Men being men part 2 .... the dark side (& comment on androgyny in the mainstream)

[Sara Jessica]

About 2 1/2 years ago, I started a little thread called "Men being, well...men" ...

www.crossdressers.com/forums/showthread.php?94956-Men-being-well....men&highlight=

...in which I contrasted a whimsical part of the male experience (those happy guys in the home improvement section) against my own experiences in that world coupled with the gender issues I cope with daily.

Since then, I've had a lot of thought about my place in this world, that I "get" the gender binary thing even though I was drafted onto the wrong team. My state of being has to do with crossing over rather than creating a place in society where boys can look like girls and vice-versa as the new normal.

Yet I have been fascinated with those who incorporate a level of androgyny into their presentation and although I have been thinking of this concept for a while, it happens that Pythos managed to sum up such a perspective so very well, better than I ever could...


"The ever present want of clothing styles and choices to be equal among the genders, no matter the sex of that person." I personally do not want to be a woman. I have no desire for a sex change. I am who I am, and want the freedom that is held from me and others due to hate, ignorance, bigotry and sexism.

Yet despite the fact I feel as if I understand this POV, I have a really hard time seeing it cross over into the mainstream. Even in major metropolitan areas, I cannot picture skirts hanging along side typical male clothing in men's departments in places as varied as department stores (ie-Macy's, etc), specialty shops (ie-PacSun, etc) or mass market (Target, WalMart, etc). Perhaps in trendy and specialty stores but not so much in the mainstream.

Take this concept into small town America and I think the androgyny concept would be even more foreign.

Which gives me a chance to segue into some experiences I had over this last weekend. It was a time of balance, a camping trip where all things feminine were rightfully eschewed in favor of a trip with my family. In doing so though, I observed some typical males in small town America. Those who caught my observation were youngish, in their late-teens into their 20's, behaving with their chest-thumping / testosterone-fueled bravado that is common in that age range. Both stereotypically common and absolute-reality-common.

I couldn't help but interject gender issues on those I observed and although any of them could be candidates for having the TG thing going on, chances are overwhelming that none did. They appeared happy as clams being the guys that they are. Males who give zero thought to their gender when they wake up in the morning. Guys who do not lament the lack of "fashion choices" when compared to women, who have no problem in their biggest fashion decision of the day is whether their t-shirt clashes with the boxer shorts which are prominently riding above their cargo pants (if they even care about that sort of thing). Guys who I could be pretty certain would reject the notion of wearing a skirt no matter where it was sold and how "male" it was marketed.

Then fast-forward to a situation which arose in our campground, one where I found myself in between two classically stereotypical males who were about to come to blows (one of whom was a relative of mine and was not the aggressor in this situation). Normally, being involved in a confrontation such as this would have sent my heart rate through the roof but somehow, I channeled my true nature and ended up as the peacekeeper with only a slight sense of heightened stress. Yet when all was said and done, all I could think about "aggressive man" was that beside the fact his behavior was absolutely stereotypically pig-male, he too would not be likely to shop the local WalMart for a new skirt.

So to bring all of this full circle, the TG world is real to all of us with methods of expression all over the map. We strive for mere acceptance, to live our lives as Pythos describes, free from hate, ignorance, bigotry and sexism. But does any semblance of androgyny gaining traction in the mainstream fit in with these goals or is this a separate and distinct goal? And for those who present in public with more of a "guy-in-a-dress" look (rather than an androgynous and/or utilitarian presentation), do any of these bigger social agenda type of goals apply to your situation?

[Pythos]

The behavior you present here is the sort of behavior I think is fostered by the ridiculous notion "boys will be boys". This idiocy starts when the male baby is allowed to be a little s__t, wheras the female child is coddled. (your experience may vary). Boys are "allowed" to roughhouse where girls are discouraged from such actions. Later on these notions transform into the "bravado, chest thumping, stupid (in my book) behavior that personally I think drags men into the mesozoic ooz. Yes I have been with girls that have roughhoused with the best, but boys in many ways are permitted to be so much worse due to the "boys will be boys" notion.

These guys you describe have most likely from day one given rules about how boys and men are to behave, they have had NO choice in what to choose. They most likely completely subscribe to the idea that men should not pay attention to appearance, and should just be satisfied with what they have when it comes to style. They most likely subscribe to the idea that women should take longer getting ready for a date and a guy should just be able to throw on a pair of jeans and shirt, and head out the door. Is this a wrong way of going about life? In my book, this behavior is no more wrong than what I strive to do. However, if one of these guys were to think it was his place to beat me up, deny me a job, deny me services, and in essence make my life hell because I look beyond the stupid notion "boys will be boys" and strive for true equality, then he is now in the "crummy example of a male" category, at least with me, and I would hope with other people.

I hope I was able to address the issues in this post. :P

[sandra-leigh]

They appeared happy as clams being the guys that they are. Males who give zero thought to their gender when they wake up in the morning. Guys who do not lament the lack of "fashion choices" when compared to women, who have no problem in their biggest fashion decision of the day is whether their t-shirt clashes with the boxer shorts which are prominently riding above their cargo pants (if they even care about that sort of thing).

I don't think I ever worried much about whether my t-shirt clashed with anything else visible, and I didn't spend my time lamenting over the "lack of fashion choices". I basically didn't care much about my appearance before I became a cross-dresser. As long as it wasn't suit-and-tie; and if it wasn't mainstream, that was good. For example, I had no problem wearing T-shirts, but what I shopped for was hand-painted or obscure T-shirts, not even anything mass-market like Metallica. My wife used to scold me a bit for picking out nice clothes for her but wearing "whatever" for myself.

Suppression? Yup, could be. But you never know which of those young men were suppressing as well, and would have hated to have been directly given some female clothing but would have been thrilled to have "found" some clothing that fit them.

Now if wearing that kind of clothing had been accepted in society... I wouldn't have had to bottle things up inside.

[ReineD]

In direct contradiction to Pythos, I have to say that we do live in a gender binary world and I don't see it disappearing, no matter how much we, as members of this community, (which I also consider myself a part of through my association with my SO), would wish it were otherwise.

If the gender divide were caused by an overly strict and stereotypical gender socialization mechanism and if it did not sit well with most of these male-socialized men, believe me there would be a much greater segment of the male population wishing to break free from it in adulthood. The internet expands everyone's choices and memberships in forums such as this one would increase 1,000 fold. And then there would be no need for them since we would all be androgynous.

Nothing will ever take away the fact that most boys want to be boys and most girls want to be girls (even if said girls wear blue jeans). It is not a stupid notion. It is simply a fact of life.


The best we can hope for is a broader recognition and acceptance of gender and sexual diversity, which can only be achieved through more research, media exposure, changing laws, and widespread education. But if or when this should ever happen, I seriously doubt it will make the testosterone laden men want to wear skirts as a fashion statement, although perhaps a few men who are more on the culturally creative edge might want to wear them to keep cool in the summer. :)

And if perchance skirts were to find their way into the mainstream, there would be just as great a difference between male and female styles as to make guys want to not wear the girly skirts that M2F TGs would continue to want to wear. The gender fashion divide would be the same as it is now, even though fashion will have continued it's evolution process as it always has.

[Gillian Gigs]

So much of boys being boys, and then it moves into adulthood has to do with the "pecking order" of things. Who is going to get to be the "alpha dog", and so on to the bottom of the pile. We even see it in girls that fight to hang off of the arm of the football star. Will it ever change, I doubt it. Testosterone seems to be the source, whether it is a problem or not depends on which side of the fence you are on. As men get older, testosterone levels decline, and so does the aggresive behavior. Short of giving all men "T" blockers, I see no changes, so the races will still continue. The arm wrestling, fights, bravado, and so on will continue. Thus is life.

[Jason+]

So to bring all of this full circle, the TG world is real to all of us with methods of expression all over the map. We strive for mere acceptance, to live our lives as Pythos describes, free from hate, ignorance, bigotry and sexism. But does any semblance of androgyny gaining traction in the mainstream fit in with these goals or is this a separate and distinct goal? And for those who present in public with more of a "guy-in-a-dress" look (rather than an androgynous and/or utilitarian presentation), do any of these bigger social agenda type of goals apply to your situation?

The desire for acceptance and the ability to live a life free from hate, ignorance, bigotry and sexism all apply to my situation. Sexism is wrong whether it's a woman or man experiencing it no matter what path he or she took to get there. The heat from the flames of hate, ignorance and bigotry doesn't know who it was stoked for and will happily burn whoever it comes in contact with. Not being as easily locked down into one of the accepted categories as has been suggested before might be the equivalent of painting a target on myself for some.

[Frédérique]

Men being men part 2 .... the dark side

I admire your bravery, Sara – you’ve started this thread on one of those special days set aside for the glorification of masculinity. I came out of my closet of solitude to reply! I recently wrote a thread about male behavior, specifically the “dark� yet whimsical side of manliness, but I didn’t dare to submit it for reasons that will soon become clear. Anyway, well done…
:clap:


Even in major metropolitan areas, I cannot picture skirts hanging along side typical male clothing in men's departments in places as varied as department stores (ie-Macy's, etc), specialty shops (ie-PacSun, etc) or mass market (Target, WalMart, etc). Perhaps in trendy and specialty stores but not so much in the mainstream. Take this concept into small town America and I think the androgyny concept would be even more foreign.

I keep trying to describe my surroundings in terms of latent intolerance for "concepts," but it (androgyny) is exactly as you describe, namely FOREIGN, and anything foreign is subject to castigation. Of course, I live on an island (for lack of a better word) in the middle of the country, far away from any cultural ideas or influence. If you live near an ocean, you may gaze at the horizon and wonder what is on the other side, while here in the Heartland such thoughts are, in themselves, suspect. Small town America keeps itself small by choice, and a display of androgyny is neither welcome nor tolerated. Looking around in my very small town, I don’t see anything that can possibly indicate gender experimentation, or expression of a feeling about gender, unless the girly girls and invariably manly males somehow qualify by harboring desires they dare not mention, let alone express visually. It all seems very conformist to me, but I’ve lived near the ocean and stared at the horizon, so I have at least learned to entertain any possibilities that may exist in life…


…the TG world is real to all of us with methods of expression all over the map. We strive for mere acceptance, to live our lives as Pythos describes, free from hate, ignorance, bigotry and sexism.

And this idea seems dangerous to the men who insist on being men. Imagine having to actually embrace ignorance in accordance with an imaginary characteristic your gender is supposed to celebrate (at this point in time)! I’m glad I’m on the other side, away from all this manliness, safe in the knowledge that there are other ways to BE. An individual must always be on guard against falling back upon pre-determined behavior that the majority agrees is correct – true bravery is reaching for, or attaining, this blessed acceptance of a state that is diametrically at odds with the male mindset…
:straightface:

[msginaadoll]

I agree and also disagree. For most boys they will be boys, and I dont necessary think its a product of nurture. Boys like to get dirty, they like to see things explode and crash. Studies have shown that give two young boys cars and they will crash them. This is generally not the behavior of girls. Note I said generally. Sometimes people like to push the sexes to be so similar and be politically correct. But I really believe this is not the case. Little boys and little girls are different in ways just not physically. It is in mental social and emotional develpment. I for one celebrate that. I hope the day will never come that the sexes are seen as the same.
With this said I believe gender discrimination and as well as how we expresss ourselves with clothes and other adornments will continue to be an issue.

[docrobbysherry]

In direct contradiction to Pythos, I have to say that we do live in a gender binary world and I don't see it disappearing, no matter how much we, as members of this community, (which I also consider myself a part of through my association with my SO), would wish it were otherwise.

If the gender divide were caused by an overly strict and stereotypical gender socialization mechanism and if it did not sit well with most of these male-socialized men, believe me there would be a much greater segment of the male population wishing to break free from it in adulthood. The internet expands everyone's choices and memberships in forums such as this one would increase 1,000 fold. And then there would be no need for them since we would all be androgynous.

Nothing will ever take away the fact that most boys want to be boys and most girls want to be girls (even if said girls wear blue jeans). It is not a stupid notion. It is simply a fact of life.


The best we can hope for is a broader recognition and acceptance of gender and sexual diversity, which can only be achieved through more research, media exposure, changing laws, and widespread education. But if or when this should ever happen, I seriously doubt it will make the testosterone laden men want to wear skirts as a fashion statement, although perhaps a few men who are more on the culturally creative edge might want to wear them to keep cool in the summer. :)

And if perchance skirts were to find their way into the mainstream, there would be just as great a difference between male and female styles as to make guys want to not wear the girly skirts that M2F TGs would continue to want to wear. The gender fashion divide would be the same as it is now, even though fashion will have continued it's evolution process as it always has.

I must disagree with some of your post, Reine. Altho it's factually based regarding our cuture as actually exists, I believe much of what we wear has something to do with our physical condition.

Let's say that suddenly most Type A macho men were suddenly growing up to be 5'10", 145 LB individuals. One thing that MANY macho men fear is being humiliated! I believe that's a major reason your big, muscular, linebacker types wouldn't try on ladies garb, even privately. They know they'd look rediculous!

Now, if they were thin and not overly muscular, why WOULDN'T they try ladies things on in private out of curiosity? Just to see if they looked HOT? I believe MANY would! Especially if they're hetero! That's what I did!

[ReineD]

Now, if they were thin and not overly muscular, why WOULDN'T they try ladies things on in private out of curiosity? Just to see if they looked HOT? I believe MANY would! Especially if they're hetero! That's what I did!

Are you suggesting the low CD to cisgender ratio (1:1,500, 1:1,000, or even 1:500 in the more hopeful estimates) is because many men are larger, and if they weren't then there would be more CDers? Doc, I'm sorry but I think this is wishful thinking. I haven't come across any data correlating the CDing to physical size.

[suit]

men go to fight to make the nest secure any one would ...every one does

[Chickhe]

The way I see it, it takes a real man to know he is right, but to use restraint. It is like the kid with the fast car that pulls up beside the family in their grocery getter and does a burn out when the light turns green...showing off, but everyone else doesn't care (except they think the kid is stupid)...when you grow up and can finally afford to drive a Farrari, when the kid beside you wants to race, you just look over and smile, you let him race off/win because you know he has no chance to win...you win because your mature attitude wins the respect of everyone you know.

[Pythos]

Yea, but when a riceburner pulls up along side your 68 mustang with the 302 your just dropped in, rumbling through dual flowmasters, you just gotta show up that nit what detroit steel and a lot of gas can do.. LOL.

Yes I had that happen on the way back from a concert with the Stang full of people, so she was weighted down...It did not matter. LOL. One frustrated Japanese hot rod left in the dust and exhaust fumes.

I wasn't mature...I know.

[suit]

the real sillyness of all of that is the bad math that is being applied through connecting rods! 1% net fuel energy to the ground!

[Karren H]

I don't see the issue.... Every morning I stop by the local convenience mart on the way to work for my caffeine fix and usually cross paths with one guy who wears daisies dukes, a cami, long hair and earrings... Another who wears capris.... And a woman who dresses like a welder (she really scares me).... And me dressed in a fine suit, pink tie, manicured nails, thin eye brows, smelling of perfume... Everyone wears what they want and no one cares... And I love getting dirty and tearing engines down.... So does my son and he's gay... He dresses more like a guy than I do... Who really cares what people wear... People who do obvioulsy need to get a life! Lol.

[DonniDarkness]

I had something i wanted to add to this quote:
Yet I have been fascinated with those who incorporate a level of androgyny into their presentation


Being a femme guy is possible from day one....Some of us guys are just born that way i guess. For me the hardest part about growing up was not looking like a girl.....i developed this need to be more male so that way i would fit in with the other guys who were built for sports and fighting. Still to this day i couldnt tell you who was even in the last superbowl, let alone so many of the things that these "standard issue" men know. Being 32 years old now and still sitting in the girls section even in drab, these terms like Metro-sexual and Androgyny are hard for me to swallow when used in direct context by others. Now after all these years of putting effort into how i looked as a guy i am suddenly put into the category of sending "Mixed Messages" by my peers and acquaintances because i am "inherently femme", its almost laughable. Years spent trying to fit into my male role being born a girly man has suddenly become "Edgy and Mainstream" (im still laughing), i mean i wasnt even trying.....

But dont get me wrong i am glad that some embrace their femme side, but i dont want to see all men as "Metro".....because then i will really be having an identity crisis!!!

So i am fascinated by other people finding male femininity fascinating....hahaha.

My thoughts,
-Donni-

[JamieTG]

There was a very interesting article in the paper last week about a couple who was refusing to announce to anyone the sex of the their newborn baby. Their plan is to let their young child start growing up making his or her own choices about what he or she likes without society pressures. As an example, if its a boy they don't want anyone telling him that pink can't be his favorite color, because thats only for girls. There was some negative reaction from some who feel thats not the correct way to raise a child. Very interesting article. Sorry I don't have a link to it.

[DonniDarkness]

It is on CNN, look for Dr Drew.

That topic is something i feel very strongly about, not giving "the child" a gender can be more confusing for the kid than saying "Well son if you like pink thats fine" And it will cause more issues than we have when we are educated about our gender,
Because by having "no Gender" it makes a bigger deal of gender to begin with. What we should be teaching is that "you CAN like what you like, no matter who you are"

-Donni-

[Danni Renee]

Being in an organization that specializes in conformity (the Army), I would not want to live in a world where we are all alike, not androgynous but ambiguous instead. The conformity of the military, while necessary, crushes freedoms and ideas in the name of making everyone and everything the same.

I personally do not see any semblance of androgyny in the mainstream but I do see the ever present pressure of conformity, in which androgyny may be another one of the "camps" that a group wants you to conform too. I view the ideals of freedom from hate, ignorance, bigotry, and sexism as most honorable goals but they too can be tools of conformity used by a group - not for the greater good of the true freedoms but as tools to get others to conform to a group ideal. One group’s freedom from hate can be the antithesis of another group’s freedom of expression. Where do you draw the line? Who is the judge of what is right?

