Gender Roles V's Cding

[Lucy_Bella]

Not to stomp on another thread that is going around right now about if there are any Cding GG's..

As we all know the different levels and desires to how those of us Xdress, we sometimes forget that some are not out to aquire a Female gender role.. IMHO emulating a female and wanting or feel you should have been a female they are completly two different lifstyles..

In my freakish nature I have the desire to emulated a female , I wish to live my life as a male in a traditional male role, dressing, a side for now. I have felt this way about it for as long as I can remember..I cannot explain why I feel the need to do this and like many fought it most of my life..

But I do feel it's a natural feeling ,how can it not be when so many others live this lifestyle and function or blend in with soceity .. As with everything else in nature I do feel that we xdressers have a counterpart with these same desires in natural female form. IMHO , I also feel it goes by everyday for the most un noticed.

Looking back in history as little a 200 years ago in societys such as the French wealthy and royality did in fact emulate their Femme side just to mention one as there were several others. It was also in those same societys, illegal for women to emulate men as so many do today. ( this is just emulating not living life as a female).

So if you think where to think back in the traditional roles of male and female as a Soceity not in surviving needs.. You would have found the shoe on the other foot and yes indeed we had women Cder's..

[GaleWarning]

On the other thread you mention, Lucy, a poster has stated that women wanted to wear trouser more than 120 years ago and that the reason has something to do with riding bicycles!

I found myself wondering if it might also have had something to do with women's sufferage, which was a HUGE issue at the time.

In broader terms, the right to have the vote was seen not only as a right, but also as an essential step towards equality.

So, too, the right to wear trouser when cycling ... the right to wear slacksuits when teaching ...

[JiveTurkeyOnRye]

I feel like I'm hitting this topic hard today because this is my third response along this route, but here's my rhetorical, impossible to truly know the answer type question: do you think you'd have a desire to present as female if you'd been able to express your feminine side as you were developing?

My theory is no. I imagine that in such a society, the ratio of male to female crossdressers compared to male to female transsexuals would be much heavier tilted towards the latter. I think what happens is, little boys who have a stronger feminine side often get it supresed by talk of "that's for girls!" or "boys don't do that," and so from a very young age there develops an attitude that if a guy likes this type of thing, then he must have to have a female part of his personality, or some part of him must feel female in order to express it.

I use this example a lot but that's cause it best rings true for me. A girl can be "one of the guys," she can toss on a football jersey and jeans, hang out and drink beer and eat nachos and not wear makeup, without having it do anything to challenge her womanhood. That same day she could then get cleaned up, put on makeup and a dress and go out as girly as can be and both activities can be considered normal behavior for her and fit into her same persona. But what if one of those guys watching the game with her also wanted to put on a dress and makeup and go out as "one of the girls" the same way that girl was "one of the guys.". I'd venture to say that in most cases doing so would require he dress as a woman, as opposed to a man in a dress and makeup. Let's take it from a more common example, even the act of getting a manicure or pedicure is considered a violation of manhood by most.

[Frédérique]

I think what happens is, little boys who have a stronger feminine side often get it suppressed by talk of "that's for girls!" or "boys don't do that," and so from a very young age there develops an attitude that if a guy likes this type of thing, then he must have to have a female part of his personality, or some part of him must feel female in order to express it.

The little boy is forced to be untrue to his inherent feminine nature, because he is being groomed for a masculine role in society. Later in life he learns all about how much he has repressed, or been repressed, and it’s much harder to "come out” and be himself. A better parent, guardian, teacher, or role model would say “you can do anything you want to do,” and leave it at that. I really don’t believe in this idea of a “feminine side,” since it’s merely a repressed, underappreciated self that cries for expression, something that is nonetheless there, tucked away to fulfill the expectations of others...


I'd venture to say that in most cases doing so would require he dress as a woman, as opposed to a man in a dress and makeup. Let's take it from a more common example, even the act of getting a manicure or pedicure is considered a violation of manhood by most.

But, I assume, most women would be uncomfortable if a man dressed as “one of the girls” for an outing with them, and they would avoid this situation – I mean, he doesn’t have to do that. He could simply be less overtly masculine, minus the female garb, not on “the make,” and blend right in. Of course, even at this stage you’re stepping out of your gender role and affecting an effeminacy that may be disconcerting to your female friends. Tell me – what do you do when your female friends start talking about abhorrent male behavior? Do you agree with them, and thus emasculate yourself, or do you defend masculinity in the absence of your peers? It gets complicated, and you tread that fine line between being male and “violating your manhood,” as you so aptly described...

[Lucy_Bella]

I feel like I'm hitting this topic hard today because this is my third response along this route, but here's my rhetorical, impossible to truly know the answer type question: do you think you'd have a desire to present as female if you'd been able to express your feminine side as you were developing?

