Can you CD w/o being TG? [Archive] - Crossdressers.com - #1 Community & Forum for Crossdressers, Family and Friends

ReineD

10-26-2011, 03:54 AM

It's a very good question and it puzzles me as well.

So if you don't mind, Kim, to step way for a moment from any debate over the definition of "TG" (if that's possible) lol, I'd like to simply rephrase the question to, "Can you crossdress without crossing any gender lines"? Or, "Is there any departure from a strictly male gender identity when a crossdresser crossdresses?

I think we should eliminate from this discussion the men who present as men (men's hair cut, no makeup, no forms, no hip pads, no waist cinchers, no feminine accessories such as jewelry, shoes, etc) but who wear man-skirts in much the same way as men who wear kilts. I do think these men are the exception in this forum and whether or not they wish to get in touch with their softer selves will vary depending on the individual.

But for the majority here who do present a feminine appearance even if partially, how can they not be crossing any gender lines? I've read some of the reasons such as dressing to relieve stress, or enjoying the silky fabrics, or having a taste for the cut and color of the clothes. But if these are the only reasons for dressing, then why wear the wigs, makeup, forms, etc, and still identify solidly as a man? Some members have said they present as a woman in order to be able to wear the clothes and not be derided for looking like a guy in a dress. But if the dressing is only to relieve stress or enjoy the clothes, then why is there a wish to wear these clothes in public, which would necessitate looking (and being treated as) a woman?

Some members suggest that dressing for fetish doesn't count. But, what is it about the dressing that is so sexually stimulating, and why is this? Hmmmm? :) If the climax involves imagining oneself as a woman, then I'd say this definitely crosses gender lines.

It is puzzling, indeed. My take on it is that members who say they are not TG, confuse the term "TG" with transsexual. They want to present as women (or for fetish CDs, get off as women), but they don't want to become a woman. I understand this. It is part-time for them. They do identify as men. But maybe they should at least admit they identify as men with a feminine twist even if occasionally. And this alone means they are crossing gender lines even if only occasionally, which is the meaning of being transgender. "Trans" = to cross. The gender lines. But crossing does not mean permanently becoming a woman. People can cross back and forth. :)

JanetK

10-26-2011, 09:12 AM

I agree with Rianna and Reine. I cross (trans) the gender lines every time I put anything on that is created for the opposite gender. Even if it is panties and pantyhose under my drab attire, it is still me in clothes not specific to my birth gender, and is therefore crossing the line from the male to female gender. I am a crossdresser and I am most definitely transgendered.

kimdl93

10-26-2011, 09:48 AM

Reine, it is hard to even ask the question without getting bogged down with "definitions". And I agree that it seems many confuse transexual with transgender. Words can be tricky things, because they inherently mean different things to different people. My other observation is that people may be uncomfortable with identifying themselves as transgenders (to any degree) then the defnition itself becomes a distraction from the basic question.

that being said, I like the way you rephrased the question. I too have a difficult time imagining how one can cross the gender boundary without possessing somewhat more fluid gender identification.

Aprilrain

10-26-2011, 10:06 AM

I think cross-dresser is a fairly accurate description without being unwieldy.
Transgender is NOT a medical term and really means nothing in particular.
The word transsexual implies moving from one SEX to the other
I suppose if we use that logic than TG could mean moving from one gender to the other with out changing ones sex. this could include CDing but some CDs just put the clothes on and do not adopt the behavior of the other gender and who is to say that behavior is exclusively male or female? society says this is typical of a man and this is typical of a woman but especially in our "individual freedoms" loving western societies one can find exceptions to every rule. People like to point out the Physical differences between men and woman but that is SEX not GENDER. I often hear, bye way of an example, how men are bigger and stronger than woman but then again I have met woman who could bench press me! and guys so wimpy and frail well you just feel sorry for them LOL.

Imeni

10-26-2011, 10:16 AM

Everybody has made excellent, valid points of view. However, I don't find that I fit under any category. So much so that I'm even sure what I would be labelled AS.

I don't want to be a woman, in any sort of the view. I don't have a part of myself whom I see as a woman, nor a man for that matter of fact. I don't look in the mirror and see a defined sex. I see a person, who biologically is male and who has a lifetime of conditioning towards being a very passing male in today's society for obvious reasons. I don't see myself as a man or a woman, but as an entirely blank mental state. Where I don't see wearing a dress any different than wearing a pair of jeans and a muscle shirt.

Society has deemed Crossdressing as weird and taboo in some places. I am aware that as a functioning member of society, I'm bound to the laws and moral code that you find therein. I pay taxes, I have a job. I buy nice things.

It just so happens, I enjoy wearing things from the opposite side of the gender spectrum and because it is in fact a societal no-no, I choose to hide it from people as not to be singled out and ridiculed for it. So, I'm not sure I know how to answer the original statement.

Yes, I suppose as, I crossdress yet don't feel the need to become a woman, or at least that's my understanding of a TG. But No in the sense that others who have a more defined view of whom they are DO feel that by crossdressing, they acknowledge or at least get the feeling that they could be feminine.

suchacutie

10-26-2011, 10:24 AM

Let's try this one on for size :) :

A male actor is cast to play a female role. He learns all that is necessary to be a convincing woman (we all know the list of things he needs to learn). He goes out on stage and plays the role perfectly.

Analyzing this, I would say that this male actor is not transgendered. He has gone through the motions but it was a job, and that's all it was. He may have even enjoyed the feeling of the clothes and the aura of portraying a woman, but it was his job, not his personal mindset.

Therefore, I would say that anyone could crossdress to "portray" a woman for some reason without mentally crossing the line. To me, being transgendered is a state of mind, not one of function. Going along with that thought, this website is "crossdresseres.com", not "transgedered.com".

Personally, I'm transgendered. However, I can see where I could use the knowledge that I've learned about Tina in order to behave completely as a male in feminine garb, makeup, etc. I see these as separable.

tina

kimdl93

10-26-2011, 12:30 PM

OK, I'm willing to grant you that an actor may cross dress for reasons other than their gender orientation. And I'll concede that its physically possilble for someone to wear the garments of the other sex without an inner need to cross some gender border. Still, a bit of a stretch isn't it?

MackenzieMarigold

10-26-2011, 12:49 PM

What you say is at the same time true and irrelevant. what you define in your first sentence is someone who is not transsexual.

Transgender has a very precise etymology - it comes from two roots: "Trans" meaning to cross and "gender". In this sense, male and female are genders, so someone who (to use your phrase) has "he body of a male and at the same time dress in the clothes of a female" has crossed (trans) the gender lines.

Using your logic, you would have to say that a cat is not an animal because a dog is an animal and cats are not dogs.

I agree COMPLETELY with that, but many people here have different definitions for transgender, which is the point I was trying to make. Unless a definitive definition were to be established, a proper conversation couldn't happen.

ReineD

10-26-2011, 01:07 PM

I agree COMPLETELY with that, but many people here have different definitions for transgender, which is the point I was trying to make. Unless a definitive definition were to be established, a proper conversation couldn't happen.

Hmm. I was working on a list of definitions to post as a sticky, and it went on the back burner. I think it's time to post it now. The definitions come from the WPATH (World Professional Association for Transgender Health), their latest Standards of Care (SoC), version 7.

You can't get any more definitive than that. And anyone who reads it and disagrees, ... well, then they're just speaking a different language than everyone else. You know, like someone who refuses to call a television a television because they think that "DFWMP" (device-for-watching-moving-pictures) is a better and more descriptive term. Or, someone who doesn't want to call it anything because, well, there are too many different opinions as to what a television should be called. :p

Here's the new sticky, posted in the M2F: http://www.crossdressers.com/forums/showthread.php?162497-Some-Common-Definitions&p=2636716#post2636716

gabimartini

10-26-2011, 01:18 PM

MackenzieMarigold

10-26-2011, 01:19 PM

Toni Citara

10-26-2011, 01:22 PM

Speaking strictly for myself... yes, I can crossdress and have no desire to become TG and/or TS.

I enjoy my male life and body very much, and when I CD it is because I enjoy it. For example, I enjoy riding a motorcycle, I have no desire to become a "Biker". I don't desire the "Biker" lifestyle.

kimdl93

10-26-2011, 01:30 PM

Kim,

I agree with you that in the case of most of us, CDing is indeed a manifestation of transgender feelings. But, I believe there are people who crossdress out of curiosity, as a fetish to seek sexual arousal only. I don't think people in this situation entertain the idea of TG or TS. My two cents.

Gabi

Here's my reaction: I don't think one entertains the idea of being TG...or TS. One who engages in CDing, it seems to me, may be expressing transgenderism, whether (or not) they consciously identify themselves as such. And if its curiousity, how long might it take to satisfy that curiosity...an afternoon, til reaching puberty, or until they're 46? As for fetish or sexual arrousal...one might argue endlessly about their motivations - why dressing would be a sexual trigger.

I seldome seek absolute answers, and I'll conceded that the Question posed in the OP, didn't allow much wiggle room. So, would it be fair to say that, with the exceptions noted, CDing is, more often than not, a manifestation of transgenderism?

Veronica27

10-26-2011, 01:48 PM

In addition to needing a precise definition of the word transgender, it is also important to note that there is a difference between femininity and the mental state of "being" a woman. Masculinity and femininity are social concepts that divide some basic human nature and behavioural traits into those that are more predominant in the male and those that are more predominant in the female. The predominance is due to various factors such as hormonal influences, and social conditioning. But all humans are capable to some extent of displaying the entire range of both masculine and feminine qualities regardless of their biological sex. The degree to which it is possible depends upon their genetics, personality and upbringing and varies from individual to individual. The major difference between the sexes is the fact that males are conditioned to suppress most of their feminine qualities to avoid the appearance of weakness, while females are encouraged to utilize their masculine qualities, since they denote strength, so long as they maintain their feminine qualities as well. The continual suppression of a portion of ones personality and being can be stressful, and crossdressing provides a means of stepping outside of ones normal external male imagery, and in a sense stepping into an apparent external female image, all the while remaining the same basic internal person. This enables the suppressed inner feminine qualities to be released in what appears to others to be in harmony with the external image. In reality, the crossdresser has passed from being a man in a man's body, to being a man in an artificially created woman's body.

If we consider gender to be our own internal mental identity, then the crossdresser is not necessarily transgendered, as it is his external image only that may have changed. The external image consists of the characteristics that we generally refer to when describing one's sex as opposed to their gender. To be truly transgendered, the act of crossdressing has to create inner feelings of being a woman in line with the outer appearance, and not simply the releasing of pent-up feminine qualities. I think that some CD's mistakenly identify the release of their own male feminine qualities when crossdressing as mentally becoming a woman, because they are not used to the sensation of allowing that side of their persona to be displayed. This misinterpretation of their actions seems logical to them as it brings the internal and external being into harmony. The outer female "shell" enables this mental deception to occur. On the other hand, some TG's can be in denial of their transgenderedness, as it could cause major complications in their personal lives, because of the assumptions that it could lead them further toward the TS end of the spectrum, or to going full-time. It is a highly individualistic situation, and I think we should respect everyone's judgement as to where they stand.

While transgender is a useful term that can apply to many situations, depending upon how it is defined, I am not an advocate of the "umbrella" approach as we are all individuals. This use of "TG" tends to define us in a very narrow way, but we are all individuals, and should be celebrating our individuality. Also, the origin of the term, was intended to provide a label for a specific type of crossdresser, rather than being applicable to everybody.

Veronica

"Mary"

10-26-2011, 02:48 PM

Transgender (TG) is an umbrella term that includes anything but plain vanilla gender. CD is just one of the alternative gender expressions under that umbrella. There are as many different expressions as there are people under that umbrella

I hope so!! I'm with Celeste. I embrace different traits that are typically more closely associated with females. I don't plan on living as 100% woman. I'm just me (85-14% ??) I just like to let that +/-15% show more sometimes.

Pink Person

10-26-2011, 05:21 PM

No, you can't CD without being TG. Cisgender people don't crossdress. Cisgender people
don't dress themselves in a manner that is commonly associated with the opposite gender. Crossdressing is by definition a transgender behavior regardless of personal intent.

People who crossdress and still claim to be cisgender are lying about themselves and lying about what it means to be cisgender. Cisgender crossdressers are fantasy figures, like unicorns. In reality, every crossdresser is a queer transgender duck. You can protest with a quack and waddle for cover, but no one (except you) will mistake you for anything else.

Joan21

10-26-2011, 06:25 PM

Why do we have to worry bout terms names etc like cd tv ts tg just b u an not worry about it I learned it's one less worry

ReineD

10-26-2011, 06:41 PM

The major difference between the sexes is the fact that males are conditioned to suppress most of their feminine qualities to avoid the appearance of weakness, while females are encouraged to utilize their masculine qualities, since they denote strength, so long as they maintain their feminine qualities as well.

Would you consider an ability to be nurturing, to care for children, to maintain a pleasant home for the family, to be sensitive to a stranger's plight, to share financial and child-rearing decision making with a partner, to shed a tear over a sad movie, the feminine qualities that men are conditioned to suppress?

If so, then what do you make of the modern dad, perhaps a single father, perhaps a partner in a dual-income family who shares or perhaps takes over the household and child-rearing responsibilities with his working wife?

I'm sorry Veronica but although your description might have been valid during the 50s, the times have changed. I've seen men cry who were not ashamed to shed their tears.

The continual suppression of a portion of ones personality and being can be stressful, and crossdressing provides a means of stepping outside of ones normal external male imagery, and in a sense stepping into an apparent external female image, all the while remaining the same basic internal person. This enables the suppressed inner feminine qualities to be released in what appears to others to be in harmony with the external image. In reality, the crossdresser has passed from being a man in a man's body, to being a man in an artificially created woman's body.

Methinks this is a rationalization. :) The dressed crossdresser is still a man, yes, but a man with a decidedly feminine twist if he aims to present as a female.

While transgender is a useful term that can apply to many situations, depending upon how it is defined, I am not an advocate of the "umbrella" approach as we are all individuals. This use of "TG" tends to define us in a very narrow way, but we are all individuals, and should be celebrating our individuality. Also, the origin of the term, was intended to provide a label for a specific type of crossdresser, rather than being applicable to everybody.

Virginia Prince, founder of Tri Ess, was the first to use the term during the 60s. You are correct, her definition was rather limiting and the term was expanded to include other people who cross the cultural gender barriers in some form.

But even then, Virginia Prince did refer to crossdressers as transgenderists? She did recognize that the act of dressing in clothing intended for the opposite sex was crossing a gender boundary?

No, you can't CD without being TG. Cisgender people don't crossdress. Cisgender people
don't dress themselves in a manner that is commonly associated with the opposite gender. Crossdressing is by definition a transgender behavior regardless of personal intent.

People who crossdress and still claim to be cisgender are lying about themselves and lying about what it means to be cisgender. Cisgender crossdressers are fantasy figures, like unicorns. In reality, every crossdresser is a queer transgender duck. You can protest with a quack and waddle for cover, but no one (except you) will mistake you for anything else.

Thank you. :)

Veronica27

10-27-2011, 04:20 PM

originally posted by Pink Person

No, you can't CD without being TG. Cisgender people don't crossdress. Cisgender people
don't dress themselves in a manner that is commonly associated with the opposite gender. Crossdressing is by definition a transgender behavior regardless of personal intent.

There are numerous definitions of transgender, and the broader you make your definition, the less meaningful it becomes. This is an extremely diverse community, but your comments make it sound like we are all identical. I basically reject any term that tries to define "who" I am, which is what the term transgender does. In its basic forms it is either a noun or a pronoun and once so labelled, tends to have a permanence. The word crossdress is a verb and describes what one "does". They can do it frequently, seldom, for brief periods or for extended periods; it does not change the meaning of the term. When you crossdress you are a crossdresser, and when you disrobe you cease to be a crossdresser.

A very down to earth definition of crossdresser can be found on Wikepedia and is credited to a well known crossdresser:

"Michael A. Gilbert,[34] professor at the Department of Philosophy, York University, Toronto, offers this definition: "[A cross-dresser] is a person who has an apparent gender identification with one sex, and who has and certainly has been birth-designated as belonging to one sex, but who wears the clothing of the opposite sex because it is the clothing of the opposite sex."

Crossdressing has to do with sexual image, and does not necessarily relate in any way to gender. We dress in clothing associated with the opposite sex, not the opposite gender. This does not mean that crossdressers can't be transgendered, but simply that we are not all transgendered.

Veronica

Darlene92

10-27-2011, 04:27 PM

i love the analogy :D, i didnt like the definitions what were given to be about ts/tg/tv which is probably a part of the problem, but i feel another problem is labeling ones self.

sissystephanie

10-27-2011, 04:32 PM

The term TG really has only one meaning, at least medically speaking!! It means "crossing genders!" And that is all that it means!! Nothing more! If you are a male and you wear feminine clothes you are a TG while doing so.

Veronica, you said that we wear the clothing of the opposite sex, and not of the opposite gender. But those two words, sex and gender, are one and the same! That is why I made the statement in my first paragraph about being a TG if you crossdress!

Veronica27

10-27-2011, 05:00 PM

To ReineD

You are describing mostly the sexual roles that society requires us to perform, and yes, there has been a gradual change in these roles over the past half century for both sexes. However, there remains those "qualities" of human nature that society has defined as being masculine or feminine because of the effects on our minds of things like hormones and the influence of that very society on our upbringing. For example, men are supposed to be more aggressive, and competetive while women are supposed to be more docile and compassionate. And yet we can point out plenty of cases where the opposite is true for both sexes. The point is that boys are taught that they have to "grow up and be a man", and too much of a display of any feminine quality is ridiculed. Men are expected to be less emotional and extremely stoic, whereas women are allowed the free expression of their emotions. Bullying is more prevalent now than ever by a boy's peers. Because of the changing roles of the sexes, there is, in fact, an increased pressure in many instances to maintain the so-called masculine qualities in order to compensate. We never tell a young girl to "grow up and be a woman". It just happens.

As to what you described as a "rationalization", I might tend to agree, but in a slightly different sense than you intended. Presenting as a female, certainly requires a display of femininity, but it is the point of my post that there is a difference between expressing our femininity, and becoming a woman in our own mind. The feminine qualities exist. We are just providing an outlet for releasing them. Some crossdressers do cross a gender line, and internally identify as a woman, or already possess a female gender identity to some degree, but that is by no means universal of all who crossdress.

My understanding of Virginia Prince's motivations for using the term transgendered as applicable to herself, was because she had evolved into living full time and taking hormones in her later years, and no longer felt that she was representative of the membership of Tri-
ess. In any event, her use of the term tended to imply a change of one's mental concept of their "gender" as opposed to simply the external image of crossdressing.

Thanks for your contribution, as these are my theories, not absolute truths, and I enjoy reading any well thought out counter arguments. It is all a learning process.

Veronica

Veronica27

10-27-2011, 05:16 PM

To Sissystephanie

Sex and gender are two different things. The following quote is from Wikipedia:

"The distinction between sex and gender is a concept that distinguishes sex, a natural or biological feature, from gender, the cultural or learned significance of sex.

Where I have a problem with much of the transgender theory, is that we are applying the term gender to "ourselves" but it is more of a cultural thing. It is often written that "sex is what is between our legs, and gender is what is between our ears". Because of the confusion, I tend to use gender to mean our inner feeling of being either a man, a woman, or perhaps some combination of both. Biologically, what we really are is what our physical body tells us, which is our sex.

Veronica

Rianna Humble

10-27-2011, 06:45 PM

To Sissystephanie

Sex and gender are two different things. The following quote is from Wikipedia:

"The distinction between sex and gender is a concept that distinguishes sex, a natural or biological feature, from gender, the cultural or learned significance of sex.

Wikiopedia is a useful starting point for someone wanting to begin research on a topic, but as has been demonstrated countless times, it is not authoritative.

Gender is absolutely not merely a cultural or learned significance of sex. Ask any trans-man whether his (male) gender is a cultural significance of his (female) birth sex. Or ask any of us trand-women whether our (female) gender is in any way learned from our (male) birth sex. You will find the same answer in both cases.

Asche

10-27-2011, 08:53 PM

I think one reason we don't reach agreement on this is that we don't agree on what "gender" is in the first place.

If you believe that gender is something intrinsic to people -- something they're born with -- if you take all the stuff that we are accustomed to see called "feminine" as being intrinsic to XX people and all the stuff we are accustomed to see called "masculine" as being intrinsic to XY people -- then, from this point of view, it is a meaningful and objective statement to say that an XY person who shows more than N % of "feminine" stuff is crossing the gender line, i.e., "transgender."

But if, like me, you believe that gender is ultimately a set of learned behaviors, preferences, attitudes,etc., which society tells us is "for boys" or "for girls," which you learn at an early age, and if you believe that the choice of what is considered "masculine" or "feminine" is ultimately arbitrary, as shown by the fact that it changes over time and from culture to culture (for example, the assignment of gender to the colors pink and blue), then to call anything or anyone "transgender" you have to first of all accept society's arbitrary division of the world into "masculine" and "feminine." Otherwise, the word doesn't make any sense. So when you use the word, you may think you're just making a neutral descriptive statement, but you're really making a political one.

This is why it bothers me when people try to label me "transgender" for how I choose to dress. It's like when Freudians would say a girl who like to climb trees was showing "penis envy": the idea that she might not be climbing trees because she wanted to be male, but because she just liked to climb trees wasn't allowed to be even considered. Nowadays, we would consider it sexist (and stupid) to assume that girls climbing trees or playing baseball (or even football) are showing signs of gender dysphoria. But a lot of people still can't consider the possibility that I'm not wearing skirts and dresses because of some sort of gender issues (like having a "feminine self", whatever the hell that is), but just because I like skirts and dresses.

And we don't just see this with crossdressing. They didn't have the term "transgender" back when I was a kid, but it was made very clear to me that the fact that I didn't like to fight or have my head stuffed into a toilet, didn't like football (or any sport, for that matter), that I liked music and reading, knew how to cook and sew, and even took ballet for a few years was a sign that I was crossing gender lines. (In those days, the word was "sissy.") Back then, I didn't see what having a penis and a Y chromosome had to do with all that stupid stuff or with having to want to do it, and some 50 years later, I still don't. I'm in a different place and time now, and some of those things that used to count as "crossing the gender line" no longer do, but the line is still alive and quite strong for others.

Asche

10-27-2011, 09:38 PM

what is it about the dressing that is so sexually stimulating, and why is this? Hmmmm? :)
Oh, this has an easy answer, if you know any feminist theory.

One important part of the feminine role is to be an object of men's sexual desire, and in particular, to embody men's sexual desire and all that is sexually attractive to men. Women's clothing, the ideal female body type, the make-up, the hair, feminine behavior, all are intended to contribute to making women into the sort of female object that men most desire sexually -- or have been trained to desire. Twisty Faster refers to this as women being "the sex class."

All that sexuality is sort of like manna (in the magical power sense) which infuses everything that the object touches. That includes the high heels (shoe fetishes), the clothing worn by the object (e.g., used panty fetishes), individual body parts, and, of course, the manner of dress.

BTW, this also can be used to explain why fetishes are less common among women: women simply aren't subjected to the same sort of 24/7 propaganda and brainwashing intended to make them see anything male or associated with maleness as an embodiment of female sexual ecstacy. (How many TV ads do you see trying to sell cars to women by showing them with a hott! and available looking hunk?)

suchacutie

10-27-2011, 10:22 PM

Kim, sorry I took so long to get back to this thread. I used the actor analogy to point out there are many ways to "act" and for many reasons. We had friends where the husband agreed to dress as a woman for a Halloween party because his wife asked him to. That one is clearly not transgendered. There could be all manner of intimate desires couples could share that would be related to dressing in the other's clothes strictly for their personal interaction. Is that transgendered...I think probably not.

Do i think that the vast vast majority of those who dress in the clothes of the opposite sex are transgendered? Yes, I do! But your question was about possibilities, and I do think there is a small percentage of part-time crossdressers who are not transgendered at all, but who see other advantages in crossdressing.

I do agree it would be a small percentage.

tina

*Vanessa*

10-27-2011, 10:53 PM

...The definitions come from the WPATH (World Professional Association for Transgender Health), their latest Standards of Care (SoC), version 7.
... someone who doesn't want to call it anything because, well, there are too many different opinions as to what a television should be called. :p

Here's the new sticky, posted in the M2F: http://www.crossdressers.com/forums/showthread.php?162497-Some-Common-Definitions&p=2636716#post2636716

PHEW - you had me a little scared there... I'm glad I can agree with the defs.

*Vanessa*

10-27-2011, 11:05 PM

.
If you address the complete thread;
.

If you feel it's a part of you, then I don't think you have a choice. sure it can be repressed, but look at how many have it come back later in life and how much it tortures them. Although I think the biggest thing is whether you're TG or just a CD.

I don't think it's fair to start a relationship as a TG without the girl knowing, just imagine if she did that to you. You''d be (reasonably) angry if you found out she was hiding that from you all along.

But if you aren't TG and just enjoy dressing up, there's nothing stopping you from having a nice girl and dressing up on the side. Plus she may even be into it =)
.
IMHO: You see that the author clearly defines how she means what is being said and withing that context of course a person playing dress-up is not by definition a transgendered person.

Toni Citara

10-27-2011, 11:34 PM

Well, simplify it like this... a human with a penis, is male; a human with a vagina is female.

Who cares if they're wearing a dress, pants, boots, or bra... the clothing doesn't matter, and the XX/XY/YY/DNA thing doesn't matter. Penis = Male Vagina = Female

Pretty simple. You are a woman if you have a vagina, either from birth or post surgery - you are a woman. You are a man, either born with a penis, or post surgery. I hate all the hair-splitting crap. The whole "I was married to a CIA Hit man, Lumberjack, Gator wrestler, Pre-Op Transexual but he, I mean "she" is still a nice person and I care about him, oh, I mean "her"... get over it. Why can't a female be a "CIA Hit man, Lumberjack, Gator wrestler"?? The roles of male and female have been blended for decades, if not centuries. Women's equality is a female attempt to become male... but men don't freak out when a woman shows up at work wearing jeans, work boots, a flannel shirt and baseball cap?? So why should women, or men for that matter, freak when a guy show up to work wearing a suit and tie, perfectly pressed skirt and proper heels??

Just my two pennies, and some thought provoking questions... YMMV

I think one reason we don't reach agreement on this is that we don't agree on what "gender" is in the first place...

Dana7

10-28-2011, 12:43 AM

You know, I started off typing a reply disagreeing with you, sissystephanie, but after researching the terminology, definitions and opinions on the Web, I have come to the conclusion that as crossdressers, we tend to fall under that category.

Wikipedia has ths definition:

"Of, relating to, or designating a person whose identity does not conform unambiguously to conventional notions of male or female gender roles, but combines or moves between these."

I think for most of us, this fits. I know that when I dress, I don't continue to feel masculine...I feel feminine! I may even change my mannerisms while dressed, and walk, sit....generally behave and feel like a woman.

Now like you, and many CDs, I have no desire to be a woman. But my gender switches - only temporarily when I dress in female things. The clothes might be the channeling of that switch, but the feelings have to already be there for that to happen. If you dress up some random guy as a woman...he isn't going to feel feminine ever. For him, he's still a guy in drag, and could never feel like a woman. But for us, it's different. We feel the femininity coming out.....the clothes are just the conduit for it to happen.

I totally agree with you, Piora. CD'ing does involve inner feelings. We do feel the femininity inside of us coming out. I know that in drab I feel comfortable in my masculinity. But I there are times when I do feel the desire to express that side of my inner self associated with feeling feminine. Some take that expression to greater lengths and make permanent changes to their outer selves with hormones, surgery, etc. in an effort to make their outer selves align more with their inner selves.

Sissystephanie said that crossdressers manifest the concept of TG. I would tend to agree with that statement. In that respect, crossdressing seems to be one aspect of a TG continuum. My belief is that all people have elements of the opposite sex within themselves. Today I saw a very buxom woman who was dressed just like a man and wore her hair short, walked with a swagger and presented as a man would. Is that woman a man? Certainly not. But she is expressing her persona in a very masculine way. Now fifty years ago, she would have been labeled a dyke. But with the shifting of our societal norms, today she is just regarded as a more of a tomboy type. We don't regard such a masculine public expression today with transgenderism but there was a time when gender identity was more rigidly defined than it is today. Back in the fifties, women were not allowed to wear pants. They generally expressed themselves with greater femininity as a whole than they do today. Our society has changed, allowing women to present in a more masculine way, but it has not allowed men to present in a more feminine way publicly. But the inner selves of some men who feel feminine feelings still yearns to be expressed.

Some of us who cross dress leave our femininity in the closet when we shed our feminine clothes, and some of us carry it with us to a greater extent in our personal lives. Some maintain it to a greater degree. But ultimately, it is a TG expression whether we decide to act on hormones and SRS or not. It is a matter of degree to me.

I think more men have the inner desire to express their femininity than admit it; but in our society, we are encouraged as men to maintain an outer persona of masculinity or face ridicule and loss of esteem. It is part of being a man. There are parts of being a man that are enjoyable and parts that are not so fun. So it is the same with being a woman. I think it is fun enjoying the best parts of both.

Rianna Humble

10-28-2011, 12:49 AM

I think one reason we don't reach agreement on this is that we don't agree on what "gender" is in the first place.

Or to put it another way, you disagree with the internationally accepted definitions used by health professionals all over the world and posted (http://www.crossdressers.com/forums/showthread.php?162497-Some-Common-Definitions&p=2636716#post2636716) recently by Reine
where we read

Gender identity: A person’s intrinsic sense of being male (a boy or a man), female (a girl or woman), or an alternative gender (e.g., boygirl, girlboy, transgender, genderqueer, eunuch).

Transgender: Adjective to describe a diverse group of individuals who cross or transcend culturally defined categories of gender. The gender identity of transgender people differs to varying degrees from the sex they were assigned at birth.

LeaP

10-28-2011, 08:37 AM

"Women's equality is a female attempt to become male... "

Wow.

"... but men don't freak out when a woman shows up at work wearing jeans, work boots, a flannel shirt and baseball cap?? So why should women, or men for that matter, freak when a guy show up to work wearing a suit and tie, perfectly pressed skirt and proper heels?? "

Because gender ROLES are culturally-determined. In a way, you've made the case for CDing to be indicative of TG IDENTITY. That is, to overcome social mores so strong and so heavily enforced requires an inner driver, unless perhaps one is a sociopath. Arguments about just liking fabrics and such really don't cut it when weighed against this kind of social pressure. (I'm speaking of those who are publically out or would be.)

There is a constant muddle in these discussions between gender identity and expression/role. The women's movement of the last century has nothing to do with a change in identity but everything to do with role and expression.

I can accept the possibility that someone closeted might not be TG, though I'd be sceptical. But out? Hardly.

Lea

LeaP

10-28-2011, 08:46 AM

Or to put it another way, you disagree with the internationally accepted definitions used by health professionals all over the world and posted (http://www.crossdressers.com/forums/showthread.php?162497-Some-Common-Definitions&p=2636716#post2636716) recently by Reine
where we read

As it happens, I like the cited definitions a lot. Still, this is a logic error. There isn't a sole authority or set of definitions. All of these have changed over time and will again. Also keep in mind that the TG community itself has had a major role in the evolution of these definitions. Ie, discussions like these are part of the process that evolves medical practice itself. It's always fair to challenge. I know people get tired of it, but it's a major reason that things have progressed in a positive direction.