Do I wish for acceptance to be who I am? Absolutely. But I do not feel that coercing others into acceptance is the right answer. I believe the goals of freedom from hate, ignorance, bigotry and sexism (and racism, age discrimination, etc.) are higher ideals that we should all strive for but in our pursuit of those ideals, we should not forget that it is our diversity, our ability to think outside the established norms that make us stronger. Sometimes we simply have to agree to disagree.

I am reminded of a line in the song “Photograph� by Nickleback, “I never knew we ever went without�. It is a similar question I have asked of my peers and Soldiers, “Do the North Koreans know they are poor?� The answer is the same: You never know you are poor or doing without until someone tells you so. What happens when there is nobody there to tell you that you are doing without? The answer is you live your life the way you think it should be and are happy – you have nothing else to compare your life too so why would you not be happy? How many of us would live our lives the way we want if we did not know (or care) what others expected of us? There are a blessed few of us that live the way they want now not because they are accepted where they live but simply because they do not care what others think.

[Pythos]

I think something we must realize even in the context of androgyny is that we are not trying to have it applied to every one. Just to those that wish to express it, either just in their style, or in their being. I certainly do not wish for everyone to be androgynous. I do wish more people would try it, and 4 fold more accept and embrace it. I wish the true gender spectrum could be visible out in the "real world'

I wish I could wear my styles and get compliments or critisism based solely on the clothing or style presented, no on the fact I am a male wearing a skirt, or otherwise "feminine" style.

Karren Hutton intrigued me though, where in the world does she live where men can dress in the manner she describes.

[Shoe Fettish Boy]

The Shoe department at a big Box retail store. It's down right depressing. They got maybe one side of one isle where they sell the three or four choices of men's shoes. All terribly bland. And the work boot wall where they sell only one work boot for women. Showing the flip side of this coin. Apparently women aren't expected to have dirty jobs, even if they want one.

I can't always buy something. Cuz all three of the big box stores at the lower price range have cut me off at size ten, Wall mart used to go up to size 12. And K-Mart 11 would sometimes fit, But they have a smaller size run now too.

Payless has cute styles in my size (only in the women's section) and they're kind enough to shelve them next to the men's shoes.

I would say that I'll welcome anything in men's fashion that goes beyond the pink neck tie thing. I wanna wear my skirts and dresses without shaving off my goatee. That is not too much to ask. But since I ask society at large for this little concession, It's asking a lot of people. I'm more than willing to beg on my knees on national television or pay a tax. But I think that this is too unfair.

My girlfriend can wear my jeans, boxers and tank top with her strappy heels and everyone lets it slide and even encourages, But if she lends me a skirt, I can't wear it out without the possibility of someone saying or doing something mean to get me to stop. It rarely happens, but it happens.

My new female buddy wants me to wear a dress for her. and take me shopping for one. As much as I love her for this, I gotta say that I wonder if I gotta shave and do hair and makeup, and wear gaga shades. Will enough strength and confidence come from her being on my arm? Will she "protect" me just by showing everyone I have a woman with me? Who knows?

Watch films about classical and pre-classical times. Yul Brinner wore a skirt in "The Ten Commandments" A super short one. Russel Crow wore a dress in "Gladiator" and sported the ultra masculine name "Maximus". Dustin Hoffman wasn't in drag the second time he wore heels in "Hook". In fact Heels were at first strictly for men, and worn with stockings. Ah the good old days. My pleated minis are nothing more than short kilts. SO what's the big deal?

[ReineD]

Watch films about classical and pre-classical times. Yul Brinner wore a skirt in "The Ten Commandments" A super short one. Russel Crow wore a dress in "Gladiator" and sported the ultra masculine name "Maximus". Dustin Hoffman wasn't in drag the second time he wore heels in "Hook". In fact Heels were at first strictly for men, and worn with stockings. Ah the good old days. My pleated minis are nothing more than short kilts. SO what's the big deal?

If you've been paying attention to recent threads, this has been discussed extensively, but it's worth repeating just so as to not take this thread off on a tangent:

The CDers who lived during the times of togas, fancy male dress Ã* la Louis XV, etc would have turned their noses at the clothes you describe. They would have instead donned the clothes worn by the ladies.

It's all relative to the fashion of the times.

[DonniDarkness]

Sigh, Fashions from the past.....

The 80's.....not too long ago....men wearing spandex animal print pants.........now they are feminine leggings

Oh remember the half shirt....now its a "high hem line top" for women

Oh and guys wearing tight jeans......now guys wear jeans that they could fit an extra person in. Or we are wearing "Skinny" jeans (lol)

Wait lets not forget about guys wearing cut off jean shorts so small you could see the pockets hanging down from the bottom hemline.... Now they are fem too.

Bottom line: all of these fashions had to come from somewhere, that means someone started the trend. Of course all these years later Fashion is different now, but people are still starting trends....And in order for someone to start a trend someone wearing that fashion has to look damn good in their own style.

And lastly, Why would we worry about women adopting our fashions from the past...if we looked good enough in them to inspire them to wear what we wear then how is that bad.....Because as crossdressers is that not what we are doing?

Back on topic:

Great point danni renee

Do I wish for acceptance to be who I am? Absolutely. But I do not feel that coercing others into acceptance is the right answer. I believe the goals of freedom from hate, ignorance, bigotry and sexism (and racism, age discrimination, etc.) are higher ideals that we should all strive for but in our pursuit of those ideals, we should not forget that it is our diversity, our ability to think outside the established norms that make us stronger.

What i like about this statement is that the acknowledgement that our diversity makes us stronger as a whole. I believe that this is the base foundation for acceptance, yet while embracing the reality that not everyone is going to like you for being you.

-Donni-

[Sue101]

Sara

You say that you cannot imagine androgyny going mainstream. Are you not fogetting that androgyny is mainstream in females? OK that is a result of larger social movement in womens's roles and the need for women to copy and compete with men, but clearly it can happen and fairly quickly too. I agree there is nothing on the horizen in the male camp that would encourage men to develop their feminine side. I think the most important thing to consider is the dating mechanism. Men chase women and need to prove themselves worthy of attention. That requires men to be men. In business as well it is largely masculine qualities that are requested. If both the workplace and marriage requires men to be men then there is no open door available right now for men to become androgynous.


Are you suggesting the low CD to cisgender ratio (1:1,500, 1:1,000, or even 1:500 in the more hopeful estimates) Not sure where you get those numbers from but they are of a magnitude lower than anything else I have seen. I know there is no reliable data out there but one way to look at this is to examine the transsexual numbers which are much easier to estimate. The latest guide is 1:10,000. If crossdressers were at 1:1500 then that is only 7 cds for every ts????? It is obvious to me that there are hundreds of cds for every ts. Realistically the number is going to be around 1:100 which is 1% of men, perhaps as high as 2% but still not enough to make a difference in society even if most were not in the closet which they are not.

[ReineD]

Not sure where you get those numbers from but they are of a magnitude lower than anything else I have seen.

I got them from here, middle of the page, keeping in mind these figures are extrapolated:

http://ai.eecs.umich.edu/people/conway/TS/TSprevalence.html

I don't have access to research libraries so I don't know if there are realistic estimates based on actual studies. I understand that estimates are difficult simply because the subjects are closeted. And how can anyone say how many CDs there are to every TS, since the definition for CD is so nebulous? Are we talking about people who dress for kicks and see themselves as male? People who are bigender? People who are TSs in denial?

Maybe I shouldn't have used ratios. lol. My point in this particular thread was to illustrate there are far more cisgenders than trans that will determine fashion, no matter what the numbers are.

[StarrOfDelite]

the real sillyness of all of that is the bad math that is being applied through connecting rods! 1% net fuel energy to the ground!

But it's really cool! Really, really fast cars are so f***ing much FUN! Dropping the hammer on a big Detroit V8 occasionally isn't like owning an F-350 pickup and commuting 60 miles each way, you know.

Plus, Pythos invoked the patriotism card. Weren't you just a little bit proud that the Cadillac CTS-V kicked butt on the Jag, Beamer and even the MB AMG?

[Sue101]

Reine - the article says this "In the United States there are varying estimates of the prevalence of crossdressing. Most conservative estimates are in the range of 2% to 5% of all adult males engage in routine crossdressing (1:50 to 1:20)." The numbers you were quoting were for transsexuals and transgenderists.

For a simple idea of numbers, you can estimate the number of ts:cd in this forum - that would easily give you 1:100 then add in the hundreds of sites which cater only for crossdressers and the multiplier becomes several hundred.

[Fab Karen]

I'll point out a big thing about teens here: Most "go along to get along" & the idea of standing out of the crowd terrifies them, for fear of peer rejection, and happens regardless of anything gender-related. Now ask any TG person aware of it at that age how they acted in their teens, I don't think many would have been open.

But of course, if you're truly committed, you could just give it all up & take on the manly life of the Lumberjack:)

[Pythos]

I never wanted to do this in the first place. I never wanted to strap myself in a glamorized metal crate with wings and go up into the air without inflicting serious personal harm. I didn't really care about seeing the ground from a perch above the ground. I wanted to be,

A LUMBERJACK!!!!

[docrobbysherry]

U only have to examine the number of posts in THIS forum!:eek:

And, the number of dressers that OBJECT to GGs dressing in "male" garb! If anything, they seem to be INCREASING!:doh:

Is it any wonder that the vanilla public objects to CDs dressed that way?:brolleyes:

[ThiHi]

Great insights all. Our diversity is what makes us strong, and as has been said, it's the right to wear what we want, wether it's a pair of jeans, a skirt, long hair, whatever, without discrimination or fear. Being a "Guy" comes with a lot of rules, colors you can wear, how you cut your hair, the clothes you choose, the car you drive, the music you like. Stultifying, inhibiting, some might say oppressive, but others find it comforting. No need to worry about what to wear, what to say, what to drive, it's all been worked out for you. I hate to say, most people don't think too much, nor do they question themselves. I work in a small segment of the fashion industry, and most women are as afraid of color as most men, from what I've experienced. Freedom and self expression are difficult things. The willingness to step out of the prescribed channel can be one filled with terror. I know I've experienced it. So I try to move along, push the limits a small bit at a time. I don't begrudge nor look down upon those that conform. Not at all. I love seeing real cowboys - manly men with big trucks and big muscles. That's simply not me. But I love having them around to move furniture.

[Sara Jessica]

The behavior you present here is the sort of behavior I think is fostered by the ridiculous notion "boys will be boys". This idiocy starts when the male baby is allowed to be a little s__t, wheras the female child is coddled. (your experience may vary). Boys are "allowed" to roughhouse where girls are discouraged from such actions. Later on these notions transform into the "bravado, chest thumping, stupid (in my book) behavior that personally I think drags men into the mesozoic ooz. Yes I have been with girls that have roughhoused with the best, but boys in many ways are permitted to be so much worse due to the "boys will be boys" notion.

Great points Pythos, and I also want to thank you for allowing me to insert your quote into my original premise.

I'm picking on your comment above. I think it's a valid observation based on perception but at the same time, I do think you are slightly off the mark. What you describe is a function of parenting more than mere socialization. There are many parents out there who simply don't have a clue and allow, even encourage, misbehavior under a guise of "boys will be boys".

Taking it a step further, I'll insert my own experience in this area. One of my little girls avoids skirts and dresses, yet she is as classically feminine as can be otherwise. She adores her long beautiful hair, she dresses very girly otherwise, loves makeup, dolls, all of those things that one might think of when describing typical socialization for a young girl. Yet none of these cues were taught per se. It is simply part of her being. Contrast this with her younger sister who is nearly identical in interests yet she loves wearing skirts and dresses.

I'm no expert in the field of child development or the factors which go into the socialization of females vs males but I can say this, even if observation or media exposure plays into this, both girls appear to be as naturally in their element as can be. And on top of that, they love getting dirty and can roughhouse together beyond belief.


In direct contradiction to Pythos, I have to say that we do live in a gender binary world and I don't see it disappearing, no matter how much we, as members of this community, (which I also consider myself a part of through my association with my SO), would wish it were otherwise.

If the gender divide were caused by an overly strict and stereotypical gender socialization mechanism and if it did not sit well with most of these male-socialized men, believe me there would be a much greater segment of the male population wishing to break free from it in adulthood. The internet expands everyone's choices and memberships in forums such as this one would increase 1,000 fold. And then there would be no need for them since we would all be androgynous.

Nothing will ever take away the fact that most boys want to be boys and most girls want to be girls (even if said girls wear blue jeans). It is not a stupid notion. It is simply a fact of life.


The best we can hope for is a broader recognition and acceptance of gender and sexual diversity, which can only be achieved through more research, media exposure, changing laws, and widespread education. But if or when this should ever happen, I seriously doubt it will make the testosterone laden men want to wear skirts as a fashion statement, although perhaps a few men who are more on the culturally creative edge might want to wear them to keep cool in the summer. :)

And if perchance skirts were to find their way into the mainstream, there would be just as great a difference between male and female styles as to make guys want to not wear the girly skirts that M2F TGs would continue to want to wear. The gender fashion divide would be the same as it is now, even though fashion will have continued it's evolution process as it always has.

Reine, you have brilliantly expanded on the essence of the premise that I have laid out. Thank you for taking the time to do so!!! :)


So much of boys being boys, and then it moves into adulthood has to do with the "pecking order" of things. Who is going to get to be the "alpha dog", and so on to the bottom of the pile. We even see it in girls that fight to hang off of the arm of the football star. Will it ever change, I doubt it. Testosterone seems to be the source, whether it is a problem or not depends on which side of the fence you are on. As men get older, testosterone levels decline, and so does the aggresive behavior. Short of giving all men "T" blockers, I see no changes, so the races will still continue. The arm wrestling, fights, bravado, and so on will continue. Thus is life.

It's not about whether T is the source. You are simply describing the natural order of things. As you say, it is life...technically it's about survival of the fittest and procreation of the species.

And I'm not here to completely dismiss the behavior of what can be called the typical male. I accept it for what it is while calling out the boorish extremes.


I admire your bravery, Sara – you’ve started this thread on one of those special days set aside for the glorification of masculinity.

No bravery here, such a term is reserved for our millitary whether they be male, female or even TG. My thread is not an attack on masculinity but rather social commentary as this relates to acceptance of things that are TG and/or androgynous in nature. However, we all know that the freedom we enjoy in our country, including the safety we enjoy and the right to present as many of us do in the real world, are all things we can thank our millitary for, something we should all think about daily rather than just on special days set aside to honor our troops (both active and those who have fallen in the line of duty).


[FONT="Book Antiqua"][SIZE="2"][COLOR="black"]I keep trying to describe my surroundings in terms of latent intolerance for "concepts," but it (androgyny) is exactly as you describe, namely FOREIGN, and anything foreign is subject to castigation. Of course, I live on an island (for lack of a better word) in the middle of the country, far away from any cultural ideas or influence. If you live near an ocean, you may gaze at the horizon and wonder what is on the other side, while here in the Heartland such thoughts are, in themselves, suspect. Small town America keeps itself small by choice, and a display of androgyny is neither welcome nor tolerated. Looking around in my very small town, I don’t see anything that can possibly indicate gender experimentation, or expression of a feeling about gender, unless the girly girls and invariably manly males somehow qualify by harboring desires they dare not mention, let alone express visually. It all seems very conformist to me, but I’ve lived near the ocean and stared at the horizon, so I have at least learned to entertain any possibilities that may exist in life…

I have seen the world you describe and in all honesty feel blessed that I don't live in it. The freedom of expression without incident (knocking on wood here) is partially a function of living in a major metropolitan area, one where I am one of millions (reducing the chance of running into someone I know) and where I can easily travel a short distance to better the odds of my remaining anonymous...yet still safe at the same time.



...I’m glad I’m on the other side, away from all this manliness, safe in the knowledge that there are other ways to BE. An individual must always be on guard against falling back upon pre-determined behavior that the majority agrees is correct – true bravery is reaching for, or attaining, this blessed acceptance of a state that is diametrically at odds with the male mindset…
:straightface:

While the TG existence can be a royal pain in the you-know-what, I too cherish my POV to the point where I often look at the "typical" male and feel pity for them. Yet at the exact same time, i can also look at the kind of man that I might wish I could be, one without the gender issues going on, with envy. This is part of my original point, that guys just don't give any thought whatsoever to the stuff that goes on in our world.


I agree and also disagree. For most boys they will be boys, and I dont necessary think its a product of nurture. Boys like to get dirty, they like to see things explode and crash. Studies have shown that give two young boys cars and they will crash them. This is generally not the behavior of girls. Note I said generally. Sometimes people like to push the sexes to be so similar and be politically correct. But I really believe this is not the case. Little boys and little girls are different in ways just not physically. It is in mental social and emotional develpment. I for one celebrate that. I hope the day will never come that the sexes are seen as the same.
With this said I believe gender discrimination and as well as how we expresss ourselves with clothes and other adornments will continue to be an issue.

Great points Gina. This is basically what I was describing in talking about my girl's behavior. There are things that are innate and I too am not wanting to envision a world where the genders are seen as the same.

However, gender discrimination and how we express ourselves needs not be an issue forever. This is where education and tolerance comes into play. We're certainly not trying to change others ability to be who they are. Rather, we wish to simply be accepted for who we are.

[Valerie1973]

Well, according to the bible, God made men from dirt. He took a rib from man to make a woman perfect. As to why I enjoy being a girl, well I want to be perfect too and its fun. As long as no one is a Buffalo Bill like in Silence of the Lambs. Now that would be creepy.

[suit]

"But it's really cool! Really, really fast cars are so f***ing much FUN! Dropping the hammer on a big Detroit V8 occasionally isn't like owning an F-350 pickup and commuting 60 miles each way, you know.

Plus, Pythos invoked the patriotism card. Weren't you just a little bit proud that the Cadillac CTS-V kicked butt on the Jag, Beamer and even the MB AMG?
"I'd like to see General mopters or Dodge put a http://www.vengeancepower.com/specs.aspx
moer in ther trucks and get 80 miles per gallon and put out 2500 ft lbs of torque!

[Sophie86]

If the gender divide were caused by an overly strict and stereotypical gender socialization mechanism and if it did not sit well with most of these male-socialized men, believe me there would be a much greater segment of the male population wishing to break free from it in adulthood. The internet expands everyone's choices and memberships in forums such as this one would increase 1,000 fold. And then there would be no need for them since we would all be androgynous.