My theory is no. I imagine that in such a society, the ratio of male to female crossdressers compared to male to female transsexuals would be much heavier tilted towards the latter. I think what happens is, little boys who have a stronger feminine side often get it supresed by talk of "that's for girls!" or "boys don't do that," and so from a very young age there develops an attitude that if a guy likes this type of thing, then he must have to have a female part of his personality, or some part of him must feel female in order to express it.

I use this example a lot but that's cause it best rings true for me. A girl can be "one of the guys," she can toss on a football jersey and jeans, hang out and drink beer and eat nachos and not wear makeup, without having it do anything to challenge her womanhood. That same day she could then get cleaned up, put on makeup and a dress and go out as girly as can be and both activities can be considered normal behavior for her and fit into her same persona. But what if one of those guys watching the game with her also wanted to put on a dress and makeup and go out as "one of the girls" the same way that girl was "one of the guys.". I'd venture to say that in most cases doing so would require he dress as a woman, as opposed to a man in a dress and makeup. Let's take it from a more common example, even the act of getting a manicure or pedicure is considered a violation of manhood by most.

Very good points Jiveturkey and Clay and frederique,

But lets keep in mind on the subject that doing as you suggest is mearly taking the natural instict out of both roles and divieding them into two seperate roles in Most societys and for some those new roles are un natural.. Now add cooping up and hendering those feelings through up bringing ..You have a gender role set in societys eyes as natural with desires to express being Femme inside and unable to expose it to others.. At the same time you have others with the same desires that think nothing of it and do not have to go through extremes to satisfy them urges..

[Patricia Jane]

Always interesting, informative and clearilywritten!

[JiveTurkeyOnRye]

Very good points Jiveturkey and Clay and frederique,

But lets keep in mind on the subject that doing as you suggest is mearly taking the natural instict out of both roles and divieding them into two seperate roles in Most societys and for some those new roles are un natural.. Now add cooping up and hendering those feelings through up bringing ..You have a gender role set in societys eyes as natural with desires to express being Femme inside and unable to expose it to others.. At the same time you have others with the same desires that think nothing of it and do not have to go through extremes to satisfy them urges..

That's exactly the point I'm trying to make. I think all men have an inherent feminity just as all women have an inherent masculinity. I don't think we're supposed to divide ourselves up into our masculine and feminine "sides," but rather allow them to be naturally blended. I think if that were the case, you'd see a lot less men feeling the need to create a female persona in order to feel feminine, but rather it would just come across naturally as it occurred to the individual.

I actually believe that crossdressing with the intent to pass reinforces gender roles more than it breaks them. It says "one has to be a woman to do these things."

[GaleWarning]

That's exactly the point I'm trying to make. I think all men have an inherent feminity just as all women have an inherent masculinity. I don't think we're supposed to divide ourselves up into our masculine and feminine "sides," but rather allow them to be naturally blended. I think if that were the case, you'd see a lot less men feeling the need to create a female persona in order to feel feminine, but rather it would just come across naturally as it occurred to the individual.

I actually believe that crossdressing with the intent to pass reinforces gender roles more than it breaks them. It says "one has to be a woman to do these things."

Your last comment is very interesting, JTOR. I have to agree with you. But then, very few people on this forum seem to be interested in the creation of a gender-free society.

It seems to me that men can actually portray a softer, more feminine side of themselves without having to done the clothing of the opposite gender. "By their actions shall ye know them." Likewise, I know quite a few hard-arsed females who portray the masculine side of their personality pretty well, even when in a dress.

Wouldn't it be wonderful if we could all be judged on our inner beings, rather than on the clothes we choose to wear? That is, in fact, what I try to do when I am interviewing for staff in my own little working world.

[Pythos]

I actually believe that crossdressing with the intent to pass reinforces gender roles more than it breaks them. It says "one has to be a woman to do these things."

OMG Jive, I fully agree with this. That is one reason if I can I do not wear breast forms, or tuck when in androgynous mode. Yes I may have an exotic fem look, BUT I am all male (LOL) and just simply flippin the ol'e bird at society and its gender roles

[busker]

On the other thread you mention, Lucy, a poster has stated that women wanted to wear trouser more than 120 years ago and that the reason has something to do with riding bicycles!

I found myself wondering if it might also have had something to do with women's sufferage, which was a HUGE issue at the time.

In broader terms, the right to have the vote was seen not only as a right, but also as an essential step towards equality.

So, too, the right to wear trouser when cycling ... the right to wear slacksuits when teaching ...

This might simply be a modesty issue, as it can certainly be today for a woman riding a bike, though I 'm not sure that it is as important today with our variable morals. Showing an ankle in public when bicycles first arrived on the scene was a social no-no. They did wear pants eventually but also long hose and there was no exposure of flesh.:2c: