or in a suit. Our GG, the chase now over, almost exclusively wears pants and a blouse (and often a blouse -- like a french cuff -- that is sort of manly).
We all should be able to see the inconsitency of what is and isn't considered normal . . . but, that said, take the same scenario, EXCEPT, after the first session of love-making, the GM tells the GG something to the effect of, "You know, I LOVE nothing better than the feel of silky against silky when we are in bed." She asks what he means, and he explains he would love nothing more than the silky feeling of BOTH of them wearing thigh-hi's and nighties. She says okay -- so they do, and it is acceptable, if not exciting to them both. Later she says she's more comfortable in a t-shirt at night, but he can wear what feels best to him, and he says okay.
An entirely different situation I'd think!!!
WHAT IS IMPORTANT, is that both are free to be who they feel they are in sense and attire, without ridicule or fear of rejection. In fact, dig a little deeper, and both see that in a very real sense, much of what you speak of concerning "attraction" is really from within the person. Sure, there might be some adjustments to seeing something unfamiliar, but it is what is within that ultimately is the winning factor regarding true attraction.
WHAT IS MORE IMPORTANT: there is a VERY GOOD CHANCE that how the GM treats the SO (treatment that she loves) actually extends from his "second self." This gets brought up from time-to-time, but perhaps not often enough. What is on the inside is the most important thing!!! I acknowledge some can't get past the trappings -- most especially if they weren't made known until after marriage -- still, the clothing is just the outward expression of part of the inner self -- and it is that inner self that is what makes up the person's strength of character! How would the GG feel if the GM said, can't deal with this man's t-shirt bit . . . makes me feel weired, etc.?!! Wouldn't most GG's think such was ridiculous -- wouldn't they think (and I've known many who think just this way) why should it matter, I want to be comfortable when I sleep, I don't like nightgowns (they strangle me, or they bunch up wrong, etc.), and t-shirts are what I find comfortable, so what's the big deal???
I think I have been on here long enouh for most to know that I advocate truth about CDing way before marriage -- that I think it only fair so that both partners are free to search their souls and see where they fall on the issue, assuming it is an issue. The bottom line is it boils down to subjective v. objecvtive!
Sobe: you have brought up many crucial issues. What I have said here is ONLY a comment to just a small portion, and granted, I have put certain issue criteria that drives my scenarios in one specific direction (for example, knowing before marriage, and consistency of thought in practice). Regardless, while every situation is different, there are some issues that are inherent to a CDers very being that, IMHO, I believe we should look at the other side of each and every coin! You leave little possibility for support and acceptance, but support and acceptance IS possible!!! Moreso, I would think, when the issues are out front long before marriage -- but still quite possible when revealed/learned after marriage.
Di GG said it so succinctly:
By the way: what is the big deal about body hair and shaving? I know so many non-CDers who shave regularly for various reasons -- it is quite common in certain sports. And, coming back from Las Vegas for the second time this year, where we have seen a number of shows, I can tell you, there are many male performers who shave. Go see Celine Dions show: there isn't a hair on the chest, arms, legs, pits of the males in her show. It just isn't that big of a deal. I live in a very small town type atmosphere and I guarantee you that I have never heard "comment one" about my shaving. Well, I stray afield . . .
Sobe,
thanks for the GG insights. Thinker and a writer, too.
But I love your avatar--perhaps you are an artist. How did you take the picture?
i'm really glad to see a post from a gg on how she feels about
women's perceptions. it's an important subject that you don't
run across a whole lot. (somewhate, but not a lot).
i do believe that many women feel that way, and it's important
to understand that mentality (and fact), but many women
react differently.
regardless, thank you.
Posting Permissions