Write this down on a piece of paper, put it somewhere safe, and read it again in twenty years. :)

[Sara Jessica]

Some of the discussions elsewhere have brought me back to this thread. Androgyny, closets, social agendas, etc. Some of this was talked about here but there is another recent thread where the protagonist described being out in a decidedly feminine outfit, yet topped it all off with a handlebar mustache and (thankfully) no makeup.

As many may have surmised in reading my writings, I have some struggles when it comes to the guy-in-dress look. I was looking for insight by inclusion of this comment....


\And for those who present in public with more of a "guy-in-a-dress" look (rather than an androgynous and/or utilitarian presentation), do any of these bigger social agenda type of goals apply to your situation?

While I strive for inclusion across our entire community, those out and in the closet, those who identify as TS, CD and everywhere in-between, I admittedly struggle with this guy-in-dress concept when it speeds past the androgynous or utilitarian approach. Call me hypocritical but at the very least I'm being honest, and willing to attempt understanding of this concept as difficult as it might be.

Part of my POV was shaped by meeting someone at our support group a few years back. This person pretty much presented as female the first couple times we met. Then one meeting, "he" shows up (there's a reason I use "he") in a canary yellow ball gown, no makeup, stubble on the face, no wig and loads of chest hair poking out the top of the bodice of the dress. During the rounds where everyone can talk for a moment about whatever, he basically says "I'm a guy in a dress and no longer wish to be called by a femme name. I will no longer wear makeup, wig, etc.". Needless to say we were all pretty much taken aback yet the kicker was that he claimed that his look somehow blended in with societal norms.

Of course I was absolutely incredulous at this point and being my first experience with a genderf*%# presentation, it shaped a lot of my POV in that I believe that those of us who choose to go out have an obligation to do so in a manner respectful not only of women but also for those who are transitioning and must deal with public scrutiny 24/7.

The way I see it, androgyny doesn't conflict with this POV but genderf*%# most certainly does.

Many in these pages may present in such a manner in the comfort of their own closet ...er, home, for a multitude of reasons. Namely, their male side (or others in their lives) demands that they keep facial hair, or whatever. They do what makes them happy without much worry about going out into the world which of course is fine. Any TG who goes into the world and is read as such (most of us who venture out would fall into this category) is technically in conflict with societal norms, yet genderf*%# takes this to an entirely different level.

All that said, I'll repeat my question to those who present in public as a guy-in-dress, do any of these bigger social agenda type of goals apply to your situation? In other words, is your POV influenced by other causes within the TG community, androgyny or even issues concerning natal women.

For those who champion androgyny, is there a line to be crossed here or are we all in the same gender-boat, merely expressing the same thing in different ways?

For the women out there, do any or all of these presentations offend your sensibilities or am I reading too much into things?

[Pythos]

I can see your stance when it comes to that guy. The image he presented was a mockery. Reason being, even in Male mode, no dress, no other feminine wear, just a "regular joe", it is socially unacceptable for a man to have chest hair protruding from his clothing, and I will bet on this guy with this dress, it was just.....GUH. What became of this fellow anyway?

These are images I think of when it comes to androgyny.
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4112/5048905886_5c93d6e8f1_m.jpg
Though a bit daring.
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4101/4791106404_b659d65940.jpg
Rocker look
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2699/4443869744_6e65d3324b_m.jpg
and me with hair too short, but in a usual outfit.
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4074/4790475317_8cb1516be1_m.jpg
Now this one is not publicly acceptable, but it is androgynous.

Turkey Jive on Rye is also a very good example, as is Eddie Izzard,

Got to flickr and search Androgyny. There are several GOOD examples of it.

[dawnmarrie1961]

I don't see my male side, what there is of it, as a darkside. It is a part of the whole which constitutes me. I can not carelessly disgard it nor ignore that part of myself. I'll admit it isn't easy trying to balance both halfs and sometimes they come in conflict with eachother. It is not easy to keep both sides of the scale from tettering one way or the other but I try because I know that somewhere inbetween lies the peace that I so desperately seek. I know that it is not a short trip that I have embarked upon but a journey that will take me all the days of my life.
I do not seek acceptance, nor do I require it from others. It is more important that I accept myself. The rest will come in its own time.
Freedom is a matter of perception. It is more a condition of mind than an actual physical state. What binds us from being who we are is often an internal problem rather than an external one. We are often prisoners, inmates of penitentiaries made from hardened steel and stone, winthin our own minds. The elusive key to our freedom must be found from within not without.
In other, more simple terms: "FREE YOUR MIND...YOUR ASS WILL FOLLOW!"
And while it is true that we have to live in a world, which we did not create, it doesn't mean that we need to conform to it's bidding by becoming what the world wants. Resist the tempation. Become who you are instead.
"WHO YOU ARE"? Well... that is for you to figure out.
Just like you. I am a work in progress.

[Avana]

Here is a relevant essay from one of my favorite transgender theorists and musicians, Terre Thaemlitz:

All's In Order
"Out of Order" Fashion's Inability to Divest of Power
http://www.comatonse.com/writings/allsinorder.html

[Kathi Lake]

Like Dawn Marrie, I do not necessarily seek respect from others when I go out. I do try, however, to seek an acceptance - however grudging - from the public. I feel I do this by dressing modestly, normally (as I present, at least), and tastefully. I want them to see the effort put into it. I want them to see that this isn't a joke. I want them to see that we're just normal human beings, and not an in-your-face version of a gender outlaw.

Yes, I'm not a boat-rocker. I never have been. I feel that you can change more opinions with an honest portrayal of yourself, rather than a "Who the hell cares what you think!?" attitude. I do, of course, allow for the case that I am wrong in this respect, but that's just how I am.

Kathi

[Alice Torn]

Society tells boys to be G.I. Joe, a football stars, macho movie tough guys, macho boxers, yada yada yada. Society needs warriors to survive in this dog eat dog world, with a history written in blood, sweat, and tears. We, who dress up, will always be the small minority, and despised for the most part. Though, it is not as hostile, as years ago, society, overwhelmingly still thinks men crossdressing is perverse. I just saw on the National Enquirer, cover, a photo of Anthony Weiner crossdressed, in 1982. One radio talk host I like, sadly was bashing Weiner for it. Yada yada yada. The beat goes on.

[JiveTurkeyOnRye]

I haven't been very active on this forum lately, but I check in from time to time and it was funny to me that this was the most recent thread today when I loaded it up, so I figured I'd throw my own two cents into it.

To note my own style, I will admit I have been veering a bit more androgynous lately, but I do think that I can still pretty securely refer to myself as a guy in a dress/skirt. Even though I wear a lot more makeup these days, and yes I've been learning to accessorize with necklaces and bracelets and fashionable belts, I still feel like when people look at me, there's never a moment of doubt in them as to my biological sex. I also do usually have a bit of stubble on my face, because that's just the nature of my facial hair. I can downplay it with a little bit of extra foundation, but it's hard to really hide it unless I wanted to pile on concealer, which I don't want to to.

I think the difference between me and the canary yellow mustachioed man you referred to Sarah, is that I personally really try hard to put together looks that work for me. I also don't like the philosophy of genderf@$% because I personally feel like even in the very name it is being combative. The fact that we can't type the name on this forum without putting in symbols to cover some of the letters speaks to that. I personally try to be as open and welcoming as possible when I dress the way I do, because I feel like being defensive and putting up shields is only going to reinforce the desire for people to pull back.

Now, there have been some points made in this thread about how unlikely it is that the mass pop culture will shift over to allow for more femininity in males, and more embracement of androgyny and the loss of the gender binary. I personally don't think we ever will lose the gender binary, but that also isn't my goal. I don't have any problem with people seeing me as male. I just want people to expand their idea about what a man can or cannot wear.

I think that's happening in slow, small pieces. I don't expect to see men's skirts as a mainstream fashion choice any time soon, but just looking at the ways gender norms have softened in my lifetime, I remember when I was a kid, guys were starting to wear earrings, but there was this whole weird unwritten rule where a boy could have an earring in only one ear, and depending on which ear they had it in, it meant he was straight or gay. Then when I was in high school and older, I noticed more and more guys would just have both ears pierced. Recently when I was home for christmas, my brother noticed that his son had pierced ears and asked him, a little loudly, "Why do you have an earring in your left ear?" and everyone looked at him (my brother) like he was crazy. It's been so common for years for guys to have earrings that it was weird for him to be put off by it. (He was drunk, which is a whole other story...)

Another example is cosmetics. It used to be unheard of for men to use skincare products and such, and now places like Sephora and Bath and Body Works have whole men's sections, including even things that have different names but seem an awful lot like makeup. Foundations and coverups mostly. But even when I'm not wearing women's clothes, I can walk up to a makeup counter at department stores and start looking at eyeliners and such and I've yet to have a salesgirl act like it is anything but typical. Granted, I live in LA, but I have gotten eyeliner applied at Sephora in other cities like my hometown of Columbus, OH.

These are both pretty minor things, but at the same time, feel sort of major to me in how they're just commonplace parts of today's society. Going back to the earring example, my nephew had no idea what his dad was talking about because he's never lived in a world where it was crazy for a guy to have earrings in both ears. The same as my niece has only ever seen digital cameras so she doesn't know you didn't used to be able to immediately see a picture after it was taken by turning the camera around. So while skirts for men would be a tough sell on today's teenage boys, if they became even a fringe trend in five years, imagine ten years after that, the crop of teenagers at that time would just be aware of skirts being a choice for the male wardrobe, and take it for granted that it's an unusual choice, not unlike girls born today with their choice of pants.

Here's the part where I rattle some feathers. One thing that often bugs me on this board when people talk about how I dress, whether it's specifically targeted at me, or as is more often the case, just talking about it as a general philosophy, is this whole idea of whether or not Middle America and Small Towns will accept it. I know they don't. But they don't accept you either. You know what you will never hear a small minded, bigot say? "Well I ain't got me no problem with them there crossdressers if'n they at least make an effort to pass an' conform to these here gender binaries."

I'll say it, the vast, vast majority of crossdressers do not pass as women. I'm not saying they don't look beautiful, or that they shouldn't dress the way they do, because of course you should, but more often than not, crossdressers look like crossdressers. Many are passable in photos, heck, *I* look passable in some photos, but take away the specific lighting, the lack of motion, the perfect posing, etc, and I become a man in a dress again, who just happens to be wearing a wig and heavier makeup. I've gone out to my share of transgendered events and also just seen CDs out and about in public, and unless someone was naturally blessed with a feminine look, or in the case of true TS women, if they transitioned early enough that they were able to balance out the hormones, actually passing is rare.

My point in saying this is, on this board MtF CDers accept themselves as something more common because on this board a CD is surrounded by like-minded individuals and to be sure, in society as a whole, the MtF is the majority of our minority, the most populous, most common group under the "transgender" continuum is the male to female crossdresser. But going back to the original post,
Sarah, you mentioned that you can't imagine that aggressive man going to walmart to buy a skirt. I think most people wouldn't imagine guys they know spending an hour on makeup and putting in breast forms and shaving their legs and putting on a dress to feel like a woman, yet the massive numbers and the multiple walks of life we have on this board make a pretty strong case that it happens quite a lot.

I've personally seen plenty of aggressive alpha male types in kilts, guys who couldn't be more macho yet wearing a type of skirt. It's not common, sure, but it happens and it's a growing trend. Do a google search for Utilikilt images, and you'll find tons of "macho" guys in skirts.

[Avana]

I've personally seen plenty of aggressive alpha male types in kilts, guys who couldn't be more macho yet wearing a type of skirt. It's not common, sure, but it happens and it's a growing trend. Do a google search for Utilikilt images, and you'll find tons of "macho" guys in skirts.


I live in nyc and see just about everything, but i've never seen this.

must be a midwest anglo/scottish thing?


usually the only men i see in skirts are super femme gay queens, androgynous queer artsy hipster boys, or masculine yet fastidious gay men more of a marc jacobs style skirt.

and bagpipers.

i don't see the point of searching for men with kilts - it's more meaningful to search for "men" on google and count the number of pages until you find one in a skirt

[Frédérique]

For those who champion androgyny, is there a line to be crossed here or are we all in the same gender-boat, merely expressing the same thing in different ways?

We are all crossdressing, to one degree or another, and we are all thrown into the same boat by this generalized association. Clashes are inevitable between fractious groups, based on what he or she believes crossdressing either entails or represents. Sure, I champion androgyny, but I also champion “crossing the line,� as you so eloquently stated, as long as I’m allowed to cross this imaginary line MY way, on MY terms, according to MY level of comfort. I do this to feel good, so anything that may degrade this blessed state is consciously avoided. I think ALL forms of expression are valid and need to be encouraged, but I do not think we all have to agree on what expression IS. To each his or her own, and please respect other ways of being…


For the women out there, do any or all of these presentations offend your sensibilities or am I reading too much into things?

I’m not a GG*, but I get the feeling that our “presentations� do offend female sensibilities – This is based on what I read on this site, either coming from GG’s directly, or indirectly through an injured or deflated MtF crossdresser. Some people forget that dreams are highly perishable…

*But I PLAY one as a TV!!! :heehee:

[Pythos]

Turkey JIVE on Rye knocks one right out of the park!!!

Society will never change, unless something changes it.

[Kathi Lake]

Society will never change, unless something changes it.But does it have to change at the speed of a meteor hitting the Earth, or can it just be as sure of the change that a glacier makes on the land (and no - the speed analogy is not lost on me)? I would rather try to persuade rather than force. That's the way I liken those two methods.

Kathi

[Nigella]

Turkey JIVE on Rye knocks one right out of the park!!!

Society will never change, unless something changes it

But does it have to change at the speed of a meteor hitting the Earth, or can it just be as sure of the change that a glacier makes on the land (and no - the speed analogy is not lost on me)? I would rather try to persuade rather than force. That's the way I liken those two methods.

Kathi.

There will be a time, in the future. Things do change, but this can only happen at the pace that society can accept. The more anyone tries to push a change on society, the more society pushes back, rejecting that change.

[JiveTurkeyOnRye]

I live in nyc and see just about everything, but i've never seen this.

must be a midwest anglo/scottish thing?

I don't deny that the vast majority of alpha male guys I've seen in kilts have been at celtic festivals and rock concerts, yes. Guess what though, that's where I first started publicly wearing kilts as well, before eventually moving on to other skirts. I think too it's even more of a pacific northwest type thing, as that's where Utilikilts is based out of and has somewhat of a following.



usually the only men i see in skirts are super femme gay queens, androgynous queer artsy hipster boys, or masculine yet fastidious gay men more of a marc jacobs style skirt.

Seems you're missing the point here, which is, you do see men in skirts. I was never arguing the case that all men in skirts need be super masculine, I'm certainly not. You named three different types of men in skirts here. Regardless of their sexuality, can we agree that these groups of men were not wearing skirts ten years ago? Even if you've only seen a handful or less, is that not still a significant change in the cultural landscape of male garments? Taking away the narrow focus on the "skirt" aspect, in general would all of these groups not be considered as paving the way for a broader approach to what constitutes a "male" in today's society?


i don't see the point of searching for men with kilts - it's more meaningful to search for "men" on google and count the number of pages until you find one in a skirt

Is it more meaningful? I guess it would be if the point was about how mainstream skirts for men are or aren't, but it wasn't. The point was, Sarah mentioned a specific type of man, the overly aggressive masculine man, and said she can't imagine him wearing a skirt, ever. I then used the specific example of the Utilikilt as a brand that markets to and appeals to exactly that kind of man.

However, just for the heck of it, I decided to do this search you recommended. It was the last photo on page 6, two guys in kilts. and that's mostly because there were quite a bit of X-Men pictures, mostly wolverine, and also a lot of photos of the cast of Mad Men on the previous pages. It should be noted however that on the very first page were two different photos of men wearing noticeable makeup.

[Sophie86]

I live in nyc and see just about everything, but i've never seen this.

must be a midwest anglo/scottish thing?

I used to participate on a hiking forum, and several of the guys there wore them. If you went and stood on the AT for a week, you could probably count 3-4 guys hiking in kilts.

I've also seen them at a club I used to go to being worn by very dominant looking guys.

[ReineD]

For the women out there, do any or all of these presentations offend your sensibilities or am I reading too much into things?

There is only one type of presentation that offends my sensibilities: the representation of woman as purely a sexual object. By this, I mean the CDers who sexualize the CDing in public. You know the type: short, short skirts, stilettos, fish nets, plunging necklines. Not in private, mind you, this is fair game.

That said, I am not offended by models/actresses who show up on the red carpet showing off their curves, or women who go out clubbing this way. There is a time and place for everything, and they know how to do this. Also, if a woman chooses to source herself from her sexuality (providing she can pull it off), if she feels this is the only way she can get ahead in this world, then it is her decision to do so, even though I choose to not live my life this way.

But when a man adorns himself in such a way, it brings in an entirely different layer and this is his own objectification of women, which I find creepy somehow. I imagine any GG being in a relationship with someone like this, and in the bedroom she would be a mere accessory to his fetish. I do not enjoy being objectified by men.

I have no issues with CDers who dress appropriately for the various social situations (and if it means dressing in a sexy manner in a nightclub, then fine as long as they know how to do it) or androgynes/goths/insert-other-genres-here who choose to be creative with their presentation.

Double standard? Maybe. :p

If I see a guy such as the one you describe: the hairy guy with a beard in the yellow ball gown (the subtype is called "gender-f*ck" you can find it in the gender section of wikipedia), I'm not offended. I don't think he's mocking women either. I rather wonder why he would choose to put himself on display like this, since his presentation is bound to ostracize him in our society. Just like someone who would choose to walk around with green face paint with horns and a tail, or any other look that would be just as far off the scale. I would see him as someone who doesn't care to live in society the way that I do, and form relationships with people. A loner. I wouldn't write him off though. I'd engage in a conversation with him and then see, but if he has such a "f*ck it" attitude, then it would be bound to show up in other areas as well.

