lex non scripta

[Magickman]

"Lex non scripta" is latin for unwritten law. It may seem to be a contradiction, but really is expression of social norms that are assumed, rather than written.

That men and women will wear clothing appropriate to their gender is lex non scripta, a social assumption.

The social assumption of appropriateness is a construct, something that most people believe and follow, but without any real substance.

Fashion is the basis of clothing standards, although it is a very fluid concept. Fashion changes constantly, and is without concrete foundation.

People who violate fashion standards are not criminals, only non-normative dressers.

There are costs associated with breaking the rules of fashion. Usually it is just disapproval, but many fear even that.


To risk disapproval requires courage. Courage is always in short supply.

What happens to those who generate disapproval? In reality, at least most of the time, not too much. Fashion is always about something new. Why not take the risk of being on the edge?

What, really, will be the consequence?

[Gabrielle Hermosa]

What, really, will be the consequence?

I my case, I could loose my job, my house, and perhaps even my life. I don't live in a cd-friendly area so it is in my best interest to keep it a secret (my wife knows).

I like what you had to say. I'm sure we all feel that way. But the reality is there are a lot of haters, many of them will want to cause trouble.

Remember - to much of society, we're a bunch of perverted, deviant, freaks. :(

That will change in time, but it does exist today.

[battybattybats]

"Lex non scripta" is latin for unwritten law. It may seem to be a contradiction, but really is expression of social norms that are assumed, rather than written.

That men and women will wear clothing appropriate to their gender is lex non scripta, a social assumption.

Hmm.... but is that a simplistic version. After all crossdressing has existed in all recorded cultures throughout history, sometimes as a taboo sure but often as a sacred practice or a normal and accepted and everyday part of society. This was true in much of the world a mere handful of generations ago and in some places still is.

And much of the change to anti-CDing was from concerted efforts to stamp it out. From the imposition on pro-CDing cultures that many of their accepted practices including crossdressing, homosexual relationships often including same-sex marriage etc of new rules outlawing those practices often in laws and often as part of many christian missionaries practices which often involved coercion either by enticement with goods and food etc or by social ostracism where christian converts had to discourage those continuing such practices and socially punish non converts.

Anti-crossdressing laws with jail punishment existed in much of the Western world not so long ago, so the law was very much sometimes written and done with intent.


The social assumption of appropriateness is a construct, something that most people believe and follow, but without any real substance.

Only because of the resistance to the written laws, the Compton Cafeteria Riot and the Stonewall Uprising followed by intense lobbying and court battles that overturned and changed the written anti-crossdressing laws. Since the written laws have been removed the social legacy of them, the rendering of TG people as invisible and not a part of peoples everyday lives has yet to be undone.


Fashion is the basis of clothing standards, although it is a very fluid concept. Fashion changes constantly, and is without concrete foundation.

People who violate fashion standards are not criminals, only non-normative dressers.

There are costs associated with breaking the rules of fashion. Usually it is just disapproval, but many fear even that.

And of course it can be legal oppression too. From baggy pants in some places to dressing as a Goth considering the Russian proposal to ban all Goth-apparel wearers from government buildings!


To risk disapproval requires courage. Courage is always in short supply.

What happens to those who generate disapproval? In reality, at least most of the time, not too much. Fashion is always about something new. Why not take the risk of being on the edge?

What, really, will be the consequence?

And worse, what are the consequences of conforming? After all the more people 'fit in' the more people who try and force others to fit in will be able to do so and the more pressure there is on those who don't to also 'fit in'. After all we must consider the responisibility of both sides of every action or inaction.

So then is the choice not just one of risk or no risk but one of personal risk or of increasing the burden on the backs of those who take the risk?

[TGMarla]

Fashion is always about something new. Why not take the risk of being on the edge?My fashion statement isn't on the edge. It's twenty to thirty years old! I just happen to like that era in feminine attire. My actually wearing it may seem a bit edgy, but in reality, I do my very best to appear as a woman when I dress, so I'm not really very avant garde there, either.

[Tashee]

I give up my Union Steward job real soon. A funny thing happened last night. Of of the officers was 'wearing' his girlfriend's underwear. no was he? IT don't matter. They wanted to fire him for being outta dress code.

I say fine- I know what dress code is and the are sticklers. I say bury it. Or I am callin Bill the Bloviator O'man on this- They say go ahead he will be on our side. I say, You think so? you want to take that chance.

Just why is an officer getting his privacy invaded to see what underwear he is wearing? it sounds like the wrong fellow is getting suspended. I think we can chop one up for the good girls. And possibly kinky men?

I did tell them move forward and I promise a 3 ring circus... The civil rights folks. transgendered. and possibly the gay right folk on the steps along with Bill O...

It feels good to go out a winner---sorry for digressing.

luv you girls and admire you so much:love:

[scarlett]

Tashee, what kind of union are you in? United Bigots and Assholes international?
My union has all kinds of anti discrimination rules. I'm not sure that they ever anticipated me but I underdress daily and don't worry too much about getting caught.

[docrobbysherry]

Some of us have A LOT to lose, if we're found out! U balance closet CDing against risking everything u built your life assembling, for what? To walk outside in ladies things? Maybe if I was very young, and had nothing to lose! But, folks with families, family friends, well established employment, and community standings, have TOO MUCH TO LOSE!:eek:


My fashion statement isn't on the edge. It's twenty to thirty years old! I just happen to like that era in feminine attire. My actually wearing it may seem a bit edgy, but in reality, I do my very best to appear as a woman when I dress, so I'm not really very avant garde there, either.

Plus, as Marla says:
Stay in your closet and dress any way u please! No worries about fitting in, wearing the appropriate outfit, being noticed or not, passing or not, etc., etc.:doh:

It's MY fantasy world! If I go out, I MUST conform in SO MANY WAYS! But, in my closet, I'm limited only by my imagination!:devil:

Lex non scripta, not withstanding!

[Tashee]

Close sweets close:devil:

[DameErrant]

Unwritten laws are sometimes enforced more vigourously than the written ones, (for example, see the Obama administration's attitudes toward Tax Cheats.) And the penalties, not being written down and limited, can be more severe than for written laws.

For example, I just got banned from one Christian Bulletin Board, (for the second time,) for defending the transgendered. Not severe particularly, but the worst they could do.

In my case, it is simply prudent to not come out publicly. I will practice in the closet, or at my support group meetings, but will seldom go out in Public.

One sage wrote, "True Individuals will not object to wearing a mask once in a while, so as not to provoke the conformists." Not an exact quote, nor can I find the source, but I will try to look it up.