Lea

kimdl93

10-28-2011, 08:47 AM

Kaitlyn Michele

10-28-2011, 09:05 AM

I'd like to have an argument please??

No you wouldn't

Yes i would

No you wouldn't

.................................................. ..........................................

Nicolesacutie

10-28-2011, 09:13 AM

I think that anytime you put on girl clothes we all have that ''what if'' thought.

LeaP

10-28-2011, 11:03 AM

Its been interesting to watch this discussion revolve around in circles. One thing I've observed on this site over the past two years is that whenever a question about gender identity comes up in relation to cross dressing, inevitably the discourse heads off into a debate about labels, defnitions etc.

My guess is that some of us would prefer to define "oureselves" in a certain way, and that leads us to dispute the definitions themselves. Basically, if as a CDr, I don't like the idea of considering myself among the "transgendered", then I'll dispute the idea by disputing or redefining the term. Disputing the definition becomes a denial mechanism.

If it were endless discussion about mere semantics, I'd understand the frustration more than I do. I get frustrated myself when I see someone citing a published term (e.g., from WPATH) when they clearly don't understand it. But it's not semantics. Access to care, insurance payment, and legal protections all critically revolve around these terms. Social acceptance and progression revolve around the positioning (and understanding) of TG behaviors and all of this has to be baked into terminology that has a common meaning for the general public who will never be educated in the nuances.

There was an earlier post I thought had value that contained a nugget about terminology within the community versus outside. The general public is not going to accept CD'ing as normal, a hobby, or anything like that. I also don't see a shift to broadening the types of male clothing into the Cis range in my lifetime. So, from the outside, seeing CD'ing as a manifestation of TG identity - at whatever level - is perfectly reasonable, especially given that TG is coming to be recognized as a normal human variation. I think it's vastly preferable to the historic alternatives, too. Anyone for CD'ing as infantilist latent homosexuality, for example?

Lea

NathalieX66

10-28-2011, 03:30 PM

I am at midlife, or 3/5ths midlife since my grandmother is on her way to reaching her 101th birthday in a couple of months.
I finally accepted my cd/trans side almost three years ago. Even though I no plans on "transitioning" as far as I know at this stage, I lost 25 lbs in a year & a half , I got rid of the goat tee, and grew my hair for a year, and now I have a ponytail, I dye it, and I'm going for another year of long hair without cutting it, I did about 8 electrolysis sessions and 2 laser sessions on the beard, and my ears have been pierced since college, and I look like I'm straddling on the fence of transition these days...and i'm fine with that.

Make me as gender ambiguous a possible, and I'm happy.

Asche

10-28-2011, 06:59 PM

Or to put it another way, you disagree with the internationally accepted definitions used by health professionals all over the world ...
They can define whatever they want -- I am hardly in a position to stop them. But I will feel free to argue that they are framing things in a way that allows them to make enforcing social norms seem like the only sane policy to take. This definition is not a neutral, objective description, it is a way of supporting the status quo.

The mental health profession has had a long tradition of assuming that if the essence of an individual comes into conflict with how society likes to run things, it is the individual who is broken, not society, and it is the individual who must change to fit society, not society to accommodate the individuals within it. The most obvious recent example is the classification of homosexuality as a mental disorder, but there are plenty of others. Drapetomania is one of the more embarrassing ones.

Pink Person

10-29-2011, 05:19 AM

Gender is a general formal and functional characteristic. Sex is a specific formal characteristic. Sexuality is a specific functional characteristic. Our gender classification includes sex and sexual elements but is more comprehensive than either of these attributes. Our gender classification is complex, so it's hard to talk about it without confusing some people. Gender attributes describe us, are prescribed for us, and we subscribe to some of them. Gender is subjective, objective, real, and artificial in different aspects.

Transgender people self-identify as one gender (masculine or feminine) but have significant characteristics (formal and functional) that are commonly associated with the opposite gender. Our genders are not completely self-determined or socially-determined. They are determined by a combination of personal and social factors.

I think it's hilarious how some of the members of this site try to defend their manhood and their crossdressing simultaneously. It always makes me chuckle (and sometimes snort with laughter). To be fair, however, it's possible to be a transmasculine crossdresser. It just isn't possible to be a cismasculine one. Cisgender people self-identify as one gender and don't have any significant characteristics that are commonly associated with the opposite gender. Crossdressing is a deal breaker for cisgender classification. You can't be a cisgender person and a crossdresser. You might be a transmasculine crossdresser, but you will never be a cismasculine one. You can still be manly in a transy mansy sort of way, but not manly like a cisman.

For the record, there is nothing wrong with being transgender. Transgender people are normal members of any human population. We are normal minority members, but our minority status is just as valid as the status of any majority member.

Veronica27

10-29-2011, 01:42 PM

To Pink Person

Your first two paragraphs are an extremely well written essay on the meaning of the term gender, and I am in complete agreement with you. You then spoil it with what appears to be somewhat of a sexist rant about manhood and crossdressing. How do you define "significant" when referring to characteristics commonly associated with the other gender. We can all be compassionate, aggressive, competetive, nurturing and on and on. There have been times in history when men have dressed flamboyantly and women dressed conservatively.

Experiencing the sensations of wearing a dress and discovering what some of the superficial trappings of society's image of womanhood might feel like, may be nothing more than an exercise in intellectual curiosity. Does this make him any less of a man than the stay-at-home house husband who raises the kids? Is the woman who becomes a professional boxer any less of a woman because of that? If the man who crossdresses finds it relaxing and a pleasant escape from the usual demands of his normal everyday existence, is this any different from the man who spends every weekend on the golf course, or gambles at a casino, or vegetates in front of the boob tube? If a man chooses to play football, we don't label him as a sadistic pervert who enjoys punishing people. He may well be, but let other factors determine that, and not just a love of football. If a man crossdresses, why do we have to label his anything, particularly transgendered, with all its implications of gender confusion and uncertainty, as well as permanence as if that describes his entirety. He may well be transgendered, but let the additional factors determine that and not just crossdressing.

You refer frequently to cisgender, a term coined fairly recently, which means self identification with one gender or the other. Does the cisgendered male not have the ability to be compassionate or to cry on occasion. Is he supposed to be devoid of any emotion other than anger and such. If so, why do you refuse to allow a crossdresser to also self identify as a man, despite the fact that he might occasionally wear a few items of clothing that society says are a no-no, but have no impact on his own personal identity, or feelings about himself?

We do not all fit neatly into little boxes that all bear the same descriptive labels. We are individuals, and deserve to be treated as such. Transgendered and Cisgendered, both sound like terms that say "This is what you are, get into your little box and be quiet"

Veronica

Pink Person

10-30-2011, 12:50 PM

The class of people who are transgender actually has more diversity than the class of people who are cisgender, but both classes have a large amount of particular diversity despite the general similarity of their members.

Even though there is quite a lot of diversity within cisgender and transgender classes, there is no intersection between them. You are either in one class or the other. Boys (and men) named Sue who dress up like women to relax, or pursue a cure for cancer, are excluded from claiming cisgender status for themselves because the act of crossdressing is never just about wearing the clothes. It isn't about relaxing or curing cancer either. How we dress ourselves is an expression of our core personal gender values. People with core masculine values dress in a masculine manner. People with core feminine values dress in a feminine manner. People with core gender values that conflict with some of their other significant gender characteristics are transgender. You can be a silly duck and deny it, but you aren't fooling anyone but yourself.

sara.s

10-30-2011, 01:09 PM

Pink Person

10-30-2011, 01:48 PM

I don't know any men who express their intrinsic masculinity by wearing a wig, makeup, and a dress; but it's okay with me if they want to make absurd claims about themselves and their behavior.

sara.s

10-30-2011, 02:02 PM

I don't know any men who express their intrinsic masculinity by wearing a wig, makeup, and a dress, but it's okay with me if they want to make absurd claims about themselves and their behavior.
We are talking about intrinsic sense of the mind(or how you feel) not extrinsic sense of your appearance. Lets go back to the definition of Gender Identity,

Gender identity: A person’s intrinsic sense of being male (a boy or a man), female (a girl or woman), or an alternative gender (e.g., boygirl, girlboy, transgender, genderqueer, eunuch). Do you see any mention of wig/makeup/bra/panties? :battingeyelashes:

ReineD

10-30-2011, 02:21 PM

So, why do you just assume that all CD's intrinsic sense is different.. Most people making that assumption here are not even CD's, but TS/GG's who do not share same mindset as us.

If this is the most accurate definition, then CD's are definitely not TG's. :tongueout

First, this is not my definition, but the WPATH's, which I'm sure they've come up with after a great deal of study and deliberation, using teams of experts in the field.

And second, don't you think that when a birth male wants to see himself looking like a woman in the mirror, it is because there is a part of his identity that differs from the sex assigned at birth? Why else would he gain so much pleasure or satisfaction from seeing himself looking feminine? Males who have solid male core identities do not want to look or feel feminine.

msginaadoll

10-30-2011, 02:43 PM

ReineD

10-30-2011, 03:01 PM

I think the problem is that people define the world differently. I got called out on the crossdresserchatcity forum (as well as called names ) because I dared to say that crossdressing can fall under the transgender spectrum. Individuals who many of us would consider transsexual felt insulted that I dared use that term. So this is a hotbutton topic for some.

I know. It would be so much easier if everyone could just remove their own agendas for a moment, and read the definitions with an objective mindset, and see there is a great deal of room in each definition to allow for a wide range of expression.

Rianna Humble

10-30-2011, 03:19 PM

Gender identity: A person’s intrinsic sense of being male (a boy or a man), female (a girl or woman), or an alternative gender (e.g., boygirl, girlboy, transgender, genderqueer, eunuch).

Transgender: Adjective to describe a diverse group of individuals who cross or transcend culturally defined categories of gender. The gender identity of transgender people differs to varying degrees from the sex they were assigned at birth.

Interpreting the 1st line, it says all CDs are TG's.

Actually, the first line you quote talks about your gender identity - which can be man, woman or something in between. It is this identity which is intrinsic, not whether you are cisgender (a man/woman who conforms to the culturally defined categories of gender) or transgender (crossing or transcending those norms).

And the next line says that the INTRINSIC sense must differ from the gender assigned at birth.

It does not say that anywhere

So, why do you just assume that all CD's intrinsic sense is different.. Most people making that assumption here are not even CD's, but TS/GG's who do not share same mindset as us.

Those of us who accept the internationally agreed definitions do not argue that MtF cross-dressers do not see themselves as intrinsically male.

If this is the most accurate definition, then CD's are definitely not TG's.