I'm not at all offended by presentations such as Jive-Turkey-On-Rye (did you have to pick such a long name? lol). Jive pulls it off very well! :) Also, age and body type play an important role in determining whether someone can pull off a certain look or not, don't you think?

This answer ended up being much longer than I had originally intended, once I started typing. lol

[Avana]

Seems you're missing the point here, which is, you do see men in skirts. I was never arguing the case that all men in skirts need be super masculine, I'm certainly not. You named three different types of men in skirts here. Regardless of their sexuality, can we agree that these groups of men were not wearing skirts ten years ago?

i did not contend that 'all men in skirts need be super masculine'. i just said that i've never seen super masculine men wearing skirts in any appreciable amount, especially not men wearing skirts and walking around with their girlfriends.

I don't think the number of skirts among more feminine and or gay men where I live is appreciable either. And it's certainly not going to be a trend any time soon any more than sequin jackets or zebra striped leggings, or fabulous headdresses.

And what does the wearing of a 'utility kilt' really accomplish? It's still defined as a male article of clothing. Show me a masculine guy wearing a lace skirt to his first date with a woman and I'll say that's something. When men are flocking to stores to get in on the 'girlfriend trend' then I think we have something.

[t-girlxsophie]

There is only one type of presentation that offends my sensibilities: the representation of woman as purely a sexual object. By this, I mean the CDers who sexualize the CDing in public. You know the type: short, short skirts, stilettos, fish nets, plunging necklines.

Thought would inject some levity into things.Better never find yourself out on the town on a Friday night in any Northern UK city Reine (unlikely i know),that would knock your sensibilities for six and thats just young girls(not CDers),won't mention what you'll see the blokes doing LOL

Sophie

[ReineD]

You mean like this?

159800

I know. If a hooker wants to make her life that way, she's completely free to do so. If a CDer wants to hang out that part of town dressed like that and try to get Johns, that's his prerogative too. That's not what I was talking about though. :p

[Pythos]

OH I WOULD SO WEAR THAT!!!........with a longer skirt, and more fancy top. LOL.

My old saying though is, it is only the clothing of a hooker, because only hookers have the guts to wear it.

(that skirt is waaaaaay too short though)

[JiveTurkeyOnRye]

i did not contend that 'all men in skirts need be super masculine'. i just said that i've never seen super masculine men wearing skirts in any appreciable amount, especially not men wearing skirts and walking around with their girlfriends.

Um, I never said you said that, the line you are quoting was in reference to my side of the conversation not yours.


And what does the wearing of a 'utility kilt' really accomplish? It's still defined as a male article of clothing. Show me a masculine guy wearing a lace skirt to his first date with a woman and I'll say that's something. When men are flocking to stores to get in on the 'girlfriend trend' then I think we have something.

So let me get this straight, if I may. More feminine men in skirts, who may or may not be gay, isn't appreciable to this conversation, In which I was talking about the way the images of men have changed just in the course of my own lifetime. Do they not count as "men" then? However, on the flip side, the fact that a skirt exists that is fully manufactured and marketed and distributed to masculine men, also doesn't accomplish anything, because it's not from the women's department of a store?

I really don't know what your point has been in either of your responses to me. In speaking of the Utilikilt brand, I was responding to the OP, who was specifically talking about the likelihood of the more aggressive, macho males in society wearing a skirt, as guys in skirts, as opposed to being androgynous or en femme. I cited an example of a brand that markets to exactly that. How do you honestly think that saying that it's still defined as a male article of clothing dismisses that point? That's exactly the point, it's a skirt defined as a male article of clothing. This is a modern skirt that is designed, manufactured, and marketed specifically to macho men.

Now, to Reine:




I know. If a hooker wants to make her life that way, she's completely free to do so. If a CDer wants to hang out that part of town dressed like that and try to get Johns, that's his prerogative too. That's not what I was talking about though. :p

Sadly, Reine, I think Sophie was talking more about non-working-girls just done up for a night on the town or going clubbing.

(Also, you can just call me Rye, that's my name.)

[ReineD]

Clubbing? Oh, OK. lol. I see the college girls in my town dressed like that too. That's not what I meant in my description either. Maybe I should have found a pic.

[Gillian Gigs]

Pythos said,"My old saying though is, it is only the clothing of a hooker, because only hookers have the guts to wear it".
So what is the average CD looking for when they dress? I think that this is where the problem often lays. Guys are on the lookout for the sexy and provocatively dressed female so they can oogle them. As a generalization, they get upset when they are deceived into looking at a CD who has gotten them to look. The more conservative approach tends to get noticed less. So does the CD want the attention, or not? Getting the attention may get undesired results, and women have had to deal with this for years.
Personally, I go with the age approprate dress mode, I am not 22, so I don't try to dress that way. What I do behind closed doors may be something different. I have given strong consideration to getting a kilt. Why, one I have the heritage, and two I wish to have the freedom to dress in a way that I do not have to worry about anything else other than from the waist down. Skirt, kilt whatever, but the kilt is more acceptable. Seems like a good option to me!
Any kind of clothing, male or female, can have a very sexual conotation behind it, and that is why that person may be dressing that way. Like the fisherman, the type of fish that you want to catch depends on the type of bait you are using. So, whether you are in guy, or girl mode, what are you fishing for????? If men are being men, then they will be looking for something to look at.

[Avana]

I really don't know what your point has been in either of your responses to me.

I'm relating the discussion to the original topic, which concerns "The ever present want of clothing styles and choices to be equal among the genders, no matter the sex of that person."

So I am saying it's all well and good that there are 'utilikilts', but just because they only have one hole for the legs doesn't automatically make them the same as a female cut/styled skirt or represent true clothing equality. It's still 'separate but (possibly) equal'. Those utilikilt guys would never wear a fringed black flapper skirt. Boys wearing the same dresses as ladies are still going to get beat up and pushed into lockers. I'm not sure I'd be satisfied with that if I were a man looking for clothing equality. (which is what the original topic is about)

And this whole discussion is relative to cultural fashions - In the hotter places of the world, such as certain African countries and India, men and women both wear skirt-like or dress-like garments. Yet the difference between male and female in those places is still just as marked for those cultures, and wearing the opposite sex's fashion would still be considered cross-dressing.

[Pythos]

I personally dislike kilts, or kilt like styles. But that is me. I do wish more men WOULD try them and wear them, cause for many, the curiosity of how a more fem style would surface, and overall the idea of men wearing skirts....ANY kind of skirt would be fully accepted. Those who wear pants 3 times too big for "the room", would realize skirts are far far better than pants dragging you down. LOL.

As to what I said about "hooker styles". I find it very very sad that women feel the need to hide so that they are not oggled at. This is why I wished boys in schools were made to at least once a month wear skirts so that they would know how it feels to have their skirts flipped, or later on get stared at like a piece of meat. Now, that does not mean I would like that aspect of life to be eliminated, I like to look at pretty women, BUT, and this is a big but, I do not STARE at them as if they are a piece of food (I saw one guy of my shop crew just glaring at a beautiful girl walking by us, his look frankly gave ME the creeps. Oh, and she was not in a short skirt, but instead she was wearing slightly baggy jeans and shirt. So for many men it only matters 'It" is a woman that is walking by. I swear though he looked like a predator or rapist.

[JiveTurkeyOnRye]

I'm relating the discussion to the original topic, which concerns "The ever present want of clothing styles and choices to be equal among the genders, no matter the sex of that person."

But see, you're quoting a line that itself was being quoted from another thread. It was a point being made by someone that was a jumping off point for the OP, but wasn't actually the purpose of the OP's post. In that post, she wrote about the typical young male she'd find in middle America, and then then she cited an example of male aggressiveness that she encountered, and made the following two statements about them as:


Guys who I could be pretty certain would reject the notion of wearing a skirt no matter where it was sold and how "male" it was marketed... All I could think about "aggressive man" was that beside the fact his behavior was absolutely stereotypically pig-male, he too would not be likely to shop the local WalMart for a new skirt.

So in my original reply, along with a lot of other points, I referenced a brand of skirt that appeals to exactly that type of group of males. Their market is still a fringe one, absolutely, I'm not denying that, but they are only gaining popularity and momentum, not losing it. It was one point being made amongst several others, and yet you seem to have isolated it and applied it to everything that was being said rather than just the one specific point it was being cited against.


So I am saying it's all well and good that there are 'utilikilts', but just because they only have one hole for the legs doesn't automatically make them the same as a female cut/styled skirt or represent true clothing equality. It's still 'separate but (possibly) equal'. Those utilikilt guys would never wear a fringed black flapper skirt. Boys wearing the same dresses as ladies are still going to get beat up and pushed into lockers. I'm not sure I'd be satisfied with that if I were a man looking for clothing equality. (which is what the original topic is about)

But I never made the claim that it did represent true clothing equality. Personally I'm not a big fan of Utilikilts. I wanted one when I was younger and still nervous about the idea of going out in skirts as a man, but at this point their fan-base and insistence on this overly aggressive machismo puts me off.

Is it a fringe flapper skirt? No, you're right. It's not even the madras skirt and black pantyhose with a v-neck t-shirt and grey boots that I wore out on tuesday night, while still presenting as male. Or the blue dress with black boots that I'm wearing in my avatar picture. I never said that the existence of Utilikilts means that equality is here or that boys won't get picked on for being too feminine anymore.

But it's a start.



Clubbing? Oh, OK. lol. I see the college girls in my town dressed like that too. That's not what I meant in my description either. Maybe I should have found a pic.

No, No, I get what you meant, we've all seen pictures or experienced the tendency of some crossdressers to exemplify women in a very objective, sexual way. It bothers my sensibilities too, feels very misogynistic to me. But I've certainly seen plenty of girls hitting clubs here in LA in pretty much the same clothes.

[Avana]

But see, you're quoting a line that itself was being quoted from another thread. It was a point being made by someone that was a jumping off point for the OP, but wasn't actually the purpose of the OP's post.

The title of this thread includes the phrase 'androgyny in the mainstream'.

There's nothing androgynous about kilts or utilikilts. They are male articles of clothing.

[Sara Jessica]

The title of this thread includes the phrase 'androgyny in the mainstream'.

There's nothing androgynous about kilts or utilikilts. They are male articles of clothing.

True but I think it's fair to say that utilitarian styles such as these are valid points of discussion because 1) they are still skirts 2) they are nowhere near mainstream at this point.

[Frédérique]

Personally I'm not a big fan of Utilikilts. I wanted one when I was younger and still nervous about the idea of going out in skirts as a man, but at this point their fan-base and insistence on this overly aggressive machismo puts me off.

Yes, you see this ultra-male “stance� on these modern kilt sites – the men are always firmly entrenched, legs apart, arms folded across their chests, unrepentantly defensive and defiant. I DO NOT wish to be one of them. Sport Kilt has the same ambiance, using all varieties of accepted male behavior to push their products. What if a more “delicate� male wishes to wear something a little less male to express himself? No doubt he will encounter the aforementioned manly male-ness he’s actively trying to avoid, and perhaps think twice about a kilt being a viable option…


There's nothing androgynous about kilts or utilikilts. They are male articles of clothing.

What about kilts made for females? I have a few of those (see my profile picture)…:)

I used to say that kilts are (invariably) MALE articles of clothing, no question about it – I mean, these are obsolete battle garments, incorporated into everyday fashion because of their looks, but their present, accepted, ceremonial presence is largely due to past (male) glories. However, I now see them as skirts (see below)…


True but I think it's fair to say that utilitarian styles such as these are valid points of discussion because 1) they are still skirts 2) they are nowhere near mainstream at this point.

They are not mainstream at this polarized point in time, where all displays of anti-masculinity are subject to censure. In order to wear a kilt these days, a male needs to magnify his manliness, almost daring a person to say something, and having the strength to back up his convictions. Meanwhile, a male like me would like to wear a kilt devoid of any historical trappings and EXPRESS myself by being different from the other males. I agree with Sara – if you wear a kilt as a skirt, it becomes a skirt, in fact I want it to be seen as a skirt by all, since it tells people that I am taking advantage of this “loophole� in male clothing, effectively crossdressing. You could debate this idea endlessly, since the kilt IS a male garment, yet it resembles a skirt, and 21st century individuals are not interested in splitting hairs when it comes to issues of effeminacy…

[Avana]

What about kilts made for females? I have a few of those (see my profile picture)…:)



if they weren't, you wouldn't have to qualify it with 'made for females'. ;)

[Asche]

In direct contradiction to Pythos, I have to say that we do live in a gender binary world and I don't see it disappearing, no matter how much we ... would wish it were otherwise.

If the gender divide were caused by an overly strict and stereotypical gender socialization mechanism and if it did not sit well with most of these male-socialized men, believe me there would be a much greater segment of the male population wishing to break free from it in adulthood.

It's not that simple. In order to "wish to break free," one has to first of all imagine what breaking free would mean. I do find that there are a great many men who are dissatisfied with what they have turned themselves into, especially as they get older, and you can hear a lot of them express it. But most don't have a clear idea of what exactly it is that they're dissatisfied with. They don't rebel against the masculine role because they don't have enough insight into themselves to recognize what it is that they are dissatisfied with. (BTW, does anybody remember "the problem that has no name"?) They don't have the insight because they've been trained their whole lives that it's bad to look too deeply into yourself.

Even if they do ever realize that that is what is bothering them (or a part of it, anyway), where do they go with it? The only obvious alternative role that they see is the one assigned to females. But that is a huge jump, with enormous costs.

Much of the support that masculine men get from each other and even from women is based on their playing their role. There's no small amount of policing of men who stray from the path, both from people whose sense of self and security is based on maintaining racial, gender, class, ethnic, religious, and you-name-it boundaries, and from those who don't actually need those boundaries but are afraid of becoming outcasts for failing to defend them.

It's easier for people like me, who never fit in much at all, to decide to go my own way. Most people never accepted me anyway, and most of those who accepted me before I started to walk around in skirts still do. But I never had drinking buddies, never had guys who I "bonded" with or had farting competitions with or who I talked about getting laid with, or any of that stuff. I never felt all that at home in men's groups, and I still don't. So I didn't have that much to lose. But those who have all that will be very reluctant to give it up simply to "be themselves", especially if they don't know that they'll be any happier for it.

It's particularly hard for men, because men are used to being the ones who society caters to. Giving up masculinity (the stuff that the OP was talking about, and what underlies it) means giving up masculine privilege. By contrast, when women rebel against the feminine role, it is about getting more privilege -- more autonomy, better pay, less being pushed around, etc.



Nothing will ever take away the fact that most boys want to be boys and most girls want to be girls (even if said girls wear blue jeans). It is not a stupid notion. It is simply a fact of life.
Most kids want to be whoever or whatever they're supposed to be. That much I think is genetic, and I think for obvious reasons: if children were not driven to absorb and take on the roles and expectations of the society they grow up in, there would be no continuity of the society. If there is one constant in the human species, it is that humans live in social groups, each with a social structure that perpetuates itself even as members die and are replaced.

This isn't 100%. I have a son who has Asperger Syndrome, and a degree of autistic spectrum runs in both sides of the family. But in trying to understand what goes on with him, I've come to realize that most people (not just children) have a strong unconscious drive and ability to become what the people around them expect them to be, and one difference between him and "normal" people is that either the drive or the ability (maybe both) is a lot weaker in him. It isn't until you spend a lot of time with someone (like my son) who isn't that way to appreciate just how strongly society influences not only what we do, but who we are.

It is very, very hard to appreciate how much influence society and its expectations have on us, or how different we might be if the expectations were different. Athropologists describe societies which don't expect women and men to be all that different (aside from their duties), and they see that the men and women don't in fact act all that differently. However, it's hard for us to experience this, because it's almost impossible to find a society that isn't heavily overshadowed by what we call Western Society. Anthropologists have had to seek out very isolated small tribes, and there aren't any any more.


Yes, you see this ultra-male “stance� on these modern kilt sites – the men are always firmly entrenched, legs apart, arms folded across their chests, unrepentantly defensive and defiant. I DO NOT wish to be one of them. Sport Kilt has the same ambiance, using all varieties of accepted male behavior to push their products.
I've visited some kilt websites. (Try "X marks the Scot", not sure of the URL.) You can get testosterone poisoning just looking at it. There's an enormous fear of being seen as in any way feminine. (Typical quote: "Why do they call it a 'kilt'? Because you get 'kilt' if you call it a skirt.") Guns and fighting are popular topic. Mention of righ-over-left kilts or pictures of men wearing an unapproved length of kilt are popular occasions for dogpiling.

It's pretty obvious that kilts raise all kinds of anxiety about loss of masculinity in many of the guys who wear them and many who don't.


They are not mainstream at this polarized point in time, where all displays of anti-masculinity are subject to censure.For my college reunion, I made a kilt from our class reunion fabric. Aside from having pockets (and being made out of cotton print instead of tartan wool), it was a very traditional-looking kilt. I had a guy (around my age) come up to me and commiserate with me, assuming my classmates had forced me to wear it because I'd lost a bet.

But I think it's also a generational thing. When our class marched bast the other classes, the people from younger classes (2000 and younger) routinely gave me high-fives and cheers (and free beers.) And the "X marks" crowd appears to be more my age.

[JiveTurkeyOnRye]

I've visited some kilt websites. (Try "X marks the Scot", not sure of the URL.) You can get testosterone poisoning just looking at it. There's an enormous fear of being seen as in any way feminine. (Typical quote: "Why do they call it a 'kilt'? Because you get 'kilt' if you call it a skirt.") Guns and fighting are popular topic. Mention of righ-over-left kilts or pictures of men wearing an unapproved length of kilt are popular occasions for dogpiling.

It's pretty obvious that kilts raise all kinds of anxiety about loss of masculinity in many of the guys who wear them and many who don't.


I was never hardcore enough for "X Marks the Scot," but I used to post on Skirt Cafe, and before that, a site known as "Skirt lover's nest" which was around all the way back in the 90's. I found I fit into those sites better before I started actually getting comfortable with wearing skirts in public and seeing what it really felt like for me to do so. It was a nice place to post when I was still scared, but once I got my own courage, I started to feel less like I fit in.

