Transvestism Career Path

[Frédérique]

So, I’m reading this book I got at the local library – “Cross Dressing, Sex, and Gender” by Vern L. Bullough and Bonnie Bullough, and I came across the following list, based on another list written in 1970 by the sociologist H. Taylor Buckner. This is an updated circa 1993 six-step "Transvestism Career Path,” another attempt to explain the unexplainable:

Step I: A genetic predisposition and physiological factors, including hormonal secretions and neural patterns, combine to produce a boy who is less active and less aggressive than his peers.
Step 2: Family and social factors influence the child: The mother may be the dominant figure in the family. The socioeconomic status of the family may be high. Respectability may be highly regarded by the family and peer group. The culture may stigmatize homosexuality. The family may be homophobic. In addition, various idiosyncratic social forces intervene.
Step 3: The child or adolescent stumbles onto the joy of cross dressing and masturbation. Orgasm occurs and is a reinforcement. The activity remains clandestine and is possible without any loss of respectability or other punishment.
Step 4: Marriage to a conventional partner takes place, and thoughts of any same-sex orientation are suppressed.
Step 5: The sex partner joins in with and supports the cross-dressing activity, or grudgingly accepts it, or leaves. If she leaves or other losses are felt, the activity may well accelerate. A supportive partner also helps the activity to increase. The grudging partner may hamper the activity, but the relationship is probably not a pleasant or lasting one.
Step 6: If the subject discovers the transvestite clubs or publications, his activities are shaped by the norms of the group. His cross dressing escalates, he adopts a female name, and going out dressed in public becomes a valued goal.

I don’t agree with most of this explanation, and I don’t seem to fit the “norm” in our own little world (according to outsiders), either. Let me explain, step by step:

Step 1: I was definitely a less active and less aggressive boy – still am.
Step 2: My mother was not the dominant figure in my family, but I identified and empathized with her at all times. Social respectability was not an issue, and homosexuality was never discussed (nor was transvestism, for that matter). I was free to explore my feelings.
Step 3: These were two different “stumblings” at different times for me. They always try to equate the two in some way, but, in my case, cross dressing suppresses sexual thought. It’s like going to a secret oasis.
Step 4: I’ve never been married, but I had a girlfriend that was so GG that I stopped dressing for three years. She couldn’t understand why I loved to go shopping for clothes with her! Apparently, heterosexual transvestism is beyond explanation, because it's curiously absent from this particular study.
Step 5: N/A, but I’ve had supportive, grudging, and uninformed girlfriends – does that count? Come to think of it, everybody left! There certainly have been “other losses,” though…
Step 6: I think I’ve found the transvestite club! Hooray! Ecsalation = happiness.

I must say I hate it when people try to explain things that seem natural to me, but its funny to read nonetheless. Obviously, every girl here has followed her own unique “career path” to where we are right now. Please let me know your thoughts on this…

[carhill2mn]

Vern Bullough's opinions have been quite controversial for years. As you noted, this was written a long time ago (even the update).

[Leslie Langford]

The Bulloughs don't seem to address the in utero "hormone bath" theory here that is now being given much credence as a biological basis for crossdressing - probably since this is a more recent development.

Aside from that, I would say that I am pretty much a textbook case based on their other criteria.

I was also an only child, which I think added to my predisposition to evolve into a crossdresser, given the overall environment I grew up in, including a dominant mother and a passive father.

[Joni Marie Cruz]

Hi Frederique-

How's your day, girl?

One thing I try to remember about things like this is that these are models or constructs to explain certain types of behavior and not necessarily "true" or even semi-accurate. It's just like physicists used phlogiston or aether to describe the propogation of electromagnetic waves back in the day. It worked because it accounted for what appeared to be happening with the knowledge they had at hand. More knowledge and investigation led to more accurate descriptions and theories.

Hugs...Joni Mari

[Ras]

I don't necessarily agree with that career path as well. We all have a different perspective as well as what we like and how we prefer to dress

[mklinden2010]

Frédérique,

Cool. I remember those authors - from a long time ago.

Thanks for the update.

I have to credit the writers with creating a readable career path.

I'll grant that much of it is "just" based, step by step, on "probability" rather than certainty for any particular person.

But, I also have to say, in terms of making sense of what rarely gets discussed scientifically, the 6 step process (or, 4, or, 10...) as even a rough model is probably better than NO model, or, attempting to explain everything, for example, using the Bible.

Crossdressing makes sense, of course, or people wouldn't do it. There's all kinds of payoffs possible, and most are obviously worth the downsides that can come along with it.

But, that's a different chart...

[tricia_uktv]

Frederique, youu should be more noisy! It sort of fits for me

Step1 I was less aggresive but more active
Step2 No
Step3 This happened as a child not an adolescent
Step4 Yes
Step5 Yes and she left, but it wasn't really about my crossdressing. She did support me in the early days. (Actually I think you can only answer yes whatever way you look at it)
Step6 Yrs, that was where I learned to be myself, but that was my step 1

We are all different and have different reasons and motivations for doing what we do; so I'm not sure how relevant this research is. Fun to have a think about however, thanks.

[windycissy]

What a hoot, as if we were all the same...the clinical, disapproving tone almost reminds me of Reefer Madness

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/e/e2/ReeferMadnessPoster.jpg

[trisha59]

1. Nope liked rough housing playing war etc.
2. Father was an HS teacher and Mother was a Grade school teacher grew up in a middle class socially excepting house hold
3. Started Cding long before finding out about that other thing
4. Did get married but never had a need to suppress any same-sex orientation
5. Does not apply
6. If this forum counts as a transvestite clubs or publication my dressing has actually decreased since joining.

Don't quite fit the mold do I.

[Empress Lainie]

The arrogance of the people who write psychological treatises about things they know nothing about always amazes me.

They are usually at least half wrong, sometimes completely wrong.

I certainly don't fit any of that mold except #1. I never even crossdressed. One day I realized I have always been female and began 24/7 the next day. Never been happier in my life.
And I always am accepted as a woman.
Oh, my own humble opinionated opinion is that all psychiatrists and psychologists are a little bit nuts themselves, and studied the field to prove everyone is.

[Granny Gray]

Researching Gender issues has been much of Bullough's career.
In the mid-60 I first became aware of his work by way of The Armerican Journal of Sociology which published his article on "Transvestites in History."
In the referenced writing by the Bullough's in this thread, as we read it picking the generalizations apart by comparing our individual history to the gross generalized "pattern" he spelled out is fraught with hazard that we will either discount what Bullough wrote or worse try to live up to a pattern that is just not right for us as individuals.
We must recognize in the world of academia progress in reporting something not previously accepted is painfully slow. Also, the axiom: "Publish or perish" is very real.
To publish is unbelievably hard because of the economic constraints which dictate what is published must be profitable and if it goes too much against the current opinions of the "authorities" in the field, it will be panned and fail to sell. So, the rigors of academic discipline constrains what is published to a glacial rate of change. What is new must be subjected to the most rigorous standards of substantiation. The result is most academic writing is grossly redundant restatement of what has been previously published but with small kernels of new data and slightly varied conclusions
Within this framework, the academic literature in many fields displays, what i call glacial progress of thought. Bullough was a professor at Cal State Northridge the last I heard of him. He had his academic standing to guard and protect so he wrote in a seemingly detached or even condescending tone.
Bear in mind, as you consider the constraints under which such things are written as this work of Bullough, he of necessity owing to the vast range of diversity among us, wrote only in the broadest of sweeping generalizations. We cannot allow ourselves to be defined by generalizations probably published under the existing constraints of the glacial speed of developing thought in the academic setting.
As one trained in the academic world but not, in retirement, constrained by it, I'm pleased at least to see people like Vern Bullough publishing since it demonstrates that our being is recognized and studied, even if the published results of those studies have glaring exceptions in our own personal histories. J.

[Frédérique]

Bear in mind, as you consider the constraints under which such things are written as this work of Bullough, he of necessity owing to the vast range of diversity among us, wrote only in the broadest of sweeping generalizations. We cannot allow ourselves to be defined by generalizations probably published under the existing constraints of the glacial speed of developing thought in the academic setting.