To what definition do you refer? Certainly not the one that you quote. You insist (and no-one wants to contradict you) that you are intrinsically male, yet at the same time you refuse to accept that your behaviour in cross-dressing goes beyond the cultural definition of male gender behaviour.

The final sentence quoted above merely states that not everyone's gender identity will differ from your sex at birth to the same extent, but I am not alone here in finding it hard to credit that you see your behaviour as reflecting an intrinsic sense of being 100% male.

sara.s

10-30-2011, 04:07 PM

First, this is not my definition, but the WPATH's, which I'm sure they've come up with after a great deal of study and deliberation, using teams of experts in the field.
Yeah, i read that.. I acknowledge..

And second, don't you think that when a birth male wants to see himself looking like a woman in the mirror, it is because there is a part of his identity that differs from the sex assigned at birth? Why else would he gain so much pleasure or satisfaction from seeing himself looking feminine?
Lets talk about me first..
Even before cd'ing on part time, i used to change my hairstyle, beard style alternatively to make it interesting. I love just about anything that make me look different. Its fun, may be i might have costume fetish but not enough money and storage. I don't shave when getting dressed, just the area visible; and that too only if there is thick hair growth. If you remember, long time ago i had created a thread about going out as superman vs going out as woman to mall and which would be thrilling.

I don't feel feminine dressed or not; i don't dress at home, nor i underdress outside. I am just bored of wearing the same outfit the second time over, and also it's been such a long time since i purchased women's outfits. As for your question on satisfaction i get looking at the mirror... answer is simple. I am hetero-sexual lol. I like to look at beautiful girls. I just keep staring at the mirror and thinking why can't she be real and wished if i could drag her out from there. If you hadn't noticed, for a long time, my status was "In love...(with myself)".

Males who have solid male core identities do not want to look or feel feminine.
This is a shallow definition of "solid male". It is as if saying, females with solid female core identities will not want to look or feel masculine. Its actually embedded in US society, that if you are "male with solid core identities" then it must not look feminine, you must be going to gym and build muscles. Its only here that manliness is measured in terms of muscle build up. What about countries where men are short, aren't they "solid men" because they are short. There might have been many men in US army who may have looked cute/short and gave up their lives defending the country. Aren't they "solid males"? And how about TXKimberly who served in military and a bravest cd here? In a country with football as a primary game, this kinda concept of "Solid Male" is not a surprise. If you dare many of these so called "solid males" to dress up and makeup and walk in a far away town, you ll probably see how sissy they are. I am not suggesting CD's are solid males either, but that a "solid male" is intrinsically brave rather than extrinsically strong. And btw i used to be a crazy risktaking biker before i came to US. And i wonder how many "solid males" can beat me at that.

There are so many cd's who say they don't find their feminine self, but most here keep ignoring them unless they say they mention the "pink fog" word. They have their own reasons for dressing, some sexual, some comfort. Everyone is different and just because there are majority of one type of people doesn't mean you have to kick out the others.

sara.s

10-30-2011, 04:15 PM

It does not say that anywhere

??? Looks like you have lost it. :doh:
At least Reine got what I said, I will just debate with her.

anouk

10-30-2011, 04:32 PM

The only thing that unites all the crossdressers is an urge to wear clothes of the other sex. It seems to be more typical that there are some feelings of other gender, too. For example for me it is very important point in crossdressing. However I konw some cd:s who just want to be a man in woman's clothes, even without any significant fetishist flavour.

Rianna Humble

10-30-2011, 06:04 PM

??? Looks like you have lost it. :doh:
At least Reine got what I said, I will just debate with her.

So I have lost it because you make an untrue statement - fine! We'll all use Humpty Dumpty logic to make you feel better.

DebbieL

10-30-2011, 06:44 PM

TG tends to have multiple definations.

The term Transgender was coined in 1984 in a usenet newsgroup to provide a broad definition for those who enjoyed different aspects of femininity, such as dressing, behavior, make-up, and so on, but were not necessarily transsexual. It started during a conversation around transsexuals and Kinsey's "Scale" of sexual preference. The concept of transgender was intended to allow for a scale from something like 1 - totally happy with my natural gender to 6 - full-blown transsexual.

However, it's entirely possible to be a 1 - a man who enjoys being "All Man" and enjoys dressing up in girls clothes for a short time strictly for sexual pleasure or to please a partner, then go back to being "All man" again. On the other end of the spectrum, there are those who, given the time and money would want a sex change more than anything else in the world, and yet feels that, since they have to exist as men, for now, will dress as men for work and other social events.

Perhaps there should be a distinction between IDENTITY and ACTIVITY, or perhaps that is the difference between Transgender (Identity) and Transsexual (Actions/Behavior).

It's ironic that a popular them in transgender liturature is the "Forced Feminization" where a heterosexual "all man" male is forced to undergo a transformation into feminine appearance, behavior, and activities, including sex with men, and resists each new step toward transition until they eventually surrender and become women.

Perhaps the reason this genre is so popular, is because so many transgendered and transsexual men feel like they have been forced to live in their male gender role, and are not able to live in their preferred gender role.

I have been to many meetings of Cross-dresser meetings where there were, in addition to thet feminine men who wanted to look and act as much like a girl as possible, men who were obviously men, who enjoyed being men, and had zero desire to be a woman, look completely like a woman, or even be viewed as a woman, and just liked dressing up "for kicks". One enjoyed playing football in high school and college, still hung out with the boys, and didn't start dressing until very late. He and his wife enjoyed having sex while he was dressed up, but neither wanted him to go out in general public while dressed.

Pink Person

10-30-2011, 08:06 PM

Our imaginations are powerful deceivers. Girly-men who pout (with pretty red lips) and stamp their (high fashion) heels when anyone else suggests they aren't "all manly" are suffering from a very clouded perception of reality indeed. Is it a pink cloud or a blue cloud? It doesn't matter. They can't see straight, I mean queer, when it is staring at them in the mirror. They have a very special alternative vision of themselves in their mind's eye. Unfortunately, sometimes our mind's eye sees things that don't exist, like a desert mirage or "all manly" crossdressers.

sara.s

10-30-2011, 09:12 PM

So I have lost it because you make an untrue statement - fine!

You think i made a untrue statement bcos you failed to read my post correctly. Anyways, I want to clarify that: In my post by "It has two parameters to define transgender:---Interpreting the 1st line, ..." I was referring to the 1st line in the definition of Transgender.

ReineD

10-30-2011, 09:51 PM

I don't feel feminine dressed or not; i don't dress at home, nor i underdress outside. I am just bored of wearing the same outfit the second time over, and also it's been such a long time since i purchased women's outfits.

Well, then you may be the exception to the majority of members here? If you transform yourself into a feminine being because of your love of costumes, and you alter this with other transformations such as superman or any form of cosplay (that is not crossplay or a doller), in other words if it is more a case of dress up that is independent from the feminine gender, then I agree you are not transgender. You might tomorrow decide to become a jedi and be happy with that for a few years?

But, if the costuming is specifically female gender oriented, it may indicate a wish to be feminine somehow, even if it is only sometimes?

This is a shallow definition of "solid male". It is as if saying, females with solid female core identities will not want to look or feel masculine. Its actually embedded in US society, that if you are "male with solid core identities" then it must not look feminine, you must be going to gym and build muscles. Its only here that manliness is measured in terms of muscle build up.

I have to disagree with you there. Boys and men (who are not TG) have no wish to present in any way, shape or form as feminine. It is not who they are. And it also doesn't mean they are into muscle building. I can think of scores of males who are not into the stereotypical guy stuff: the musicians, the artists, the history buffs, the political activists, the scholar bowl guys who have their own brand of sexiness in high school for some girls, by just being brainy, or intensely into whatever it is they're into even if it is not muscle, guns, and cars. :)

As to the comment about women who appear to CDs as if they want to feel masculine, well, it's been done to death in this forum, but allow me to simply say that women do not feel masculine when they wear jeans or are into sports. They feel like women who wear jeans and who are into sports. In other words, they have no desire to present as a gender opposite than who they are, except of course the transmen. There may be some butch women may have gender ambiguity, just as some gay guys might too, but I don't think we're talking about them.

As for your question on satisfaction i get looking at the mirror... answer is simple. I am hetero-sexual lol. I like to look at beautiful girls. I just keep staring at the mirror and thinking why can't she be real and wished if i could drag her out from there. If you hadn't noticed, for a long time, my status was "In love...(with myself)".

You make a reference to autogynephilia (the love of oneself as a woman). My response is that our sexual expression is a fundamental part of who we are, even if in our conservative society many people compartmentalize it. Why would one male who loves women get off on seeing himself dressed as one, while another male who also loves women would not be satisfied doing this? It does have to do with core identity even if the person involved thinks it is just sex and therefore it doesn't count. If you read the threads here from the older CDs, you'll see that for an overwhelming number, it did start out as just sex. But then it solidified into a more concrete form of feminine identity over the years, to the point where for many CDs in their 50s & 60s, it is no longer about sex at all.

However, it's entirely possible to be a 1 - a man who enjoys being "All Man" and enjoys dressing up in girls clothes for a short time strictly for sexual pleasure or to please a partner, then go back to being "All man" again

OK, lets talk about a male for whom the wearing of feminine items is strictly pure, unadulterated fetish. It's related to sex and sex only. If he's married, they're both into it in the bedroom. It could be anything really, spiky heels, or corsets, or boas, or non feminine items such as feathers, or diapers, or bondage, or gagging. An object fetish is strictly an object fetish.

But, when the sexual gratification occurs when a male takes on a feminine persona (he becomes a woman in his imagination), then it is indicative of something much, much deeper than just having a foot fetish and getting off on stilettos or boots, for example.

Also, if the CDs in this forum for whom the dressing is highly sexual are to be honest with themselves, can they say that they do not get off on feeling specifically feminine, ever? Judging by the threads in this forum, the majority of members here enjoy looking feminine, acting feminine, feeling feminine, they enjoy seeing each other look, act, and feel feminine. It's way more than, "I just do this for sex". :p

Edit

I'm not trying to be difficult, but what is so wrong with admitting to feelings of wanting to be feminine even if it is sometimes, and why such a strong fight to preserve strictly a male identity when it is obvious that sometimes the male identity becomes eclipsed? Is it the homophobia or the transphobia that seems to be inbred in males as they socialize themselves into adult men?

sara.s

10-31-2011, 12:39 AM

You might tomorrow decide to become a jedi and be happy with that for a few years?