I feel still like a lot of the guys on those sites are really scared of being seen as feminine, there's a whole camp calling themselves "Bravehearts" that I just have never seen eye to eye with. We used to clash over my occasionally slipping the word "crossdress" into a conversation, and I finally parted ways with them after there was a whole brouhaha when I questioned the removal of a post from their "Fashion Freedom" topic board that was about wearing women's jeans.

For a group advocating men's fashion freedom, it felt like the gang was very close minded to anything that didn't fit their own narrow image of what fashion freedom meant. I can only imagine the fuss they'd raise over the outfits I've been wearing the last few months.

[ReineD]

It's not that simple.

I think it is, in my original context. The world that I live in is mostly binary. The majority of the men that I know do not wish to cross the gender barriers in terms of altering their presentation to appear more feminine. You don't know me, but this is not a comment about whether or not anyone "should" cross the gender barriers or boundaries. I am fully supportive of anyone honoring their gender affiliations, no matter their chromosomes.




In order to "wish to break free," one has to first of all imagine what breaking free would mean. I do find that there are a great many men who are dissatisfied with what they have turned themselves into, especially as they get older, and you can hear a lot of them express it. But most don't have a clear idea of what exactly it is that they're dissatisfied with. They don't rebel against the masculine role because they don't have enough insight into themselves to recognize what it is that they are dissatisfied with. (BTW, does anybody remember "the problem that has no name"?) They don't have the insight because they've been trained their whole lives that it's bad to look too deeply into yourself.

Younger males might be more afraid of 'appearing' more feminine or gay than their peers by making public their desire to decorate their bedrooms or by sharing their feelings with other males (that they don't know ... see below for more) for example. But, this is understandable during a time when they are establishing themselves among the male pecking order. More mature and confident men (in terms of attitude as well as in chronological age) do not feel as if their masculinity is threatened if they allow themselves to develop their artistic sensibilities, or show their feelings. At least, this is what I have witnessed among family members and friends. I also know quite a few men who make no apologies for not being interested in sports or cars but instead follow their other interests. Many men have just as strong opinions as their wives as to what color to put on the wall, or what furniture to choose, or the proper way to cook a certain dish, and they can be just as emotional watching commercials about puppies. Honestly, I've seen this multiple times and this is why I feel that as men mature, they move away from the more stringent "if I want to be respected by my peers, I must behave in this or that way" rule.



Even if they do ever realize that that is what is bothering them (or a part of it, anyway), where do they go with it? The only obvious alternative role that they see is the one assigned to females. But that is a huge jump, with enormous costs.

I've seen no evidence of this among the men that I've come to know. Admittedly, men do give themselves permission to show their softer sides to women (even in their teenage years) and maybe this is why you and I disagree, since obviously I'm not in the room when there are only males present. Maybe men know how to change their attitudes depending on whether they are with close friends or a room full of potential competitors. The ability to do this might be just one of the rules of engagement, and it may not be a big deal to them. I really don't think that men are permanently "stuck" in overly macho behavioral patterns, especially as they gain maturity. But, this may vary depending on their socio-economic milieus. I don't know.

Having said this, I have three grown sons (and no daughters). Over the years my house was the 'hang out' place for countless all-nighters. I've witnessed the boys being there for one another emotionally when one or the other experienced difficult circumstances such as family or girlfriend troubles. I've seen my sons give advice and feel sad for their friends. I've seen them go shopping with their buddies for that special shirt and tie, and cologne, in addition to hearing them talk about which girl was the hottest and the coolest car to have. But, these boys knew one another well, had bonded, and they were all good friends. I'm sure they didn't exhibit as many vulnerabilities on the football field with the rest of the team.



Much of the support that masculine men get from each other and even from women is based on their playing their role.

How can this be true? In modern marriages, dads are expected to help with the kids and housework, and working moms have an equal voice in the family's finances, decisions as to where to move in order to follow career paths, etc. Men and women each bring their own strengths and weaknesses to the relationship and they each rely on each other for different things. If a man should lose his job, the wife will be the strong one, and vice versa for example.



It's easier for people like me, who never fit in much at all, to decide to go my own way. Most people never accepted me anyway, and most of those who accepted me before I started to walk around in skirts still do. But I never had drinking buddies, never had guys who I "bonded" with or had farting competitions with or who I talked about getting laid with, or any of that stuff. I never felt all that at home in men's groups, and I still don't.

Had you felt more comfortable being with guys, do you think you would have bonded with them enough to feel comfortable showing your more human vulnerabilities, like my sons did? (Although I understand not feeling safe enough to dress in front of them since this is a boundary that IMO most men do not wish to cross). I don't want to dismiss your experiences, but if you never got close enough to men in order to see their softer side, then how can you say it doesn't exist or that they are afraid to show it to the people they are close to?

I do see men as having multiple facets, the softer more emotional sides as well as enjoying competition in areas that interest them. So, why would they feel as if they need to be more feminine in order to be themselves, if they are not transgender?

:hugs:

[Fab Karen]

Freedom is a matter of perception. It is more a condition of mind than an actual physical state. What binds us from being who we are is often an internal problem rather than an external one. We are often prisoners, inmates of penitentiaries made from hardened steel and stone, winthin our own minds. The elusive key to our freedom must be found from within not without.

Right on, very true.


"The more anyone tries to push a change on society, the more society pushes back, rejecting that change."
Imagine if black people in this country had listened to that kind of thinking, where would they be now? Or women? Gay people? They have shown us how it's done.

On the topic of men, Reine has made some excellent points showing that not all men are knuckle-draggers who for example have farting contests ( personally I have never seen such things with guys even among boys ), or ( if heterosexual ) only view women as pieces of meat. As with any category you can name, the more we generalize, the further we get from the truth.

[DebsUK]

Well 'm joining the thread late (been away for a bit, see below..). Apologies also for not grasping a lot of the issues raised in this thread (three pages worth, srsly? :D )

I've been in the gender wilderness for the last couple of months. CD? TV? TG? Dunno, but just couldn't be bothered to do the whole dressing thing since about Feb. Why? No idea, but it's how I've felt. On the other hand I've still been trying to be more andogynous. I still have been growing out my hair, keeping my nails long (no polish though), occasionally wearing tinted moisturiser and stuff. See, I want to be me, and the internal "me" is kind of not male nor female per se. Obviously the external "me" is male, though I'm small and slight so I have a fairly androgynous shape. The style I aim for is "androgynous skate-punk lesbian". Maybe not the most appropriate look for a young-looking 43 year old man, but that's part of my dilemma. Androgyny in women is acceptable. Androgyny in guys isn't. One of my role models is one of the instructors at my gym: quite butch, short hair, generally androgynous but definitely proud of being female. OK, I can't claim the proud of being a girl thing, but I still admire her androgyny and see her look as something to maybe not aspire to, but perhaos be inspired by. It's so much easier for girls though. Wear a pair of chinos? That's the trend. I wear a pair of girls' trousers and I'm a pervert, and that's just my wife before I leave the house (actually, she's not that bad, but you know what I mean).
Funnily enough, not especially apropros, yesterday at the gym after classes my wife and me were chatting to a couple of friends (women). They are going to a fitness weekend soon along with another friend from our classes who happens to be agay man. This weekend has a fancy dress do and this year's theme is school days, so he opted to be a headmistress, but is having trouble deciding on an outfit. Now, if it were me I'd be a schoolgirl (NO WAY would I want to present as a fusty, middle-aged spinster :) ), anyway, the thing is, my friends were making fun of the fact he had to go and choose a dress, and the awkwardness that would cause. Again, gender boundaries coming to the fore. I know they'd still accept me if I said "actually I have a couple of dresses he can try", but I think I'd be looked on as more of a joke figure as a result. Is this about status? I wonder. I mean, I said I've nothing to prove, but maybe if I admit I wear dresses, or that I'm TG in some way, they think less of me, Is that an issue for some or for me?

The point I think I'm trying to make is I'm proud to be transgendered in some way. I'm happily married, I've got nothing to prove as a guy (which relates nicely to Reine's post about young guys needing to assert themselves and older guys not). I've never been the alpha male, never will be, but I'm now realising I never wanted to be. I don't have to fit into a gender stereotype mould. Don't get me wrong, the pendulum will swing back to me wearing dresses (October seems to be the tipping point, go figure), but the move this time is less than las time I lost the urge, my only obstacle at the moment is not being arsed to get dressed :)

Apologies if this is a little incoherent, or a bit stream of conciousness, but there are loads of issues this thread raises

[Erika_bagels]

What about kilts? I've always had a manly penchant for plaid, ruffled skirts, whether they be on myself (with fur sporran and tartan tam-o-shanter), or on japanese schoolgirls (with sailor bib and long white stockings). I can see what Reine means. Even when a manly skirt is available, I'd pick the manly skirt for manly days, because a short, flirty one would still earn me a proper beating in the right alley.

[Sweet Sabrina]

Originally Posted by

"Frédérique
View Profile View Forum Posts Private Message Add as Contact Send Email

A quiet girl...

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Join Date:Sep 2006
Location:Lindsborg, Kansas, USA
Posts:1,542 Originally Posted by Sara Jessica
Men being men part 2 .... the dark side
I admire your bravery, Sara – you’ve started this thread on one of those special days set aside for the glorification of masculinity. I came out of my closet of solitude to reply! I recently wrote a thread about male behavior, specifically the “dark” yet whimsical side of manliness, but I didn’t dare to submit it for reasons that will soon become clear. Anyway, well done…"

My Reply:
As I read this reply, I can only assume you are referring to "Memorial Day". I would hardly consider this a glorification of masculinity. The holiday was established to remember the sacrifices of those men and WOMEN who made the ultimate sacrifice in defense of the ideals and values that we as Americans hold dear. If you think that simply because you are in the military you have some over developed sense of masculinity, I think you have a lot to learn. As a veteran, I have seen first hand that the military is very diversified when it comes to it's members. While until recently, hiding your sexual or dressing preferences was the norm, nevertheless, we were there. I cannot speak for all those who have served but for me the reason I enlisted had nothing to do with my masculinity. It had to do with what I considered a duty and a responsibility to protect and preserve the country that has provided so much to us all. I know this might sound like an angry reply but it is not meant to be. It is meant to enlighten. Simply because one joins the military does not mean they are hellbent on guns and glory. Generalizations are the worst things people can do to one another. Thanks for listening to my rant

Scott. USN 1991-1995

[Sue101]

If the gender divide were caused by an overly strict and stereotypical gender socialization mechanism and if it did not sit well with most of these male-socialized men, believe me there would be a much greater segment of the male population wishing to break free from it in adulthood.

I will agree with Asche and say it is not that simple.

Just some points to consider.

1. Everything you observe in male and female behaviors are after the fact, meaning everyone has already been thoroughly brainwashed into their gender socialization behaviors. Sure there are variations and rebels but there is no way to ascertain how masculine the average male would be if he grew up without this rigid gender structure because they are no examples out there you will encounter.
2. Science has looked at gender behavior and conducted numerous experiments and studies. There are plenty of books about this you can read. Science has a hard time finding any basis in believing that gender behaviors are based on genetics. Pretty much everything you assume an average male to be defined as appears to be based solely on the gender socialization. Look up the science.
3. Gender socialization does not just affect children. Everyday, every hour we are being bombarded by numerous signs and situations that reinforce the binary system. It is constantly being reinforced so only a concerted effort can break through it - meaning a man must WANT to be feminine in order to overcome the mental roadblocks.
4. If the traditional female socialization mechanism was so strict and unpalatable then why did the feminist movement only appear in the 20th century? There should be a long history dating back to the beginnings of human civilization of women protesting their role and demanding to break free and acquire male roles. This is not so because women did not think there was an alternative. The same is true of men today - men don't want femininity because they believe this is not a viable or desirable alternative behavior - because they were brought up to think this way and without a masculist movement to open their minds this will remain so.
5. The old social movement equation. Society understands why women would want to "improve" themselves by becoming more masculine but society thinks men moving down the social ladder by becoming feminine is a perversion of human nature. By nature, we seek to improve our lot and be more successful. Men wanting to become more feminine goes against this most elementary rule.
6. Masculinity is actually defined by being the opposite to femininity. A masculine man has no feminine attributes. Masculine men are successful in business and with the opposite sex so there is no glaring advantage why a man would want to develop feminine attributes when this would shatter the masculine aura and so is clearly disadvantageous.

The point is you believe boys want to be boys based on your observations of males who are being controlled by the factors listed above and are unable/unaware that they have a feminine side and it is ok to express it except in specific situations like being with a girlfriend. The only males you know who actively want to pursue feminine behaviors are crossdressers and sometimes gays. For every other male the mere thought of developing femininity is an immediate turn-off. You say girls want to be girls but I don't think that is the case anymore. Girls want to be girls and boys at the same time.

[Asche]

I will agree with Asche and say it is not that simple.
Oh, it's so nice to feel every now and then that someone thinks that something I say isn't crazy. I'm used to always being the one with ideas that don't make sense to anyone else....


4. If the traditional female socialization mechanism was so strict and unpalatable then why did the feminist movement only appear in the 20th century? There should be a long history dating back to the beginnings of human civilization of women protesting their role and demanding to break free and acquire male roles. This is not so because women did not think there was an alternative.
Actually, there have been individual women through history who have objected or rebelled against the roles they were forced into. What is unusual over the past 60 years or so is that the majority of women (in Western society, at least) have stopped going along with large parts of the role. I've read that there were mini-feminist movements in the past, such as in the mid 1700's and another one (in the US, at least) in the mid-1800's. And the suffragettes in the 1920's.

My own theory, for what theories are worth, is that it has to do with security. For most of human history, one's very survival depended upon the active support of people one was closely connected to -- family, tribe, village. To have a role -- any role (even slave) -- was to have some security in a dangerous world. I don't think it's a coincidence that modern feminism arose during a time and place of unprecedented prosperity and social mobility (the 1950's-1970's in Western society.) Civil rights for African-Americans first gained real ground during this period, too.

I don't think it's a coincidence that a certain social retrenchment started in the 80's and 90's not long after the economy went into its long slow decline and the social safety net started to unravel.


The point is you believe boys want to be boys based on your observations of males who are being controlled by the factors listed above and are unable/unaware that they have a feminine side and it is ok to express it except in specific situations like being with a girlfriend....You say girls want to be girls but I don't think that is the case anymore. Girls want to be girls and boys at the same time.
My own view is that "masculinity" and "femininity" are purely social constructs. We are not born linking liking pink or lace or horses with "female" or liking cars or playing football with "male." What's more, the variation among men and among women is far greater than the difference between the "average" man and "average" woman. It is our culture that defines certain characteristics as "masculine" and "feminine." IMHO, what is happening with girls is not that they "want to be girls and boys at the same time," but that as feminist ideas become rooted in our culture, girls are feeling more free to express their characteristics without regard to whether society labels them "masculine" or "feminine" than they were when I was growing up. For instance, there were plenty of rough tomboy girls when I was growing up, but now some of them are feeling free to demand the opportunity to play tackle football.

I am seeing some signs that some groups of boys in my sons' generation are feeling freer to express characteristics that would have been labeled "girly" or even "sissy" when I was their age, but I don't know how widespread it is or whether it's growing. If there is a change, I suspect it will happen over generations -- assuming things don't happen that would reverse the trend.

[ReineD]

Sue & Asche, we'll simply need to agree to disagree. I do not believe that gender is a pure social construct.

I do believe gender identities are reinforced (and also some gender roles but this is decreasing remarkably), but they reinforce something that is there to begin with. How would nature ensure the propagation of our species if it favored gender neutrality? These are deep questions and I suppose I could take a week (or a lifetime :)) to conduct research, but I don't have the time nor the current resources to do it properly.

I just know the little things. For example, I have 3 boys. I was determined to raise nurturing, feeling human beings. They did not go to public school, but to a Montessori school where everything is gender neutral, from the age of 18 months. There was an elaborate Playmobil dollhouse that I volunteered to bring home once in order to put crazy glue on all the joints, that the little ones kept taking apart. It was at my house for months. My sons and I played with it and they loved it because here was the world they saw around them reflected in miniature. I did not allow guns in my house. The toys were zoos, circuses, lots of art materials and books, no popular culture male character toys, etc. All their friends also went to Montessori. The dress up box had loads of different things it it, with some things specifically for boys but most of it was gender neutral.

Well, guess what? They would go outside and make their own guns out of sticks. They would play aggressive games with their friends. They would tie each other up to trees. Girls don't do this.

Also, if gender were a social construct that CDs and TSs don't "fall for" then how come there are not more CDs and TSs?

I posted in another thread today, I do believe traditional gender roles are narrowing in the workforce and at home. Dads and moms both do yard work and household chores. They both have university degrees and they both work side by side in the workforce. Male nurses or flight attendants are more common now as well. Yet, the males do not "feel" more feminine, nor do the females "feel" more masculine in these jobs or activities. Men enjoy ballet, the arts, the theater, and women enjoy sports. They both like to cook. When men and women date, they each take turns picking up the tab. Gender identity is so much deeper than what someone does for a living, the pastimes they engage in, and what chores they take on at home.

I know the idea that sometime in the future men will universally want to break out of the restrictive masculine chains that have been "forced" on them and will therefore embrace and accept a more feminine style of presentation may be appealing to CDers who have felt society's bias all their lives, but I honestly do not believe this is a realistic outlook of things to come. And this is because gender roles are narrowing (AND NOT gender identities which is separate from the roles). Things have relaxed considerably from 60 years ago, they continue to relax even more, yet outside of the trans community, boys still want to be boys and girls still want to be girls. At least this is what I have observed in the many different places I have lived among the hundreds of people I have known, in the dozens of different social contexts.

I am not at all saying that transpersons need to conform to the cis world. I am saying that I do not believe it is realistic for transpersons to believe that the cis world will disappear when society stops imposing all these "fake" gender constructs on men. If non-TG men felt so constrained by these constructs, they'd buck the system royally, just like the women did at the turn of the last century when they demanded equal rights.

What we do have now are dads clamoring for fairer divorce and custody laws. They want custody of their kids and they don't want to pay alimony. And the trend is going their way, together with the narrowing gender roles in the workforce and at home that enable women to support themselves and enable dads to take care of their kids. But, this does not make these dads feel more feminine or want to present in a more feminine manner.