Yes, I agree -- glacial, indeed. I assume that more thorough studies have been done recently, but the original “Transvestism Career Path” thought up by Buckner (and modified by Bullough) was based on an in-depth interview study with only seven transvestites! Is it any wonder these sweeping (and inaccurate) generalizations occur?

[Granny Gray]

Right. I did my primary study over a 20 year period involving following about 120 various people involving hetroxexual crossdressers, would be "changlings", gay "drag queens", and many simply confused people. In addition I observed about 2 dozen wives of crossdressers. All of these folk I got to know, some quite well, and interviewed in depth. I found as far as defining rules, there was only and it began with the word: EXCEPT... For every generalization there were exceptions. I don't think there was any "researcher contamination" since I was able to relate, I guess it could be called, in a STEALTH mode, because my primary objective in studying Psychology in graduate school was a totally SELFISH motive. I couldn't afford a schrink and at the time the whole of the helping professions were hung up on and made a demigod of Sigmund Freud. Intuitively, since the very though of sexual intimacy with a male induced the VOMIT reflex in me, I know I wasn't homosexual and at the same time I loved the feel of girly clothes when I wore them. So I knew any Psychiatric or Psychological theory that equated crossdrssing with homosexuality was simply simplistic and totally WRONG. I set out to find out about ME, and I did. J

[donnalee]

Sounds to me like "How do I score some grant money with a half-baked analysis of something I know little about (but just slightly more than the grantor)". Then I publish this drivel at the grantor's expense, thereby securing me a reputation as an expert and a cushy job with tenure at a willing but brain-dead university.
In Russia during the 30s, in the Stalin era, there was a "scientist" by the name of Lysenko, who would bend his "research" to Uncle Joe's will. He once stated that if you cut off the tail off a female rat, her offspring would be born tail-less, because that was what Stalin thought.
Lysenkoism is not dead. I was brought up with a great respect fo the scientific process as the best tool for determining truth, and have watched with horror over the past 25 or 30 years, as this has been perverted into a farce in order to provide politically correct answers.
Most of the latest "scientific research" has involved percentages so small as to be within a reasonable margin of error, and therefore meaningless. The reasons for this are explained above.
Sorry about the rant, but this pushed one of my buttons.
Donna :Angry3:

[Veronica Nowakowski]

1: I was definitely less active and aggressive than most boys, though I'm surprised to see a connection.

2: My mother is damn sure dominant, always wore the pants, made the final decision, etc. Respectability is highly regarded, and I would not want to tell my mom that I was gay (if I were), don't want to tell her about this. She's the kind that it's fine for others, but I don't think she'd accept such things in her family.

3: Definitely it started with masturbation, curiosity stemming from the homemade sex doll.

4 and 5: never got there, damned bad luck with women, 1 sex partner, and though I proposed on 3 occasions, no marriage.

6: Did that before I joined, but being able to do it regularly and flawlessly is a valued goal :)

[erica12b]

wow thats me right down the list what did i win ,

a sad life alone , wanting more but afraid to be myself tell its too late in life and im full of regrets,

can i just have the stuffed tebby bear on the top shelf please

[dawnmarrie1961]

Step I: I was never less active and less aggressive than my peers. Actually I was the complete opposite. I always tried to push myself to do better than I was physically capable of in sports. Even if I failed in the attempt I would at least go down trying. I didn't care if we won the game. I just wanted to do my best .

Step II: My mother was the dominant figure in our household, the bread winner, the stable one. My father was the formidable figure, the disciplinarian. Most people respected my father because of his enormous size. It was like having the incredible hulk for a father. During the late 60's and early 70's their was a cultural stigma with homosexuality. I wouldn't describe my father as being homophobic. I remember watching a movie on cable tv when I was 12 that involved a homosexual couple and for some reason my father said to me "You know I would have a problem if you were homosexual." That surprised me coming from him. I don't know if he knew about me cross dressing at that time. If he did he might have associated cross dressing with being a homosexual because in those days it was just assumed. Today we know that assumption is incorrect.

Step III: Masturbation? Oh come on! Get a life! I didn't have my first boner and wet dream until I was 15 years old. Was cross dressing for years before that! I must have been a late bloomer on the masturbation scale.

Step IV: I did get married. And I tried suppressing my cross dressing behavior. The only same sex orientation that I thought of was girl on girl. Often when I had sex with my wife I would imagine that I was a female. I often told her how much I envied her body.

Step V & VI: After the traumatic experience of losing my company to hostile takeover by one of my business partners, the loss of my oldest daughter and almost losing my wife due to attempted suicide, I gave up the facade and told my wife the truth about my cross dressing. See was very understanding and accepting at first of this behavior. She enjoyed the "fantasy" in the bedroom. Her acceptance reinforced my behavior and accelerated it. In a period of a few short months I was dressing female all the time and going out in public without any second thought to how it was affecting my loved ones. Started taking female hormones with doctors supervision, big mistake. I gained so much weight to my hip and buttocks that it scared the hell out of me. When my wife finally realized what the end result of all these changes was going to be she stopped feeling comfortable with our sex life. It didn't seem natural to her anymore. Eventually our we ended our marriage and went our separate ways.

This is the way I see it. Cross dressing , for me, was used as a defense mechanism when I was younger. Because I did it in secret I never had to question the validity of it and so I never made the attempt to substitute a positive behavior in its place. My years of cross dressing in secret only reenforced the behavior into my personality. When I finally decided to tell my wife I took her acceptance as a validation of my behavior and it quickly accelerated out of control. Now I have to accept what I have done. I did so out of my own free will. With little or no regard to those around me who it hurt. Sometimes I think I was very selfish. I could have done things differently so as not to hurt the ones I love. It may not have changed the outcome but it sure would make it a lot easier to live with.


Be safe. Be smart

Dawn Marrie

[sissystephanie]

Yes, I agree -- glacial, indeed. I assume that more thorough studies have been done recently, but the original “Transvestism Career Path” thought up by Buckner (and modified by Bullough) was based on an in-depth interview study with only seven transvestites! Is it any wonder these sweeping (and inaccurate) generalizations occur?

There certainly is no wonder in my mind about why such Stupid generalizations occur! I would bet that the only reason it was published was because he was a Professor. Basing a Treatise on 7 interviews is totally out of line! And referring to Crossdressers as Transvestites shows his lack of real knowledge, or at least his willingness to accept facts! The word "Transvestites" was coined many years ago to describe younger men who dressed as females for sexual purposes! Although it may now be found in some psychology books, it is not the normal description of crossdressing as most of us know it. It was, and still is, the description of one particular group of crossdressers. I Do Not fit in that group, and resent very strongly being called a Transvestite. In fact, the last person who called me that some 40 years ago still walks with a permanent limp after I responded! A good kick to the knee took care of that!

We are what we are, and I thank God for that!

[Frédérique]

The word "Transvestites" was coined many years ago to describe younger men who dressed as females for sexual purposes!


Hi Stephanie!
You may be interested to know that I heard the exact same definition for “cross dresser” a few years ago! I have absolutely no problems with the label “transvestite,” because that’s what I am. I do take issue with the word “drag,” but let’s not split hairs just yet…

In this particular study, transvestism, drag, FTM and transsexualism all come under the “umbrella” of cross dressing. Just like at this site, everything is lumped together for convenience, which tells me how society wants to see us. Surely we’re all cut from the same cloth, right? If only they would take a closer look, and see how different we all are, we might actually get somewhere with awareness and acceptance.

[sissystephanie]

Hi Stephanie!
You may be interested to know that I heard the exact same definition for “cross dresser” a few years ago! I have absolutely no problems with the label “transvestite,” because that’s what I am. I do take issue with the word “drag,” but let’s not split hairs just yet…

In this particular study, transvestism, drag, FTM and transsexualism all come under the “umbrella” of cross dressing. Just like at this site, everything is lumped together for convenience, which tells me how society wants to see us. Surely we’re all cut from the same cloth, right? If only they would take a closer look, and see how different we all are, we might actually get somewhere with awareness and acceptance.