Jedi for many years is so boring. I would rather change it up everytime. :)

I have to disagree with you there. Boys and men (who are not TG) have no wish to present in any way, shape or form as feminine. It is not who they are. And it also doesn't mean they are into muscle building.
I can think of scores of males who are not into the stereotypical guy stuff: the musicians, the artists, the history buffs, the political activists, the scholar bowl guys who have their own brand of sexiness in high school for some girls, by just being brainy, or intensely into whatever it is they're into even if it is not muscle, guns, and cars. :)

But you still do not deny that a much larger fraction of young girls like the stereotypical guys (muscle, guns cars). Right? There is something in it for the girl too, i am just guessing bragging rights, more shopping, more parties, more luxury, riding on expensive car, better future.

As to the comment about women who appear to CDs as if they want to feel masculine, well, it's been done to death in this forum, but allow me to simply say that women do not feel masculine when they wear jeans or are into sports. They feel like women who wear jeans and who are into sports. In other words, they have no desire to present as a gender opposite than who they are, except of course the transmen. There may be some butch women may have gender ambiguity, just as some gay guys might too, but I don't think we're talking about them.

I totally and completely agree to this. I never said anything about jeans sports butch etc. I just reversed the sex/gender in your own statement "Males who have solid male core identities do not want to look or feel feminine." and equated it to the original statement. You support your original statement but you take offense for a converse statement. Either agree to both, or reject both.. Is there any reason why you would reject JUST the converse of the statement? You as a woman know women do not feel masculine when they wear jeans or are into sports; but when a CD says the same thing, "Hey i am wearing skirt, i don't feel feminine, it is fun (or it gives me a kick)", you dont beleive it. This is not fair :(

On a side note, women do feel powerful when they wear pants. I know many friends who have said that.. So, also this article http://www.styleswept.ca/2011/07/does-wearing-pantsuits-make-women-more-powerful-.html. Masculine is defined as "having qualities traditionally attributed to men". Women go for power dressing to feel more powerful; doesn't that mean they are feeling masculine (i.e. powerful: power is a quality traditionally attributed to men). Other attributes traditionally attributed to men are domination, etc Nothing wrong with that. But women feel offended if we use "masculine" word, but are okay with calling it "fighting for womens rights". Yet, you don't us to be offended if we feel feminine.

You make a reference to autogynephilia (the love of oneself as a woman). My response is that our sexual expression is a fundamental part of who we are, even if in our conservative society many people compartmentalize it. Why would one male who loves women get off on seeing himself dressed as one, while another male who also loves women would not be satisfied doing this?

If i get off seeing myself dressed (which i do once a month) and be satisfied by that, I would probably be seeing a doc by now. I do have so many real girls to think about.

It does have to do with core identity even if the person involved thinks it is just sex and therefore it doesn't count. If you read the threads here from the older CDs, you'll see that for an overwhelming number, it did start out as just sex. But then it solidified into a more concrete form of feminine identity over the years, to the point where for many CDs in their 50s & 60s, it is no longer about sex at all.

Each person is different.

Veronica27

10-31-2011, 02:25 PM

What I find amusing about this topic and thread is that those who possess feelings of either being (wholly or partially) or becoming (when crossdressed), the other gender, are determined that everyone who dons a dress must share the same sense of gender identity as themselves. The only exceptions are fetishists, performers and the like. Meanwhile, those who express from their own personal experience, that they personally do not feel any sense of cross gender identity, whether dressed or not, are shot down by the know-it-alls in the first group who insist that they know what is going on in the minds of the latter group. This latter group does not dispute that the former group may be experiencing what they describe but are simply pointing out that it is not a one size fits all situation. Where's the tolerance for diversity of opinion and thought?

Any attempts by the second group at describing their feelings or explaining how they perceive of the various terminology and its applicability to their situation are summarily dismissed as so much "twaddle" or "gobbledygook" by the first group. Members of both groups can become quite heated in their responses; the first group because they think the other groups arguments are nonsense, and the second group because the first group are not willing to listen. Given the choice, I go for independent thought.

Sitting back and reading it all is really quite hillarious.

And that's just ducky.

Veronica

ReineD

10-31-2011, 03:15 PM

But you still do not deny that a much larger fraction of young girls like the stereotypical guys (muscle, guns cars). Right? There is something in it for the girl too, i am just guessing bragging rights, more shopping, more parties, more luxury, riding on expensive car, better future.

This is pure stereotype. The reality is, there is a variety of men out there, and they do end up finding partners who love them and marry them, and go on to raise families. The idea that women in general prefer the stereotypical male is totally false. Different things float different people's boats! There are nerdy girls just as there are nerdy guys. There are intellectual girls just as there are intellectual guys. There are artsy girls just as there are artsy guys. There are goth girls just as there are goth guys. And they all find each other! :)

Honestly, I think that men who experience gender issues need to necessarily find a way to survive in a homophobic and transphobic world and so they wrap a big protective blanket around their inner cores in order to survive. I don't blame them given the world we live in, but this leads to a development of all manner or rationalization and scornful beliefs in gendered stereotypes, when in fact, they just need to relax and accept who they are and also realize that we do live in a varied world.

You as a woman know women do not feel masculine when they wear jeans or are into sports; but when a CD says the same thing, "Hey i am wearing skirt, i don't feel feminine, it is fun (or it gives me a kick)", you dont beleive it. This is not fair :(

Again, I'm going by the thousands of threads I've read here, the pictures in the Gallery, the accounts of how wonderful it is to feel and look and act pretty and feminine. Just read the forum! If you are in fact an exception, that's fine. If you like to go out looking like a guy wearing a skirt or it's just a fun costume for you, that's great! But you can't say that the majority of the CDers who participate here do not have the goal of crossing the gender lines.

sara.s

10-31-2011, 07:15 PM

The reality is, there is a variety of men out there, and they do end up finding partners who love them and marry them, and go on to raise families. These are not baseless stereotypes. You may pick a girl and ask her, Who she thinks is a "solid male" a nerd, a artsy, or Football player?

this leads to a development of all manner or rationalization and scornful beliefs in gendered stereotypes, when in fact, they just need to relax and accept who they are and also realize that we do live in a varied world.

We realize who we are, and also realize that the world is varied... but we don't want to described as who we are not. we don't want to be stereotyped again, we already have enough of stereo types.

Again, I'm going by the thousands of threads I've read here, the pictures in the Gallery, the accounts of how wonderful it is to feel and look and act pretty and feminine.
If women can act rough, powerful, arrogant, dominant and not feel masculine and therefore not crossing gender lines and therefore not transgender.... then similarly, men can feel calm, submissive, patient and not feel feminine and therefore not crossing gender lines and therefore not transgender....
Women probably feel like that because of the position, money power.. and we because of wearing women's outfits.

If position/money power does not change a women's personality so also wearing women's clothes may not change a man's personality.

But you can't say that the majority of the CDers who participate here do not have the goal of crossing the gender lines.
"Gender-lines" is an interesting word.. Women fought hard to cross it, because that's where the jobs, respect, stability and so much more lies.. But its so hard to understand why men would want to cross gender lines.. isn't it?

ReineD

10-31-2011, 07:34 PM

If women can act rough, powerful, arrogant, dominant and not feel masculine and therefore not crossing gender lines and therefore not transgender.... then similarly, men can feel calm, submissive, patient and not feel feminine and therefore not crossing gender lines and therefore not transgender....

If you think that women act rough, powerful, arrogant, and dominant, and that men who dress don't cross gender lines, then I give up, Sara. You win! :) :hugs:

Kaitlyn Michele

10-31-2011, 07:51 PM

oh sara....
when i read your posts, this comes to mind..

The lady doth protest too much, methinks

sara.s

10-31-2011, 07:56 PM

If you think that women act rough, powerful, arrogant, and dominant, and that men who dress don't cross gender lines, then I give up, Sara. You win! :) :hugs:
We definitely cross gender lines, but just we were only discussing the WPATH definition here.

And yeah, there are few women, who are something like that... no offense meant! But you seem to be a very tolerant and wonderful woman, supporting your cd hubby and all the CD/TS and also TG's! We all win :hugs:

Pink Person

10-31-2011, 10:09 PM

Crossdressers who compare themselves to women to prove their manliness are making a false
comparison. The true and relevant comparison they should be making is between themselves and other men who don't crossdress. Any crossdresser who measures himself in this manner and doesn't notice a significant gender difference is suffering from a very severe form of denial.

I get it. Some of you desperately want to keep your maleness, and your masculinity, and your combined manliness. No problem, Betty, but you only get to keep some of each of these things. Crossdressers have forfeited any reasonable claim to cismaleness, cismasculinity, and combined cismanliness. The best that they can hope to rightfully claim for themselves is transmaleness, transmasculinity, and transmanliness. This is the shoe that fits you, princess, so put it on. It's not like you don't want to do it.

ReineD

10-31-2011, 10:35 PM

Crossdressers have forfeited any reasonable claim to cismaleness, cismasculinity, and combined cismanliness. The best that they can hope to rightfully claim for themselves is transmaleness, transmasculinity, and transmanliness. This is the shoe that fits you, princess, so put it on. It's not like you don't want to do it.

I think the big issue among the CDers who don't wish to claim transmaleness as you call it (good description!), is a belief that it is wrong to be TG, as if it takes away from who they are or it makes them lesser men somehow. This comes from being socialized in a trans/homophobic world and having internalized the transphobia.** It's a shame, really. I'm in love with a CD who considers him/herself dualgender. I don't think he or she is less of anything at all! It's like being bilingual. Knowing two languages doesn't make a person any less proficient in either one! In fact, it enriches a person in many more ways than knowing just the two languages. :)

** For those who are interested, see the next to the last definition in the link under my signature ... also google it for more in depth articles.

Debglam

10-31-2011, 10:45 PM

It's like being bilingual. Knowing two languages doesn't make a person any less proficient in either one! In fact, it enriches a person in many more ways than knowing just the two languages. :).

I really like this analogy Reine. I did the one, became rather proficient at it, now am moving on to the other. :)

Oh, IMHO there is no shame in being trans. Dumping the shame and guilt has been one of the most liberating things in my life.
Debby

*Vanessa*

10-31-2011, 11:31 PM

.
Merci Reine ;)
.

kimdl93

11-01-2011, 11:01 AM

oh sara....
when i read your posts, this comes to mind..

The lady doth protest too much, methinks

Kaitlyn, that exact thought occurred to me when I read Sara's post.

Veronica27

11-01-2011, 05:18 PM

I think the big issue among the CDers who don't wish to claim transmaleness as you call it (good description!), is a belief that it is wrong to be TG, as if it takes away from who they are or it makes them lesser men somehow. This comes from being socialized in a trans/homophobic world and having internalized the transphobia.