[Sara Jessica]

Nothing like the real-world experiences to drive a point home Reine, so very well stated. I did a similar thing in describing some of these gender role things that had to do with my little girls.


I know the idea that sometime in the future men will universally want to break out of the restrictive masculine chains that have been "forced" on them and will therefore embrace and accept a more feminine style of presentation may be appealing to CDers who have felt society's bias all their lives, but I honestly do not believe this is a realistic outlook of things to come. And this is because gender roles are narrowing (AND NOT gender identities which is separate from the roles). Things have relaxed considerably from 60 years ago, they continue to relax even more, yet outside of the trans community, boys still want to be boys and girls still want to be girls. At least this is what I have observed in the many different places I have lived among the hundreds of people I have known, in the dozens of different social contexts.


And this pretty much sums up this thread in a succinct paragraph.

[Asche]

For example, I have 3 boys. I was determined to raise nurturing, feeling human beings. They did not go to public school, but to a Montessori school where everything is gender neutral, from the age of 18 months....

Well, guess what? They would go outside and make their own guns out of sticks.
Not to say that it disproves your point, but may I point out that they were not isolated from the wider society. If they had been all that effectively isolated, then they wouldn't have known about guns in the first place.


Also, if gender were a social construct that CDs and TSs don't "fall for" then how come there are not more CDs and TSs?
To say something is a social construct is not to say that it isn't real, or that we could get along without social constructs. The English language is clearly a social construct, and is clearly very real. It's also clear that if the USA had instead somehow ended up speaking, say, Swahili, we would have probably gotten along more or less as well as we are with English. But I seriously doubt we could have gotten along with no language at all.

I wouldn't say that CDs and TSs "don't 'fall for'" this social construct. I would say that the gender construct in its current form in Western (or USA?) society is something that most people can wear in greater or lesser comfort, but just doesn't fit some people at all. It's like "one size fits most" tights. Some people (like me) can't get them up past their knees.


I know the idea that sometime in the future men will universally want to break out of the restrictive masculine chains that have been "forced" on them and will therefore embrace and accept a more feminine style of presentation may be appealing to CDers who have felt society's bias all their lives, but I honestly do not believe this is a realistic outlook of things to come.
I agree with you.

Most adults have pretty much gotten used to their "chains" and figured out how to get around while wearing them. If they aren't too heavy or ill-fitting, why would they want to exchange them for a different set of chains that may be just as bad and require another few decades to get used to?

[Pythos]

Out of all my early friends....it was a girl that made a rubber band gun utilizing a piece of wood, a clothespin, and a rubber band. Her dad showed her how.

[Sara Jessica]

Why does it have to be about chains???

What's wrong with a gender binary, whether it's rooted in nature or a product of society and/or upbringing?

[Pythos]

The problem with a gender binary is that it gives only two options. Gender A, or Gender B, opposed to what we know to be true and that is there is in fact Gender A and Gender Z, with all the other Genders in between.

[ReineD]

I wouldn't say that CDs and TSs "don't 'fall for'" this social construct. I would say that the gender construct in its current form in Western (or USA?) society is something that most people can wear in greater or lesser comfort, but just doesn't fit some people at all. It's like "one size fits most" tights. Some people (like me) can't get them up past their knees.

I agree that trans individuals feel at odds with stereotypical gender expectations. But I do believe that because the gender gap has and continues to narrow in terms of the workforce and home life responsibilities, the gender stereotypes are losing their strengths, even though I suppose we'll always have them to a degree in some socio-economic contexts.

This, together with the internet's ubiquity, does make it easier for people who don't feel at ease within the gender binary to branch out. But, I disagree that gender dysphorics are being prevented from exploring and then determining who they are. This may have been true a generation or more ago, but I don't think it is the case any more since the stereotypes in terms of what men and women can do at work and at home have all but disappeared. The gender dysphorics certainly don't feel completely free to express themselves in the mainstream (although even this is improving), since it doesn't look as if the narrowing gender gap will affect how people wish to present (in other words, men who are single dads will not want to start wearing dresses), but hopefully CDs are not forcing themselves into denial to the same degree they did 40 or 50 years ago.

I'm not dismissing the trauma that CDs and pre-stealth TSs experience in their life choices. I'm just saying that I doubt there are scores of gender dysphorics waiting in the wings for the opportunities to explore who they are and that sometime in the future we will discover that say half or even one tenth of the men in our society will wish to present as women.

[Sara Jessica]

The problem with a gender binary is that it gives only two options. Gender A, or Gender B, opposed to what we know to be true and that is there is in fact Gender A and Gender Z, with all the other Genders in between.

Not necessarily. This is only the case if everything in the world was black and white. We all know there is a lot of grey out there and this is one of them. The concept of a binary simply gives us a starting point.

And just because society is built upon such a binary does not mean automatic rejection of variances. It's just that "acceptance" becomes more of a challenge the further away from the norm you go.

[JiveTurkeyOnRye]

Maybe the idea should be to view it less like a spectrum vs. binary idea, and view it more like a venn diagram:

http://www.louisianavoices.org/images/edu_venn_diagram_blank.gif

There's a "male" side and a "female" side, but there's also plenty of space for personal expression where the two circles overlap.

[NicoleScott]

I quit doing green light burn-outs when I had to start buying my own tires and gas. It was financial, but I'll take credit for maturing. haha

[Sara Jessica]

Maybe the idea should be to view it less like a spectrum vs. binary idea, and view it more like a venn diagram:

http://www.louisianavoices.org/images/edu_venn_diagram_blank.gif

There's a "male" side and a "female" side, but there's also plenty of space for personal expression where the two circles overlap.

That is a great point Ryan, especially when it comes to discussion of labels with people who reject such notions. You can easily put the binaries on the diagram along with pretty much every mode of TG expression.

That said, I don't think it changes anything in the original premise, that most men simply don't have it in them to migrate to another point in the diagram, whether towards androgyny or otherwise.

This makes me think of something I thought of the other night. I had flipped on the TV coverage of the NHL Draft's first round. Up on stage were the Tampa Bay Lightning's staff. Men, several of them, along with their draft pick. And again it struck me, these guys are MEN. They give no thought to their gender, they just do it. And a couple of them do it very well from a style standpoint. Think about it, what's not to like about a man who looks good in a smart suit? Steve Yzerman and Guy Boucher in particular looked incredible. They're both decent looking to begin with but still, could you imagine either of them up there in a dress??? I think not. Nor would they be prattling as they were getting ready about the perceived lack of fashion choices for men as they were getting ready.

So once again it's three cheers for men being men, and women being women...and of course acceptance of variations without expectation that such variations will somehow take over. I just don't see it happening.

[JiveTurkeyOnRye]

That said, I don't think it changes anything in the original premise, that most men simply don't have it in them to migrate to another point in the diagram, whether towards androgyny or otherwise.

Well, I cited a few different examples in my first response to you in this thread of cases where they have. Male cosmetics, earrings, skinny jeans, or, if you take it out of personal appearance, all the things Reine listed of ways that the gender gap is closing as to what people are allowed to do or not. I don't think they're migrating towards androgyny, I think it's more that society has gradually allotted for those things to be acceptable for "men."


This makes me think of something I thought of the other night. I had flipped on the TV coverage of the NHL Draft's first round. Up on stage were the Tampa Bay Lightning's staff. Men, several of them, along with their draft pick. And again it struck me, these guys are MEN. They give no thought to their gender, they just do it.

You're right. This is true of just about anything though. Most people don't give much thought to changing the status quo. But it also doesn't mean that if things slowly start to change they won't eventually change with it. I contend that they are, snail's pace, yes, but they are. You could basically negate the cultural impact of any social change that's ever occurred by saying "well there were a lot of people who never thought about it."

Here's a lowkey example: Lightbulbs. Have you gone to a home depot lately and looked at the lightbulb aisle? If you do, tell me the percentage now of CFL bulbs and the newer, even-more efficient LED bulbs, vs standard Incandescent bulbs. The old school bulbs are still there, but they're losing real estate. Yet I remember when CFL bulbs first came out, people dismissed them as a novelty. Now, I've even seen examples in pop culture, like on Yahoo!, where the image of a lightbulb to represent an idea is a CFL bulb. But, most people never thought about the environmental impact of lightbulbs. Even now most people who buy CFLs just do it because they're there, or because it seems like the thing to do. I really doubt the majority of lightbulb shoppers are driving to the store going "Here I go to lessen my environmental impact and cut my energy bills!" Instead they probably just have a shopping list that says "lightbulbs."


And a couple of them do it very well from a style standpoint. Think about it, what's not to like about a man who looks good in a smart suit? Steve Yzerman and Guy Boucher in particular looked incredible. They're both decent looking to begin with but still, could you imagine either of them up there in a dress??? I think not.

No, currently I couldn't. Trust me Sara, I am fully aware of how unusual I am when I go out dressed as a guy in a dress. But, consider this. The suits they're wearing are a thoroughly modern garment. The actual "suit" didn't come into fashion till the seventeenth century, and even then looked totally different from the suit trends of today. So whether the men are actively aware of it or not, they *are* changing their styles and following different fashion trends. Does it mean they're going to jump into dresses tomorrow? No, of course not, but it does mean that the cultural image of what makes a "man" changes.


So once again it's three cheers for men being men, and women being women...and of course acceptance of variations without expectation that such variations will somehow take over. I just don't see it happening.

I don't think the variances will ever take over, does anyone truly advocate that, or don't most people just want there to be mainstream acceptance for us to be ourselves?

[Intertwined]

Would love to have your opinion on this.

I do not believe in a Gender Binary, no one is completely feminine or masculine, I don’t care if your talking about Marilyn Monroe or John Wayne.

I will admit, some are more near one end of the Gender Continuum than others, unlike me, who is darn near middle of the road.

[Debb]

I agree. I'd even go so far as to propose: there is a third gender, a "supergender" if you will, that encompasses both.

[Kathryn Philips]

Would love to have your opinion on this.

I do not believe in a Gender Binary, no one is completely feminine or masculine, I don’t care if your talking about Marilyn Monroe or John Wayne.

I will admit, some are more near one end of the Gender Continuum than others, unlike me, who is darn near middle of the road.

John Wayne's real name was Marion which can be both a male and female name...

[Asche]

I'm just saying that I doubt there are scores of gender dysphorics waiting in the wings for the opportunities to explore who they are...
I would say that it depends upon exactly what you mean by "gender dysphoria."

If you mean males who are dissatisfied with their lives due to the restrictions of their gender's role, whether they are aware that the dissatisfaction comes from their gender role or not, I suspect there are lots of them.

If you mean males who are aware of and object to some of the restrictions of their gender's role, I suspect there are still quite a few. A lot fewer than there are girls and women who object to the restrictions imposed on them because they are female, but still quite a few.

If you mean males who feel that they would like to switch to living as if they had in fact been born female (even if only part-time), then I agree that the number is probably fairly small.


... and [I doubt] that sometime in the future we will discover that say half or even one tenth of the men in our society will wish to present as women.
Agreed.

If anything, I would expect that if the bounds of behavior, etc., that is accepted for males are broadened, we might see fewer men wishing to present as women.

[Asche]

The problem with a gender binary is that it gives only two options. Gender A, or Gender B, opposed to what we know to be true and that is there is in fact Gender A and Gender Z, with all the other Genders in between.


Not necessarily. This is only the case if everything in the world was black and white. We all know there is a lot of grey out there and this is one of them. The concept of a binary simply gives us a starting point.

(As I put back on my Energizer Bunny costume with the "Gender is a construct" drum...)

I think this is still too limited. What we are used to calling "gender" is more like a multidimensional space, each of whose axes corresponds to some characteristic that we call "masculine" or "feminine" (can you tell I'm a mathematician?)

And when you come down to it, the only reason these axes (other than "anatomical gender") are considered part of "gender" is because we are used to calling them "masculine" or "feminine."]

One of the more annoying follies that our species is prone to is the habit of conflating things that aren't really related. We like to think that if we know (or think) someone is "A Democrat", we already know all about what he/she believes in, is for/against, etc., so we don't have to bother to learn anything about them as individuals. Any time someone says "the Muslims" believe this, or "the French" are doing that, they are reducing a very varied group to one characteristic.

And that's what we do with gender.

[ReineD]

Well, I cited a few different examples in my first response to you in this thread of cases where they have. Male cosmetics, earrings, skinny jeans, or, if you take it out of personal appearance, all the things Reine listed of ways that the gender gap is closing as to what people are allowed to do or not. I don't think they're migrating towards androgyny, I think it's more that society has gradually allotted for those things to be acceptable for "men."

You make a good point: it is true that cosmetics, jewelry, skin care, some items of clothing, etc that have traditionally been only available to women are now widely available to men. But, I don't see any of these trends as an indication that men are migrating to femininity. It just means that men want to look younger, want to hide the gray in their hair, want to be stylish for a number of reasons, some of which are to present a more vibrant or youthful appearance for the job market or the dating scene.

Styles and fads continually change, and what might have once been considered strictly appropriate for one gender (such as pants for men or skin care for women), is no longer. But, this does not mean that the women who now wear pants or the men who now use exfoliators or cover their gray feel any less feminine or masculine respectively.

Maybe we're saying the same thing. :p

Asche, you've mentioned several times now that you feel there are many men who feel uneasy being men or they feel certain restrictions about being male, even if it hasn't occurred to them they might be trans in some form or another. At least, this is what I think you are saying. :p Can you give me an example of a guy who doesn't feel right in his own skin but doesn't know why? Or (other than a CDer who wants to wear what is currently considered feminine wear), a guy who feels there are restrictions placed on him that he doesn't enjoy? :)

[Jamie001]

You make a good point: it is true that cosmetics, jewelry, skin care, some items of clothing, etc that have traditionally been only available to women are now widely available to men. But, I don't see any of these trends as an indication that men are migrating to femininity. It just means that men want to look younger, want to hide the gray in their hair, want to be stylish for a number of reasons, some of which are to present a more vibrant or youthful appearance for the job market or the dating scene.

Styles and fads continually change, and what might have once been considered strictly appropriate for one gender (such as pants for men or skin care for women), is no longer. But, this does not mean that the women who now wear pants or the men who now use exfoliators or cover their gray feel any less feminine or masculine respectively.

Maybe we're saying the same thing. :p

Asche, you've mentioned several times now that you feel there are many men who feel uneasy being men or they feel certain restrictions about being male, even if it hasn't occurred to them they might be trans in some form or another. At least, this is what I think you are saying. :p Can you give me an example of a guy who doesn't feel right in his own skin but doesn't know why? Or (other than a CDer who wants to wear what is currently considered feminine wear), a guy who feels there are restrictions placed on him that he doesn't enjoy? :)

It is interesting to note how beauty items and beauty treatments are marketed to men. At one salon at a casino, a pedicure is marketed to men as a "Sports Foot Scrub" - LOL. Hair color is marketed to men using sports as a backdrop for a TV for 'Just for Men" hair color. The tagline for the ad is "keep your edge". Nothing is marketed to a man as a beautification product. There are several companies that are selling men's nail polish and they are using masculine color names like "Pirate and Coal Miner (me thinks this one was especially made for Karen so that Karen could wear it to work or while playing Ice Hockey!".

The cosmetics market is attempting to take cosmetic items and beauty services that were always considered feminine and marketing them using advertising and product names that make them appear to be "masculine". As I stated in another post, we don't need male nail polish because OPI, Essie, and all other brands of nail polish have a lot of great colors for everyone. The male nail polish companies will use employ a masculine marketing campaign and sell a bottle of nail polish for two or three times the price of the equivalent OPI nail polish, and guys that want to wear nail polish will pay the price because they believe that the product is masculine. t is a really brilliant strategy. Most women that I know will purchase a product regardless of whether it is marketed to men or women. Women do not have the hang-ups that men have regarding masculinity and femininity.

I agree that we are not moving to an androgenyous world; we are simply moving to a world where more liberties are available for men as long as those items such as beauty treatments and products are marketed to men. It will still be a severe foul for a normal masculine man to use feminine products like OPI nail polish or Clairol hair color, or if a man uses Clairol hair color, you can be certain that he will never publicly review that fact for fear of being ridiculed and ostracized from the male pack animal/herd mentality.

[Jamie001]

In addition to my previous post, it is important to understand that there is nothing more fragile than masculinity. Most men have been fed a line of crap since they were several years old that their masculinity is being tested everyday and that they must rise to the challenge. The average male fears having his masculinity questioned/challenged more than running into an inferno to rescue people inside or going to war. It is all social conditioning. Women are not conditioned in this manner and have a wider range of behavior patterns that are considered to be acceptable. For example, several months ago, the president of J. Crew (Jenna Lyons) featured a national ad in which she was enjoying a loving bonding moment with her young son and had painted his toenail hot pink because it is his favorite color. This ad caused outrage among the Right-Wing-Nuts, however it was interesting to read the response on the blogs of the LA Times, NY Times, and other websites. It was mentioned many times that if the ad had been reversed - in other words, if the ad showed a little girl wearing a football uniform and throwing a football to her Dad, there wouldn't have been any discussion, in fact most folks would think it is really cute. The ad really highlighted the double-standard of honoring and encouraging masculinity, while devaluing femininity and feminine traits. Kudos to Jenna Lyons and J. Crew for this ad. The only way to make progress is to get out there and be who you really are, not the "one-size-fits-all" image that society has created for your along with the small bot that defines acceptable expression. Unlike many other countries, we live in America and have freedom of speech and expression.

[JiveTurkeyOnRye]

Maybe we're saying the same thing. :p

We are but sort of disagreeing about what it says. You're right, men don't tend to use cosmetics in the mainstream to "feel feminine," just as women don't wear pants to "feel masculine."

But these are both things that were once considered feminine and masculine that are not any more because the social culture has shifted to allow them to be viewed differently. So in other words, while they didn't choose to do these things that they're not doing specifically to feel feminine, enough men wanted to something that was considered feminine that society had to eventually accept that these were acceptable behaviors for men.