Frederique,

I find it hard to believe that such a sensative lady as you would label yourself as a "Transvestite!" Do you really enjoy having sex with men while dressed? That is what Transvestites do, and that is the main reason they dress! Yes, I know the word is taken from the Latin for crossdresser, but the original reference was to a specific group doing it for a specific reason! I don't fit that group!!

You are right about all of us being "lumped" together. I am not a Transvestite, nor a Transgender, and certainly not a Transsexual! I am a Crossdresser, plain and simple. While I may be in "Drag," according to some definitions, I just consider myself to be wearing what looks and feels good! Women's clothing!!:thumbsup::thumbsup:

In the past I did go all the way, with wig and makeup to really look feminine so as to "pass." I did that so my late wife and I could go out as two girls, which we did often. As you probably know, my wife is now gone. So I skip the wig and makeup and just go out dressed as a guy in a skirt!:heehee: I feel way more comfortable in female clothing, but don't feel like a female!! A wise Therapist from years ago told that was because I was totally aware that I was a man! Hence my tag line!:thumbsup:
Unlike some of us. I like my male self and have no desire whatsoever to change that. But I do admit to liking the fit, feel, and look of feminine clothing! From the skin out!

[Granny Gray]

Frederique: Back in the dark ages, I flew B-47s out of what is now Salina Municipal Airport, then Schilling AFB. Did some graduate work at night at Bethany Col and occasionally ventured to your town for a round of Golf... It's a small world, for sure. Oh yes, I DETEST the use of the word "DRAG". It is an INSULT to all women.
We could argue endlessly about name tags and achieve NOTHING. A unique PERSON is what I am, CROSSDRESS is what I do, and a WOMAN is how I present my persona to be.

J

[Frédérique]

I find it hard to believe that such a sensative lady as you would label yourself as a "Transvestite!" Do you really enjoy having sex with men while dressed? That is what Transvestites do, and that is the main reason they dress! Yes, I know the word is taken from the Latin for crossdresser, but the original reference was to a specific group doing it for a specific reason! I don't fit that group!!


Stephanie, definitions evolve over time. Perhaps since Latin is a “dead language,” your definition of transvestite may be termed obsolete, or at least inaccurate, here in 2009? There are different kinds of transvestites, if you care to look. The whole point of this thread is to rail against being pigeon-holed by society (or the experts, in this case). There’s the sexual transvestite (what you are referring to), and the tactile transvestite, to name just a couple. I am the latter. It’s as simple as that. If you grew up with your particular definition, and it repulses you, that’s OK with me*.

I just want to say that homosexuality does not repulse me in any way, shape, or form, any more than the natural world repulses me. When I wear women’s clothing, society will immediately “brand” me as a homosexual, but it doesn’t bother me at all. Gay men, along with my fellow male visual artists and the men that inhabit our little transgendered cyber-clubhouse here are the only males I like, but I myself am not gay. Pity. I grew up in a world of brutes, and it’s only natural I would seek out more sensitive types. This crazy world desperately needs less maleness! As for society’s misperceptions about us, it’s all about laziness, isn’t it? So, to answer your original question -- no, I do not dress up to have sex with men, yet I prefer the label (and my definition) of “transvestite.” Cross dressing is just too broad a term, IMHO…

*Since you brought it up, Stephanie, how come you (obviously) have no problem with the word “sissy” and its attendant homosexual connotations? Just wondering – I’m a sissy myself…



Oh yes, I DETEST the use of the word "DRAG". It is an INSULT to all women.
We could argue endlessly about name tags and achieve NOTHING. A unique PERSON is what I am, CROSSDRESS is what I do, and a WOMAN is how I present my persona to be.



Yes, I agree with you, Granny – “drag” is an insult to all women! That’s another word that is misused time and time again. There’s a lot of mislabeling going on these days. We are unique individuals, one and all…
And, yes, my town is quite a “small” world! Is it any wonder I try to keep out of sight? :heehee:

[Frédérique]

I certainly killed that thread! Well done, Freddy… :facepalm:


Here’s the original five-step “Transvestism Career Path” compiled by sociologist H. Taylor Buckner, circa 1970, compiled from an in-depth interview study of only seven transvestites:

Step 1: Somewhere between the ages of 5 and 14, the young boy tries on an article of women’s clothing and experiences sexual gratification, usually through masturbation.