Rather than saying it takes away from who we are, I would suggest that it tries to "imply" who we are and therefore imposes certain stereotypes upon us. In order to understand transgender, it is necessary to understand gender. I don't believe that there is any dispute over the meaning of trans. The word gender and the word genre have the same Greek root, and it pertains to classification. If you look up the definition of gender, most sources begin by referring to it as a grammatical term. It is a sub-category of a broader category such as a pronoun or a noun. A listing of the basis for describing the sub-category (gender or genre) is usually included and includes such things as shape, size, etc. and only lastly, sex.

The secondary usage of the word gender is usually a description of how the word has evolved into its relationship to the word "sexual identity" through common usage.

The World Health Organization definition of gender is: "Gender" refers to the socially constructed roles, behaviours, activities, and attributes that a given society considers appropriate for men and women." This was expanded in a technical paper with the following: "Gender is related to how we are perceived and expected to think and act as women and men because of the way society is organized, not because of our biological differences." In other words gender is a social concept and involves social expectations and perceptions, not something that we possess internally.

Health Canada offers this description: "Gender refers to the array of socially constructed roles and relationships, personality traits, attitudes, behaviours, values, relative power and influence that society ascribes to the two sexes on a differential basis. Gender is relational - gender roles and characteristics do not exist in isolation, but are defined in relation to one another and through the relationships between women and men, girls and boys." i.e. society ascribes it. The determinant of masculinity and femininity can differ from society to society and era to era. It has nothing to do with "who we are" but is all about how society arbitrarily categorizes human qualities, and determines gender roles.

Next we must analyze gender identity. The definition you provide is good: "A person’s intrinsic sense of being male (a boy or a man), female (a girl or woman), or an alternative gender (e.g., boygirl, girlboy, transgender, genderqueer, eunuch)." The important words here are "intrinsic sense" which means the essential nature of a thing person etc.

If, for example, my intrinsic sense is that I am a man, then that does not change because I sometimes might wear clothing that society deems to be feminine, because femininity is simply a social construct. What I am doing is crossdressing which your definitions state is: "Crossdressing (transvestism): Wearing clothing and adopting a gender role presentation that, in a given culture, is more typical of the other sex." i.e. we are talking about presentation, and typical as determined by society, not the individual. The perception, by society, is not necessarily the reality.

Lastly, the definition you provided of transgender contradicts much of the foregoing thoughts:"Transgender: Adjective to describe a diverse group of individuals who cross or transcend culturally defined categories of gender. The gender identity of transgender people differs to varying degrees from the sex they were assigned at birth." In other words the adjective is being applied to the individuals, albeit a diverse group, when the reference is to the culturally ascribed norms that are being broken, and not the basic nature of the individual. Thus a man can show emotion and cry at a funeral, for example, which is generally considered a feminine trait, without it impacting his identity as a man. Similarly he can be a stay at home dad and raise the kids, a socially ascribed feminine role, without impacting his identity as a man. Why, then can he not dress and adopt most of the characteristics of appearance that society ascribes to women without it having an impact on his identity as a man?

If it impacts upon his identity of himself, then perhaps he is transgendered, but if not (and nothing says it must) he is not transgendered.

I fail to see why this issue is the subject of such harsh criticism as we find on this and other forums. Rather than disputing the logic, we are psychoanalized and diagnosed as possessing phobias of various sorts, or being unwilling to "accept" what to us is simply not true. We are not disputing that what the majority on these forums say is applicable to many cases, but simply making the point that in our own experience these claims are not universal. We are not all transgendered. Perhaps it is the transgendered who are battling some sort of phobia.

Veronica

sara.s

11-01-2011, 06:44 PM

I think the big issue among the CDers who don't wish to claim transmaleness as you call it (good description!)
Here we go.. one more label: transmaleness :doh:

My brain hurts.
.......................
I still don't know what cisgender is either. Pink Person. You keeps saying things that are the equivalent of an optical illusion. If I read it with one eye closed and then back up and go close and back up and read it again......it sort of makes sense.....oh no....there it goes again....slid off my brain.
I got it when I tried with left eye closed, followed by right eye wink and then a gentle nose tug. :D ...
Edit:just kidding, we really need a translator

ReineD

11-01-2011, 06:50 PM

Sara, what you call a label, I define as a vehicle that is used to communicate thoughts and ideas. They are necessary. Without them, we'd still be in the ice age. :)

Veronica, you make excellent points. I don't have the time right now, but I'll get back to you! :hugs:

Pink Person

11-01-2011, 08:39 PM

I cried at a funeral once, but I wasn't wearing a dress, so no one thought I was being a sissy-man. If sissy-man is an unintelligible term for some of you, then ask anyone standing nearby what it means the next time you are wearing your meaningless, artificial, insignificant, socially constructed, and objectively indescribable naughty nurse outfit. There is no need to go to Canada for an opinion. Common people everywhere will not have trouble explaining things to you.

sara.s

11-02-2011, 12:35 AM

Rianna Humble

11-02-2011, 12:47 AM

All of us CDers are actually "TG's in denial" because "we are scared of Trans/Homophobic world and internalization of transphobia in our minds or it makes us lesser men" is a very poor argument. You just keep repeating the same thing over again and again with no respite over 1000's of posts.

And you don't? - Apart from when you accuse people of "losing it" when they point out inconsistencies in your arguments.

ReineD

11-02-2011, 01:30 AM

Sara, I'm getting the impression you're taking this personally. You said earlier that you are not transgender, that for you it is a costume. I believe you. This discussion is not about you, specifically, it's about the thousands of members here who do feel, act, and look feminine when they dress, and this is reflected in their posts if you take the time to read them. If I believe what you tell me about yourself, then there is no argument.

Virginia, I still owe you a response. :)

victoriamwilliams1

11-02-2011, 01:34 AM

Yes! TG is an identity for me! The question could be, "When do you stop being a CD?"

Now for me when I am out in public I do identify and if asked I will say I am a female, that's just me.

Asche

11-02-2011, 04:42 AM

..This discussion is not about you [sara.s], specifically, it's about the thousands of members here who do feel, act, and look feminine when they dress, and this is reflected in their posts if you take the time to read them. If I believe what you tell me about yourself, then there is no argument.
However, there are plenty of people here who are quite willing to insist that any male who wears a dress or otherwise dresses or acts in a way they consider "feminine" is "transgender." Just look through this thread. A lot of people here are just not able to conceive of the idea that a male who does something "feminine" might be doing it for any reason other than to express some sort of feminine identity.

And while we can walk away from cd.com if we feel the folks here are just too bloody-minded, there are people in RL who apply the same Procrustean bed to us who we can't so easily walk away from (e.g., mental health professionals.) For a variety of reasons, I am fairly privileged, in that I can mostly blow such people off. Lots of people -- children in particular -- are not so privileged.

I have no problem with people calling themselves "transgender" if they feel it describes themselves. And to judge just from the titles of the posts here, there are an enormous number of people here for whom it is very much about their gender identity (or identities.)

What I object to is when people want lump together everyone whose behavior society sees as "crossing gender lines" under labels which imply that that behavior is about gender identity, and I argue that "transgender" is one such label.

Rianna Humble

11-02-2011, 05:15 AM

What I object to is when people want lump together everyone whose behavior society sees as "crossing gender lines" under labels which imply that that behavior is about gender identity, and I argue that "transgender" is one such label.

The definition says
Transgender: Adjective to describe a diverse group of individuals who cross or transcend culturally defined categories of gender.
However you identify, what you do fits the adjective.

LeaP

11-02-2011, 06:07 AM

This thread, having throughly deconstructed "transgender" to the point of meaninglessness, has now devolved into a discussion of the meaning of "is."

Reductio ab Clintonum. And you know what the result of THAT is ... unimpeachable logic.

Lea

Veronica27

11-02-2011, 10:03 AM

"However you identify, what you do fits the adjective."

And therein lies the problem. People are using transgender as an adjective to describe the person, whereas it is the activity which crosses society's artificially defined barriers. The definition you quote is from an organization whose primary purpose is the promotion of transgender health. As such it is politically motivated, and its cause is enhanced if the "transgender" population appears as large as possible. I am not attacking their intentions, as they are noble, but that is the reality. Their definition contradicts the generally accepted definitions of gender, as applied to the sexual connotation, and sexual identity, which I quoted in my last post. The definition of gender does not change by adding the prefix "trans" to it.

Veronica

When I was a boy, way back in the 1940's, the word "sissy" was one of the worst pejoratives you could call another guy. It was worse than many of the more acceptable (in those days) ethnic nicknames in widespread use. Call someone a sissy and you would get your ass kicked but good. I know that some of the younger people in this community like to use that term to describe themselves or their activities, but when someone clearly avoids its use in their writings, it should be avoided in the replies. And I don't need to go to Canada for any opinions, I am in Canada and proud of it.

Veronica

sara.s

11-02-2011, 11:19 AM

This discussion is not about you, specifically, it's about the thousands of members here who do feel, act, and look feminine when they dress, and this is reflected in their posts if you take the time to read them.

Okay, its not about me, fine. But I read these posts you talk about. We all guys (CD/not CD) have some feminine attributes (emotions/submissiveness/ weakness/ignorance etc) within us and we feel it and either choose to act it or suppress it to be the "solid male" you want(Remember your definition about "solid male"). Feeling/Acting out these attributes when dressed doesn't have to mean the CD begins to self identify as a female. It is like letting off steam.

ReineD

11-02-2011, 04:49 PM

Health Canada offers this description: "Gender refers to the array of socially constructed roles and relationships, personality traits, attitudes, behaviours, values, relative power and influence that society ascribes to the two sexes on a differential basis. Gender is relational - gender roles and characteristics do not exist in isolation, but are defined in relation to one another and through the relationships between women and men, girls and boys." i.e. society ascribes it. The determinant of masculinity and femininity can differ from society to society and era to era. It has nothing to do with "who we are" but is all about how society arbitrarily categorizes human qualities, and determines gender roles.

The definition of gender does not change by adding the prefix "trans" to it.

The Health Canada definition you provide does not mention gender expression as part of the definition of gender. I've entered the term "transgender" in their search box and come up with nothing. I expect they are currently working on a position to address transgender concerns and it is not yet reflected on their website. Canada is a progressive country and I do believe it is only a question of time before they will catch up to the growing global awareness that gender is not binary.

That said, "Gender" is more than just the socially constructed gender roles and characteristics you quote in post #92. A gender role is only one of four components that defines gender. I think it is helpful to break it down:

THE COMPONENTS THAT CONSTITUTE GENDER:

(1) Sex: Our anatomic reality. Physiologically, we can either be men, women, or intersex, which is an atypical anatomic sex development.

(2) Gender identity: A person's self-concept of his and/or her gender. Who they feel they are.