So, really you have sort of answered your own question towards Asche. All the examples you named earlier in this thread, like about the way the gender gap has narrowed to allow men to fill more nuturing rolls in society. Here were examples of ways that the social paradigm shifted because enough people felt repressed by them, or at the very least saw a need to move the barriers, even if it was a subconscious element of what they were doing. The status quo has changed, and it doesn't do that when people are fine with how things are.

Having said that, I also agree with you that no man is going to start wearing dresses for the reason of being a stay at home dad and thus feeling the need to be more feminine. The only way skirted garments will return to the realm of men's fashion is if, like those skin care products, they become accepted as male garments. This is why I cited Utilikilts. Most people who know what they are accept them as male garments, so some of the aggressive, tough guys that Sara spoke of in the first post actually do consider them an option of clothes to wear.

Furthermore, the truth is that MtF Crossdressers, if anything, actually uphold the social norms that insist the different sexes behave in specific ways, because when passing as a woman a (Non-TS) crossdreser is essentially saying "I am doing this feminine thing, so I have to present as female."


The ad really highlighted the double-standard of honoring and encouraging masculinity, while devaluing femininity and feminine traits. Kudos to Jenna Lyons and J. Crew for this ad.

Good example Jamie! I actually emailed Jenna Lyons to compliment her on the ad and to show her support during the media blitz and she wrote me back to thank me. She laughed about the media storm, and was like "We were just having fun!" (in reference to her painting her sons toenails, as in, the kid otherwise behaves entirely cisgendered and was just enjoying time in an innocent activity with his mom. )

[ReineD]

Here were examples of ways that the social paradigm shifted because enough people felt repressed by them, or at the very least saw a need to move the barriers, even if it was a subconscious element of what they were doing. The status quo has changed, and it doesn't do that when people are fine with how things are.

I agree with the shifting of the social paradigm, but not because people felt repressed. I think it was due to economic necessity. During the 50s, only one salary was needed for a family to live. Now, it takes two if they have kids. Men had to take on more of the "traditional" female roles (helping out with household chores and kids) out of sheer necessity. The rising divorce rate with more dads getting full or shared custody also resulted in men having to become more domestic in addition to maintaining their careers. Women now tell their daughters they must obtain degrees and develop careers, no only for personal fulfillment but also because of economic need in addition to the fact that a woman can no longer rely on "being taken care of" by a man since marriage has become so volatile.



Furthermore, the truth is that MtF Crossdressers, if anything, actually uphold the social norms that insist the different sexes behave in specific ways, because when passing as a woman a (Non-TS) crossdreser is essentially saying "I am doing this feminine thing, so I have to present as female."

I couldn't agree more. :p Although, I suspect the CDers who are out in the mainstream do less of this than the closeted CDers.


The average male fears having his masculinity questioned/challenged more than running into an inferno to rescue people inside or going to war. It is all social conditioning.

...

The ad really highlighted the double-standard of honoring and encouraging masculinity, while devaluing femininity and feminine traits.

This is true as well, but I question whether non-TG men resent the double standard, even though I understand why CDers do. I rather think non-TGs are the ones who uphold the double standard, simply because they enjoy being men and THEY are the ones who do not wish to cross the gender lines. Women don't feel this way because they've had to cross into traditional male gender roles out of economic necessity, beginning during WWII. I think there was a lull though during the 50s, but the cultural revolution during the 60s changed all of this again. :)

[Fab Karen]

It was literally lack of man-power. The post-war period, extending through the 50's was America attempting to stuff the genie back into the bottle ( "you women go back to your proper place" ). During the war, masses of women got to see that talk of "men's work" was BS, as well as getting a taste of the convenience of pants.


"I am doing this feminine thing, so I have to present as female."
Looking female gives me a kind of spiritual pleasure, it's not because "I am doing this feminine thing."

[Asche]

... I question whether non-TG men resent the double standard, even though I understand why CDers do.
"Non-TG men"* is a rather large group, and it's almost impossible to say anything about such a large group that doesn't have lots of exceptions. The topic of men wearing skirts, for instance, crops up all over the Web, and you'll always find a number of comments from men saying they'd love to try it if they weren't afraid of what would happen to them if they did. For that matter, quite a few men have told me that they would love to wear kilts, but are afraid to.

I'm not saying they're the majority of non-TG men, but it shows that there's a lot more variation than you seem to assume.

* - I'm assuming that you are not defining anyone who has any desire for any non-gender-conformant thing to be TG, the way some people here do. If you did define TG that way, then your statement would be a tautology.


[non-TG men] enjoy being men and THEY are the ones who do not wish to cross the gender lines. Women don't feel this way because they've had to cross into traditional male gender roles out of economic necessity, beginning during WWII. I think there was a lull though during the 50s, but the cultural revolution during the 60s changed all of this again. :)
As someone who lived through the 50's and 60's, I don't think women crossing into traditional male gender roles was simply "economic necessity." Economic necessity led to two-income households, but it wasn't responsible for women wearing pants nearly all the time, or for large numbers of women going into traditional male professions, or for girls demanding the right to play in Little League, or for women regularly protesting expressions of sexism.

If "economic necessity" drives anything, it is women doing work that makes a direct economic contribution to the family, and they've been having to do that for millenia. Even women working in factories is a lot older than any organized women's movement -- it was already widespread by the early 1800's.

[Sue101]

How would nature ensure the propagation of our species if it favored gender neutrality? These are deep questions and I suppose I could take a week (or a lifetime ) to conduct research, but I don't have the time nor the current resources to do it properly. Gender behavior has nothing to do with sexual activity. You could totally reverse gender roles and society would continue. You don't have to conduct research - just buy a book on the subject off Amazon. There is so much that people assume is natural behavior which scientific tests disprove.


Well, guess what? They would go outside and make their own guns out of sticks. They would play aggressive games with their friends. They would tie each other up to trees. Girls don't do this. Girls dont? Tomboy behavior is very common. Anyway trying to protect your kids from certain masculine traits at home is pointless when they will be taking their ques how boys behave from other boys around them ie the boys at school as well as observing boys behavior on tv, movies, books, internet etc. Children learn their behavior from each other not from their parents. Your methodology would only have worked if you kept them at home and ensured all other sources of information were blocked.


Also, if gender were a social construct that CDs and TSs don't "fall for" then how come there are not more CDs and TSs? Not following your logic. The issue is gender conformity is overpowering so we would expect only a tiny minority to fall through the cracks and that is what we observe. Also most CDs do conform for many years until one day they discover the idea of crossdressing which at heart is an escape from your prescribed gender.


I know the idea that sometime in the future men will universally want to break out of the restrictive masculine chains that have been "forced" on them and will therefore embrace and accept a more feminine style of presentation may be appealing to CDers who have felt society's bias all their lives, but I honestly do not believe this is a realistic outlook of things to come. Yet the same was not true of women. If we were having this discussion at the beginning of the 20th century we would be saying women would have no interest from breaking free of their traditional role. Your point of view is centered on your observations of present day males who are locked into a rigid gender structure. There are no exclusive feelings to genders. If many women love the feeling of being pretty and feeling desirable then the same would be true of men devoid of the social constraints that manipulates them from even considering the idea.

[ReineD]

Asche, the last time I used the term "cis-men" here, there were many who did not follow my meaning. I've been using the term, "non-TG men" since.

At any rate, I meant men who are not interested in crossing gender barriers in any significant way. For example, I know someone who enjoys wearing his lover's panties during sex and only during sex. He is not interested in any other feminine accoutrements at any other time nor does he identify in any way as being the least bit feminine. The panties help him to feel closer to his female lover during sex in ways that I won't get into here. I would also include this person in my broad definition of "non-TG men", or "cis-men" if you prefer. It was meant to be a broad statement, in the same way that we use the terms "men" and "women" here.

Economic necessity: I agree, such a broad statement can never be a single, simple explanation but I did use it as a support statement to the claim Jamie made that many women do not shy away from appearing masculine (although I disagree that a woman who works and wears pants is masculine) in the same way that men shy away from appearing feminine. This was not my main argument although it is a significant reality of our times. A proper discussion of all the other factors that caused women's changing roles in the last 50-70 years, why they started to wear pants and branched out into professions that were previously dominated by men, why some demanded the right to compete against boys in sports, and why most will protest sexism, in short, why women demand equal rights should be done separately, so as not to derail this thread too much. If you like, you could start a thread about this in the Lounge, since by itself it isn't a CDing topic, and invite others to share their opinions.

EDIT
Sue101, I've just read your post #98 and thank you for your response, but to simplify things, let's get back to the basic argument. I maintain that most boys want to be boys and they are not interested in adopting an internal feminine gender ID, no matter what are the social conventions. I gather you disagree with this and you maintain that if society said it was OK for all boys to be feminine, most would since they would like to feel pretty?

I will say this in response to your last argument (women breaking free of their traditional gender roles during the 20th century), this did not in any way cause them to feel any less feminine. They still know they are women and they do not want to change this.

[JiveTurkeyOnRye]

Reine, I'm quite disappointed because yesterday I spent a long time writing you a post in response to points you and I raised, only to accidentally hit the "+ Reply to Thread" button at the bottom of the page instead of the "post quick reply" button under the actual text box, and lost the whole response. Rather than try to re-create it, I'm just going to move on to the most recent post of yours.




I would also include this person in my broad definition of "non-TG men", or "cis-men" if you prefer. It was meant to be a broad statement, in the same way that we use the terms "men" and "women" here.

Just curious here Reine if you would consider me transgendered or cisgendered based on my personal preference to still appear as male despite the gender norms of the clothes I choose to wear? There's no right or wrong answer, just a side curiosity.





I maintain that most boys want to be boys and they are not interested in adopting an internal feminine gender ID, no matter what are the social conventions.

I agree with you on this point, in fact I maintain the belief that if there weren't such restrictions on what is and isn't considered acceptable behavior for men to be MEN, you'd see less boys/men adopting internal feminine gender IDs. Why? Because they'd be able to express those aspects of their personalities while still being boys. (A world where for example, a JCrew ad with a kid panting his toenails with mom wouldn't be scandalous)

Why do I feel this way? By looking at women. The cultural standards allow for "tomboy" type behavior amongst women. Thus, when you come on a site and look at the FtM section, you see very little, if any who identify as simply FtM Crossdressers or FtM Transvestites, but rather, almost exclusively you find true Transmen, Men who were born with women's bodies.


I will say this in response to your last argument (women breaking free of their traditional gender roles during the 20th century), this did not in any way cause them to feel any less feminine. They still know they are women and they do not want to change this.

But the two aren't the same thing. Being/feeling more or less feminine/masculine isn't the same as being/feeling more or less male/female. By virtue of working in a hardware store, especially the one I worked in back in Ohio, I certainly have met plenty of VERY masculine women, who were still quite comfortably women. I think all people have their own individual mix of traits that can be perceived as masculine and feminine.

I wear styles that are more outwardly feminine than most men do, for sure. And I think I look relatively good when I indulge in a little bit of feminine flair to my outfits, though I also think I look (and feel) good when I get totally dressed up in a smart suit and tie and embrace my masculine side. I also think I have made some great outfits by blending some masculine and some feminine elements together. I also don't ever doubt that I'm a man when I do this.

I personally do think more men would wear skirts/dresses and other "feminine" things if they weren't so concerned about the social stigma. I've been told as much to my face by guys who have become familiar with my own style and have told me about it when hanging around after comedy shows and stuff. Furthermore, I've even had another comic, named Jeff, who has always been really cool to me about my style, tell me once that he had a lot of admiration for me dressing how I do because he even has some men's shirts he owns that he won't wear because he's too worried about getting picked on by other guy friends of his for it being too "gay" or "girly." This is a men's shirt! He obviously liked it or he wouldn't have bought it, but he's afraid to wear it because of the reaction his peer group might have.... I do not think this is all that uncommon a concern amongst young men in today's culture.

[Sue101]

I maintain that most boys want to be boys and they are not interested in adopting an internal feminine gender ID, no matter what are the social conventions. I gather you disagree with this and you maintain that if society said it was OK for all boys to be feminine, most would since they would like to feel pretty? We are not talking about the same issue. I am not saying boys would become crossdressers and develop a feminine ID, just that the notion "boys will be boys" and the implied idea that boys naturally do not like traditional girly activities is counter-intuitive unless you actually believe that there are behaviors which are exclusively gender based. Again I would suggest you read a scientific book on the subject to open up your mind on this subject.

Basing your beliefs on your own personal observations is unfortunately totally flawed and reveals nothing because everyone you know has been thoroughly indoctrinated into the gender system, including your SO! The only way to truely know what is natural and what is social construct would be to raise hundreds of babies in an isolated genderless environment which offers no clues to the children how genders should behave. If this experiment were to take place do you really think those children would grow up into adults behaving the same way we do? How could they if there were no rules to tell them that they should not like doing something because that behavior is only allowed for the other gender.

So I stand by my reasoning that if many women enjoy feeling pretty and desirable there is no justification to believe that a similar number of men would not also enjoy the same feelings if society allowed them to feel that way without guilt and prejudice. This is not about crossdressers since we have a psychologcal need to cross the gender barrier, this is about understanding that "boys will be boys" only reflects the current gender rigidity that males habitually learn from the day they are born.

[ReineD]

Again I would suggest you read a scientific book on the subject to open up your mind on this subject.

Can you recommend one, or point me to research? I don't have access to a research library. I can only read whatever abstracts I find online. But, given specific papers (author, publication, and date), I can get my SO to print them out for me since she does have access. :)


The only way to truely know what is natural and what is social construct would be to raise hundreds of babies in an isolated genderless environment which offers no clues to the children how genders should behave. If this experiment were to take place do you really think those children would grow up into adults behaving the same way we do?

I agree, it would be interesting to observe the results of such an experiment. Do you know of any research that approximates such a theory? I'd love to read it. I'm not stuck in any particular thinking pattern, save, as you say, the men that I do know.

[Sue101]

These two books cover hundreds of studies that pour cold water on the notion that the sexes are fundamenatlly different. These can be bought on Amazon second hand quite cheaply.

Same Difference: How Gender Myths Are Hurting Our Relationships, Our Children, and Our Jobs
Rosalind Barnett, Caryl Rivers

Delusions of Gender: How Our Minds, Society, and Neurosexism Create Difference
Cordelia Fine

and if you want to get to grips with a favorite theory that many CDs want to believe in - that prenatal hormones made their brains feminine then get this book as it outlines how the notion that gender is hardwired into our brains is not supported by hundreds of studies-

Brain Storm: The Flaws in the Science of Sex Differences
Rebecca Jordan-Young

I don't think you can conduct a proper analysis of what crossdressing actually is if you dont understand what gender itself is and where it comes from. If you read these 3 books then you will comprehend crossdressing is not what most CDs want you to believe it is, or what they themselves want to belive it is, since their ideas about gender are deeply flawed and based on populist notions like men are from mars, women are from venus. Men and women are not separate species, we are the same with only minor differences in a few select areas. By and large men and women equally share the same behaviors but we are socialized to act differently to obtain the significant advantages derived from conformity.

[ReineD]

Thanks for the resources! I'll look them up. :) To be fair though, I'll also look up any criticisms of their work.

EDIT

Men and women are not separate species, we are the same with only minor differences in a few select areas.

I do agree that in many respects, men and women are similar. I also disagree with the notion that engaging in certain activities makes someone more masculine or feminine. :)

[busker]

Can you recommend one, or point me to research? I don't have access to a research library. I can only read whatever abstracts I find online. But, given specific papers (author, publication, and date), I can get my SO to print them out for me since she does have access. :)



I agree, it would be interesting to observe the results of such an experiment. Do you know of any research that approximates such a theory? I'd love to read it. I'm not stuck in any particular thinking pattern, save, as you say, the men that I do know.
http://www.pubmed.gov
is open to everyone and probably 50% of the published material is free and total, not just abstracts. also, many public libraries now subscribe to a service which would give you a bit more access to scientific literature, but you must be a member with a valid card and most of it is available on line from your home, but some things are available only from within the library itself. It depends on the library agreement with the vendor. . There are actually a number of major resources on line for free scientific literature but since my other pc crashed, my bookmarks are temporarily "lost". If you already knew this, my apologies.

[Gaby2]

Well, it took me the whole morning and more to work through this thread, Sara Jessica!
The initial thread took 5 minutes and I was hoping that these 5 pages would read as easily...
no luck there!
Somehow I gave your reference to a “darker side� more weight than what most posts read and what you state the OP projected.
Moreover the following sentence intrigued me:

My state of being has to do with crossing over rather than creating a place in society where boys can look like girls and vice-versa as the new normal.

I can’t help associating “darker side� with words like: sinister, sadistic, evil, mean and cynical.
None of these adjectives are gender-specific but if one needs to use these characteristics to achieve a position of authority, then they can dominate the agenda.
As I see it, (we)men:heehee: have dominated society for centuries, mostly championing the “breadwinner takes it all� philosophy.

While gratefully reading the wonderful insights as regards society, the behaviour of “typical� men and how our upbringing perhaps even demands a statement like CDing, does this thread mirror a sad present-day loss of “feminine virtues�?
I struggle to come to terms with the lack of… well, “love� in many of the people with whom I deal in everyday life –for what they do and for who they are.
I notice this especially in women – the very “objects� of my CDing interest.
In my youth, it was the women who openly expressed love and thereby hope in a poverty stricken context.
(The men were at work or in the pub, though I didn’t feel less loved by them.)
Maybe my early CDing was expressing a desire to be like these hope-giving women.

Avana #39 allowed me to find:
“…the point [Thaemlitz] wished to convey was that there is a difference between action motivated by optimistic desires for things to come ("trying to change things from this point forward"), and action motivated by an urgency to end the unacceptable present ("trying to end things which have persisted until now")…�

Despite the positive discourse in the thread about forward-looking changes and improvements in society from TG perspectives, what if society is in reality going backwards?
It’s hard to accept, but most of us won’t ever be able to do much against ignorance and injustice, being caught up in and trying to deal with our own very real everyday problems.
Even so, affluent or not, I hope we’re all not just working-class heroes.