Step 2: As a young man the subject experiences some difficulties related to his perception of himself as masculine. The failure can be in any realm: sports, marriage, or occupation, but he interprets it as an indication of inadequate masculinity. His performance may not actually be poor; he may be a perfectionist, and he falls short of his own unreasonable goals.

Step 3: He is blocked from seeking a homosexual outlet. He may have a socialized aversion to homosexuality, or he may not know how to find a homosexual partner.

Step 4: Blocked in both the heterosexual and homosexual directions, he returns to the pleasures of wearing female apparel and masturbating. He elaborates the fantasies surrounding this act. He may learn from the literature that transvestism exists, so he adopts the sexual script that goes with the label.

Step 5: His gratification pattern becomes fixed in the transvestite identity with the development of the other persona, a feminine name, and an elaborate fantasy life. A dyadic relationship is encapsulated in his transvestite activities, and he realizes that he has within himself both a male and a female, so he can play out many of the culturally prescribed heterosexual dyadic scripts. He can buy himself gifts and seek comfort from his feminine persona. He may find that his actual marriage is less satisfying for tension release than his internal marriage.

Well, he got one thing right – I am a perfectionist. I must say I like the idea of an internal marriage, though...

[PaulaJaneThomas]

And referring to Crossdressers as Transvestites shows his lack of real knowledge, or at least his willingness to accept facts! The word "Transvestites" was coined many years ago to describe younger men who dressed as females for sexual purposes!

Wrong: the term transvestite was coined by Magnus Hershfeld. Hershfeld basically divided trans people into two groups - transsexuals and transvestites. Sexual orientation has nothing to do with Hershfeld's original classification (although Hershfeld believed that gay and trans people formed a third gender). Transvestite is Latin and translated in English simply means crossdresser. Anybody who tries to attach more to it than that probably has some hidden agenda.

[darla_g]

I am consistently amazed at what the need is to put individuals in little categories thus defining them.

[Jacqueline Louise]

No wonder we are so confused, we cause ourselves so much debate. The word Transvestism is GREEK, correctly identified as crossdressing. Fine, there may well be some sexual gratification, but that is not the driving force. It stems from complex infantile relationship issues, mother/father, and is accepted as being usually triggered by some trauma associated with one or other parent(but usually mother) at an very early age. Thus there needs to be several simultaneous(sic) events occurring. We continue to view ourselves badly because of the relationship issues that occurred, and seek comfort and security in whichever way we can. We need acceptance by the persons causing the issues, before we can achieve self-acceptance. With many persons that is never realised or possible, which is why we continue to search for solutions. At best we can learn to tolerate ourselves as masculine and feminine, and just enjoy it in whichever way we can.

[RachelZ]

Its funny to me because the person who wrote this must have spent so much time studying, writing papers, editing, and working on trying to get a clear understading of us. Mean while there are so many people here from different worlds that it proves that there is no set formula or mold to us. I just love proving the so called smart people wrong.:D

[Rachel Morley]

Hi Frédérique,

Interesting hypothesis .... I guess. :strugglin: :bonk: I agree this is very generalized and I too don't fit into it's framework. Nevertheless, it was interesting to read.

[Crysten]

The key statement in this whole thread is what Freddie said - people are lazy. Rather than look at a TG person (pick your flavor) and learn about the topic, most people will glance, say "fag", and look away. Simple as that. If it doesn't effect them directly, most people don't care one way or the other, and won't expend the energy to learn the various "classifications" as evident in this thread.

As for labels, I ignore them all. I wasn't aware of the term "transgendered" until relatively recently, and had always considered myself EITHER a crossdresser OR transvestite (never really liked either term personally). If I was to define myself now, I would say transgendered, but only becuase I like the term better.

As for the career path, some of that is me to the tee, some of it not, and really, what diffenence does it make? I am who I am, trying to define an entire class of human beings like that is totaly distasteful to me.

Crysten