Coming back to your statement about “crossing over�…
I noticed the Nigerian Ladies’ soccer team kicking the s..t out of the Germans in the World Cup the other evening. The German Ladies took it like a man!
(I’m not talking about being “tough� – this was the worst of unsporting behavior.)
I’m just wondering where we are heading when the feminine role-models have learnt how to cheat, foul and bully like the “best� of us?
Is this a manifestation of a “darker side� in women as they assert themselves in the man’s world?
It begs the question: do I want to present like them?

In stark contrast, I enjoy reading forum-posts because the real people here (mostly men) express a passion, a desire, and yeah, a love for CDing (and indeed almost all manifestations of TG).
They simply brighten up my day in a very traditional feminine manner.
This gives me lots of hope for the future.

Two-cent take,
Gaby

[ReineD]

We are not talking about the same issue. I am not saying boys would become crossdressers and develop a feminine ID, just that the notion "boys will be boys" and the implied idea that boys naturally do not like traditional girly activities is counter-intuitive unless you actually believe that there are behaviors which are exclusively gender based. Again I would suggest you read a scientific book on the subject to open up your mind on this subject.

Well, I hate being accused of being close-minded, so I've familiarized myself with the literature you suggest in your post #103. :)

First, a discussion of the books:

I agree with Rosalind Barnett. There is no fundamental difference between men and women in terms of learning, capabilities, and job performance.

I also agree with Cordelia Fine's position. She does take on a more feminist approach with the term "neurosexism", which she coined to explain the flaws in current scientific research that explain away women's different aptitudes by examining biological data in limited contexts and do not take into account social conditioning. I wholeheartedly agree with her that pure biological research does not prove that women's intellects are less capable than men's, women are less capable of leadership than men, women are more empathetic than men and men are more systematic than women. I agree with her there is no biological basis for any inequality between the sexes.

Both Cordelia Fine and Rebecca Jordan-Young suggest there needs to be more rigorous and complete scientific research when determining differences between the sexes. It is a complex field that involves anthropology, sociology, psychology, and biology, in short both the soft and hard sciences, and research that examines the effects of giving hormones to rats in a lab environment for example does not totally explain human gender and sexuality differences.

But, Cordelia Fine does not say that the differences between the sexes are caused purely by social conditioning. Dr. Fine does admit to innate gender differences and she also rather thinks that men have it easier than women in our society. These are excerpts from an interview she gave in "The Psychologist", November 2010, in which she defends criticism about her book:


My book is not concerned with core gender identity, that is, the sense of being male or female. (page 903)


I certainly think that neurosexism is bad for men too, and often downright insulting [the notion that men are not hard-wired to be empathetic]. But at the same time it's worth pointing out that although it's a brave boy or young man who flirts with the feminine in front of his peers, on the whole men tend to be welcomed into traditionally female occupations. By contrast, women who try to enter masculine occupations including those more dangerous ones, often suffer very hostile treatment. (page 902)

She should know. I imagine she has suffered her fair share of sexual discrimination.

The mistake you make, Sue, is in believing that if it were not for social conditioning men would want to feel pretty, just like women. I'm quoting from a post you made in the Nature vs. Nurture thread:


So any male who dresses in a LBD and enjoys feelings of prettiness and desirability then that is as normal a feeling for a man to experience as it is for women.

Non-transgender men do not want to feel pretty in the sense that you describe it. You are not speaking of cognitive functions here, but of a fundamental gender identity which is manifested in the way that we choose to present ourselves. I think you are transferring your own wish for sameness onto everyone else. Men and women may well have no differences in terms of intellect and general capabilities, and it is true that a person's tastes for the arts or sciences vs. the more concrete pastimes such as building engines vary increasingly in our day and age from person to person regardless of gender, but fundamentally there is still a gender difference among people who are not transgender. Women get pregnant and nurse babies, while men don't. Boys would still want to differentiate themselves from girls, and vice versa, if we raised everyone in a gender neutral world. If we lived in nudist colonies for example, we would still be informed of our differences solely based on our different bodies and biological functions. The boys who feel feminine would still want to align themselves with the girls and would want to shave their bodies to approximate women's hairlessness, while those who don't would still want to hang out with the guys and perhaps have hair growing contests, even though we would perhaps all earn how to hunt, fish, grow vegetables, and build huts when not nursing babies.

It is perfectly valid to say that men want to feel attractive and admired. Men want to feel loved and desired too. But to ascribe transgender values on males who are not transgender by saying that were it not for social conditioning, boys would want to feel pretty in LBDs I believe is inaccurate.

[Asche]

Non-transgender men do not want to feel pretty in the sense that you describe it.
But what does "non-transgender men" mean?

As far as I have been able to tell from the way people use the word here, "transgender" simply means a man who is doing (or wanting to do) stuff that is not considered appropriate for men. Since you seem to consider "wanting to feel pretty" to be something "men don't do", you're making your statement true by simply excluding anyone who would make it false. I think this is a case of No True Scotsman (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_true_scotsman)



The mistake you make, Sue, is in believing that if it were not for social conditioning men would want to feel pretty, just like women.
I can't speak for Sue, but I certainly would never make such a bald statement, because almost any blanket statement like "men would want to feel pretty" is going to be false simply because men are all different.

However, "men wouldn't want to feel pretty" is equally false, for the same reason.

Some men do want to feel pretty, despite the social conditioning against it -- just look around Crossdressers.Com. It's hard to imagine that there wouldn't be more of them if there weren't all that social conditioning and stigma against it. How many? Nobody knows.

It's also hard to imagine that there wouldn't be plenty of men, maybe even the majority, who would not[/] want to feel pretty, regardless of how society tried to condition them. (After all, a large segment of the female population isn't interested in looking pretty, either, despite the social pressure on them to meet those beauty standards.)

For [i]any reasonably large group X, (almost) any statement "X's are Y" is going to be true for some and false for others. To go on and insist that "X's are Y" is to implicitly erase all the X's who aren't Y. Giving the exceptions a label Z and throwing in the occasional "except for the Z's," doesn't make it any less of an erasure.

This isn't just academic for me. I've had too many experiences where people simply ignored some significant aspect of me because they couldn't be bothered with exceptions to their "X's are...." statements. Or had people insist that I was something or someone other than who I thought I was, simply because they preferred. their theories to my reality. For instance, I've had people in the CD community insist that I was "really female" because I like to wear skirts and dresses.

[Sara Jessica]

Thank you for your comments Gaby.

Please know this thread has taken on a life of it's own in such a good way. It has grown well beyond the little premise I threw out there for consideration. I especially appreciate the enthusiasm shown by several of the members here (especially Reine for seeking out some of the academic works which were cited). I have also found it exhausting to participate further on their level so while I have read every word thus far, my participation has been eclipsed by the others.

That said, to address a couple points you made about the original premise, the "dark side" had two meanings. First of all, it was a contrast to my original "men being men" post from a while back. That one was based on my observation of a couple "Tim Allen / Home Improvement" types. Their passion for what they were into was intriguing, something I saw as nothing but positive. But the "dark side" also had to do with my encounters immediately prior to starting this current thread, with men both young and old whose behavior was what I would call stereotypically pig male, the kind of guy I could never be, nor would I ever hang around with such a person, along with the testosterone-infused youth with all of his bravado on display.

As for "crossing over", that is more to convey my personal POV, a contrast towards a societal trend towards androgyny, if such a thing exists outside of the fringes. I believe many of the responders have touched upon areas where this is the case but I'm still not seeing it as a mainstream endeavor any time soon.

The behaviors you describe in the soccer match are examples of the dark side of sport, a trap that clearly women can fall into despite being the "fairer" gender. But I dare to say that such behavior isn't commonplace beyond the confines of sporting events unless you count a recent trend where girl-fights have been posted on sites like youtube with zeal.

I did find your comment about women in your youth expressing hope and love as something you wish to emulate. In reading what led up to that, I thought to myself "oh no, here it comes" in that I expected a comment about idealization of clothing and styles of that time period, fearing that we were about to read a lament about why women of today don't dress in such a manner. So it was refreshing to be surprised with your lovelier take. All I can say is that times change on every front. Style of course is easy to conceptualize but I think your point is just as valid. The concepts of love and hope, companionship and relationships, etc. are ever changing as well and I think it was a neat point that you made.

[ReineD]

However, "men wouldn't want to feel pretty" is equally false, for the same reason.

Some men do want to feel pretty, despite the social conditioning against it -- just look around Crossdressers.Com. It's hard to imagine that there wouldn't be more of them if there weren't all that social conditioning and stigma against it. How many? Nobody knows.

Of course CDers want to feel pretty! This is the point of CDing for the vast majority! :)

As to your question about what I mean by "non-transgender" men. I am talking about men who do not wish to cross any gender boundaries, and I am not talking about men who have mild panty fetishes: there are men, such as my prior example, who do put on panties, thigh highs, heels, or something similar during sex only, but who otherwise have no desire or inclination to present feminine in any way, shape, or form. The act of putting on said panties does not make them feel "pretty", but rather brings them emotionally closer to the woman who owns the panties. :) This is not crossing a gender boundary in my book, it is only engaging in a fetish. The article of clothing could be angora, feathers, or latex, and it would produce the same results.



(After all, a large segment of the female population isn't interested in looking pretty, either, despite the social pressure on them to meet those beauty standards.)

We disagree here. There are many women who do not feel they need the fashion and makeup trappings in order to be feminine. I know there is a "high" standard universally upheld by the CDing community, but in reality, it is a woman's basic nature and her inner sense of self that makes her a woman and feel like one. Not the adornments.



For instance, I've had people in the CD community insist that I was "really female" because I like to wear skirts and dresses.

I understand your frustration with people who have difficulty imagining that anyone is different than they are. Was it a TS who said such things?

So let me ask: what type of CDing do you do exactly? When do you CD, how do you present yourself, and what do you get out of it?

[Stacey Summer]

Androgyny is already here. We see it all levels of society, from the business suit to the followers of fashion. But it's still essentially binary. As many others have said, Mankind's greatest asset is our diversity, our differing beliefs and opinions. Any attempt to force acceptance is doomed to failure, as a species we are for too independent and strong willed to meekly submit to someone elses idea of what is right. Acceptance should come about through greater understanding, better education and an increase in the respect we show to one another. The anti-discrimination laws in effect are a good thing, at their heart they mean that it's against the law to verbally or physically abuse someone for how they dress, how they look, their skin colour, their sex or their gender but they don't preclude you from having your own opinions or beliefs. Would I like to be able to wear a nice skirt and heels to the shops without fear of sniggers and rude comments? Absolutely but I'm also aware that everyone is different and everyone is entitled to their own opinion on any given subject.

I'[m not entirely sure that made too much sense so I'll say it this way. Acceptance is by far a more laudable goal than some sort of asexual society where everything is the same. However, having said that I'd like to go back in time, find the person or group of people who first defined what men and women were "allowed" to wear and do nasty things to them. If there was no segregation of clothing in the first place their would be no discrimination in this area. A juxtaposition I know.

Stacey.

[dawnmarrie1961]

but does it have to change at the speed of a meteor hitting the earth, or can it just be as sure of the change that a glacier makes on the land (and no - the speed analogy is not lost on me)? I would rather try to persuade rather than force. That's the way i liken those two methods.

Kathi


Any real and lasting change takes a certain amount of time.
Rememeber "rome wasn"t built in a day."The world will learn at a speed that reflects that amount of good teachers that are out there to learn from. Bad teachers will only hinder progress.
LET US EACH TAKE A PRIVATE OATH TODAY TO BE A "GOOD TEACHER".

[Gaby2]

That's interesting, Dawn Marrie!
You agreed with Kathi who had answered Pythos:

Society will never change, unless something changes it.

But does it have to change at the speed of a meteor hitting the Earth, or can it just be as sure of the change that a glacier makes on the land (and no - the speed analogy is not lost on me)? I would rather try to persuade rather than force. That's the way I liken those two methods.

Kathi


Any real and lasting change takes a certain amount of time.
Rememeber "rome wasn"t built in a day."The world will learn at a speed that reflects that amount of good teachers that are out there to learn from. Bad teachers will only hinder progress.
LET US EACH TAKE A PRIVATE OATH TODAY TO BE A "GOOD TEACHER".
I'm with you and Kathi as regards letting time do the work.
But Pythos' statement allows for much more!
Sometimes nothing less than radical means will work to change attitudes.
Especially, if people in general (=us) accept the status quo because that's just the way it is.
Remember John Lennon...
Here's quoting him more specifically this time (4th verse):
"Keep you doped with religion and sex and TV,
And you think you're so clever and classless and free,
But you're still f**k*** peasents as far as I can see,
A working class hero is something to be,
A working class hero is something to be."
:guns Gaby

[Sue101]

Reine I am glad you looked up summaries of these books but that was not really the reason I suggested them. I do not necessarily agree with all the theories being put forward, I believe some to be flawed. The value of these books is that they describe many gender studies and how the results contradict what we feel is natural about the genders.


The mistake you make, Sue, is in believing that if it were not for social conditioning men would want to feel pretty, just like women Why is this a mistake. That is like saying women cannot possess any typical masculine behaviors like aggression. On what basis can you support the notion that there are feelings and behaviors that only women display? Also how does this square to numerous examples in our history and other cultures where men go to some lengths to beautify themselves? In a non taboo world a LBD would be recognized for what it is - a flattering article with feminine overtones. Something a man could wear to convey his perception of himself as a more sensitive person - but not necessarily transgendered.


Non-transgender men do not want to feel pretty in the sense that you describe it. You are not speaking of cognitive functions here, but of a fundamental gender identity which is manifested in the way that we choose to present ourselves. I think you are transferring your own wish for sameness onto everyone else. Again you are basing your assumptions on post conditioned men when you say they don't want to feel pretty. We know that because boys were conditioned to think that way. Feeling pretty has nothing to do with gender identity. It is a simple human emotion that like all emotions are shared by both genders. Only social conditioning tries to make them exclusive to one sex.

I am not transferring my own wish for sameness. I am not saying men would become crossdressers. I am saying there is no basis to claim that men would not express these feelings if the taboo was lifted. That does not make them feminine men or CDs, just whole persons. As I have mentioned before you would hold exactly the same views of women if you lived a hundred years earlier. Women were not considered capable of being aggressive, competitive, business minded, politically minded, sports minded etc. We know that is all nonsense, a woman can be everything a man can be and have the same interests and feelings. But apparently this is not true of men? There is no rationale to this.


Women get pregnant and nurse babies, while men don't. Is this not old school thinking linking the physical attributes with gender? Do women feel feminine when pregnant or do they feel like they are a woman? Granted since we are all post conditioned many people do link certain activities to the gender. They feel reassured and are comforted by the fact that they are doing something strongly linked to their social gender so are fulfilling their role. If I picked up a gun I might feel masculine because I am replicating the thousands of images I have in my head of macho men firing guns but anyone can fire a gun. I don't see how this sheds any light onto the issue of how males are conditioned to stay clear of certain behaviors and feelings solely due to gender socialization.

[ReineD]

LOL. We seem to be discussing the same thing across two different threads. I've just addressed this in the Nature vs. Nurture thread.

But, I'm afraid I'll have to bow out of the "post-conditioned" discussion. It's just far too speculative for me, and also I hate to say this, but I just don't think I'm as invested in discussing it at length as you are. Besides, I don't think we'll come to an agreement on this. I see us going around in circles.

It was fun, though! :)

[Sue101]

Better than a panty thread! Debates are not about winning or losing but about throwing ideas around. The main benefactors are the audience who learn from watching. ;-)

I will ask you this though. In one thirty words or less describe what femininity is as precisely as possible - no examples to be included just your best dictionary definition.

[Asche]

So let me ask: what type of CDing do you do exactly? When do you CD, how do you present yourself, and what do you get out of it?
My "type of CDing":

The main "CD-ish" thing I do is to wear skirts and tights. I wear skirts pretty much all the time, except for work or events with the kids. That includes hiking and bicycling. I don't try to hide the fact that I'm male: for one thing, I have a beard, for another, with my body shape, there's no way I could pass for female. I also wear kilts (usually Utilikilt-style kilts, the Scottish style ones are too uncomfortable.)

I end up making my own skirts, because I haven't found a skirt sold for women that I think looks right on me. I go for fairly full skirts, because I like the feeling of the skirt swirling around. For contra dances, which is where I got my start wearing skirts, I go for fairly "feminine" skirts: lace, satin or taffeta, ruffles, petticoats, and skirts that stick way out when you twirl (a lot of twirling goes on at contra dances!)

My shirts are ordinary men's shirts, because women's blouses don't fit me any better than women's skirts. I haven't mastered sewing my own shirts, but whenever I do, I'll probably start experimenting with lace, ruffles, and pouffier shirts. For that matter, when I figure out how to make dresses that I think look good on me, I'll start experimenting with dresses.

FWIW, I don't do makeup, bras, high heels, or sheer pantyhose. Never felt the urge.

How I present:

The effect that I look for is that I'm a man who wears what he wants to wear, regardless of what may be considered "appropriate" for males, and who has his own sense of style.

FWIW, I have no wish to be mistaken for female -- which is just as well, since I'd have a snowball's chance in hell of succeeding!

What I get out of it:

I like pretty things. I like looking at them, I like looking at women wearing pretty things. I like wearing them because it's a way of participating in them, just like dancing is, for me, a way of participating in the music. (Full) skirts, in particular, look and feel pretty to me.

I imagine myself as the little boy who, at nursery school, aways wants to wear the princess dress, not because he wants to be a girl, but because he (like a lot of the girls) is enraptured by the prettiness of the dress. I've always wondered what would have happened if I'd had an older sister or two.

I also get a sense of getting in touch with parts of myself that I've had to suppress. I can see how some people might see this as their "female side", but I've never felt particularly "masculine" or "feminine."

Of course, my experience of "masculinity" while I was growing up was mostly that it involved beating up and getting beaten up (in my case, mostly the latter) and other, equally uncomfortable things, while "femininity" seemed to mostly involve pretending to be stupid and incompetent, neither of which had anything to do with what I felt I was or wanted to be. Hence my dislike of Teh Gender Binary.