(3) Gender role or expression: Characteristics in personality, appearance, and behavior that in a given culture and historical period are designated as masculine or feminine (that is, more typical of the male or female social role). All people tend to incorporate both masculine and feminine characteristics in their gender expression in varying ways and to varying degrees.

(4) Sexual orientation: Who we are attracted to. I mention this only in passing, but I do mention it since for many people here, sexual orientation can fluctuate with their gender expression, if only in fantasy. But, it is recognized that sexual orientation is independent of the other three gender determinations for some people. A person can be same-sex attracted without having any desire to present as a member of the opposite sex.

Most people have a gender identity (2) that matches their sexual characteristics (1). They perceive themselves as being either male or female and this matches their sex. I think we can agree on this. Those whose gender identities do not match their sex, either fully or partially, are transgender. And if their gender identity is the polar opposite of their sex and they wish to change their sexual characteristics in order to match their gender identity, then they are transsexual. I think we can both agree on this as well.

Where you and I differ, is in the gender role and expression (3). You maintain that a man can express feminine traits without being transgender, if he sees himself as a male. You used as an example that a man who cries is not considered feminine, which implies that you may consider the act of crying a feminine trait. But, I believe that men, women, and transgenders have the capacity to feel sad and cry, although I do admit that men are taught to do this privately. I wish to add that some women are also taught it is not proper to cry in public. Nevertheless, crying is a trait that is independent of gender since it is a natural, human reaction to grief, just as laughter is a human reaction to joy. You also mention a dad staying home raising kids as a socially ascribed feminine role. We've already established that gender roles do change across time and cultures, and so I'm sure we can agree it is no longer considered feminine for a single father to raise his kids in our modern society.

This leaves us with gender expression, which is the crux of the discussion in this thread. You ask, why should the fact that a man who wishes to present as a woman be an indication that his gender identity is anything other than purely male?

Although we've established that gender roles and expression do change over time and cultures, there is one constant, and this is the ways in which men and women wish to differentiate themselves from one another. Louis XIV was not considered feminine when he wore lace, tights, and heels in the 18th century, although he would have if he had worn the clothing that his wife wore. He adhered to the gender expression that was acceptable for men at the time. Likewise, women today are not considered masculine when they wear the blue jeans that are considered acceptable for contemporary women, although if they take it one step further and also wear men's shoes, shirts, haircuts, and bind their breasts, they will be seen as falling outside the current feminine gender norms. But for the most part, women want to look like the other women in their culture, men want to look like the other men in their culture, and our choices in clothing and other presentation choices do reflect the gender differences most of us aspire to. (For the purpose of this discussion, let's leave the ways that some gays and lesbians wish to present themselves for a discussion that is tangential to this one).

So, why is it that our choice for gender expression is tied to our gender identity? We've established that we are socialized to conform to a range of expression that is considered usual and customary for either masculine or feminine presentation in our society. Most people are drawn to assimilate this socialization. They do not fight it. They do not question it. They have no desire to go outside their social norms and hide their cross-gendered clothing and presentation preferences. They do, fundamentally, wish to align themselves to the gender with which they identify, in public and in private.

This is why it is difficult for many people to understand that a person's sense of identity is not affected when they crossdress. Now granted, there are men who do fully present as men (no makeup, wigs, forms, no female names, etc) and who still like to wear skirts. I agree that such men are not transgender. But, the minute anyone exhibits a desire to assimilate the opposite sex's full gender expression in a way that aligns them with the opposite sex, and they further open themselves up to societal bias and possibly risk losing their marriages over it, then if it isn't a deep seated urge to express some form of alternate gender identity (even if it is only partial and only sometimes), what is it? A taste for softer clothing? Men have silk, cashmere, fine wool, and microfiber clothes too. A sense of comfort? This leads to the question as to why it is more comfortable to present as a woman. A wish to temporarily drop male responsibilities? Many men experience this and engage in other pastimes that do not involve CDing. Fetish? Perhaps, but it is often not purely sexual or fetish.

And last, I think a major misconception is the idea that a person must identify either fully as a man or a woman, and if there is even a partial identification with femininity it must mean this person is a woman. This is categorically not true. There is a wide range of gender identity in between the male/female binary. It is time we remove the word "sissy" (that you mention in #104) from anything that falls outside the binary. A man can still identify mostly as a male, and still need to cross the gender barriers. This does not make him a sissy or a woman. But it does mean he is transgender.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

EDIT - I have one last thought:

A MtF transsexual experiences a full disconnect between her gender identity, and both her birth sex and the socially ascribed gender role/expression of her birth sex.

A crossdresser does not experience a disconnect between his gender identity and his birth sex. But, there is a disconnect (to varying degrees) between his gender identity and the gender role and/or expression that is ascribed to his birth sex.

A cisgender experiences no disconnect between any of the first three components of gender.

SandraAbsent

11-02-2011, 05:06 PM

Just a real simple answer to the original question without getting too deep...The great thing about labels is that the tend to fall off and you can replace them with whatever you want to.

Pink Person

11-03-2011, 06:20 AM

You can brush your teeth with a turd, but that doesn't make it toothpaste. The logical definition of toothpaste excludes turds. Similarly, the logical definition of cisgender excludes crossdressing.

I do believe that self-identification is our most important gender characteristic, but as Reine has very carefully and thoughtfully explained, it is not our only one. Some of our other significant gender characteristics are not open to (whimsical) self-definition. You can call your penis a popsicle, but that doesn't make it one. You can crossdress in a costume like everyday is Halloween, but it isn't, and you're not wearing a costume (those are your clothes). You can tell people you crossdress for manly reasons because you are a manly man who likes to cover his manly gender core with a candy-colored feminine shell, but this behavior excludes you from the company of men who don't suffer from this contradiction. You can declare that gender categories and comparisons are arbitrary, but your self-declaration is no match for the truth to the contrary that transcends your beliefs.

The class of transgender people is wide in diversity (particular diversity, not general diversity), so stop bitching about your small box. It isn't that small. The cisgender box is smaller, and crossdressers don't fit into it.

LeaP

11-03-2011, 11:09 AM

Reine:

"A crossdresser does not experience a disconnect between his gender identity and his birth sex. But, there is a disconnect (to varying degrees) between his gender identity and the gender role and/or expression that is ascribed to his birth sex."

Pink Person:

" ... the logical definition of cisgender excludes crossdressing."

There's a difference between experiencing a disconnect and acknowledging it - e.g. cognitive dissonance. The major point I wanted to make, however, is that expression doesn't exist in a vacuum. One doesn't just express, one expresses something, i.e. it's a manifestion or outward sign of something in one's thoughts or psyche.

I agree that the male cisgender definition (substitute behavior, conventions, etc. if you're hung up on "definition.") completely excludes crossdressing as a habitual activity that's part of your normal life. So to say it is an expression of maleness is a logical absurdity.

The question for the non-TG crowd, then, is just what is your crossdressing an expression of? Those I've read so far all have very conventional cismale alternatives that don't involve wearing women's clothes, makeup, wigs, forms, etc.

Lea

Veronica27

11-03-2011, 11:52 AM

To Reine

Thank you for the well written summary of your position on the question of being transgendered. I appreciate that you have not indulged in name calling or sensationalized metaphors to make your point. In fact, you and I are not that far apart in our analysis of the various factors and definitions involved, with the exception of the degree of inclusiveness of your final conclusion.

I see the important factors here as being gender identity combined with motivation, a factor that neither of us has emphasized to any degree. Identity is our self-concept as you state. The transgenderists are reading something into our activities and behaviours, likely based on their own experiences and education, but their assumptions may be entirely wrong, as nobody knows what is going on in someone else's mind. Many describe their urge to dress as a "need" and say they are incomplete unless the are giving vent to this "need" on a regular basis. Personally, I can take it or leave it, and have abstained for very lengthy periods during my lifetime. This is the case with many of my favourite activities. I don't need to do them, I simply enjoy doing them. Frequent indulgence leads to monotony and boredom so I refrain for a while. The desires may return depending upon what else is occupying my time and resources. I feel the same way about crossdressing.

Motivation can refer to a wide range of differing factors. As a heterosexual individual, I have always been attracted to, aroused by and desired intimacy with a woman. I have no particular affinity for very many of the so-called female type activities, but prefer more of the stereotypical masculine type of endeavours. As a result, I have a great admiration for the beauty and image of womanhood, but a marked indifference toward anything that might be remotely considered physically attractive about the male sex. Consequently, I like to watch women, but spend the greater part of my time and discussions on what society considers to be masculine activities.

Over the centuries, many men have celebrated the beauty of women in a number of ways. Poetry, songs, sculpters, paintings and in recent memory photographs. Many of these involve the unclothed or semi-clad figure to emphasize the natural beauty of woman. There are, of course, some similar artifacts depicting the male, but they are not nearly as numerous. Society has recognized the universal beauty of womanhood, by placing a much greater emphasis on fashion and grooming for the female compared to the male. I see my own personal desires to crossdress as a reflection of my male admiration for the physicality of women as appreciated through my own male heterosexual eyes.

But why crossdressing and not something like excessive viewing of pornography, or painting nudes and so on? The fact is at times I have indulged in some of these other things as well. I grew up in an era when there were very clear cut roles in society for men and women. We were instilled with the demands and expectations that came with our birth sex, both at home and at school. The proper rules of etiquette were emphasized, sexual discrimination existed in many aspects of school life, and boys were told they had to learn to "be a man", not be a "sissy" and hide their emotions. Conformity with this strictly defined definition of masculinity was expected throughout our lives, which creates pressures and consequent stress, depending upon how closely our own personalities match the societal concept of the male gender. This stress intensifies by high school, and reappears at various stages throughout our career as it intertwines with the other stresses of our jobs, and roles as husband and father.

When my crossdressing started in my early teens, it was probably somewhat fetishistic, as I was fascinated by the blossoming emergence of all my female classmates into young womanhood, and began to notice that their clothing and other elements of appearance were changing. Much of it seemed ridiculous and unnecessary to me as it seemed so impractical to my male mind, but this only added to my curiosity about what kind of sensation these things must create, and why every girl felt it necessary to conform to such silliness. The only new item of clothing that the girls were gradually adopting that seemed to have an element of usefulness to it was the bra. Coupled with my newfound attraction to this previously unnoticed aspect of the female anatomy, I became extremely curious to know what it must feel like to suddenly have to start wearing such a thing, how to put it on, and numerous other questions.

Over the years, this fetishistic attraction to the bra has diminished greatly for various reasons such as getting used to the feel of wearing one, to being married and experiencing the intimacy of being with a woman. However, it has slowly led to the realization that it and the various other elements of female appearance provide a very strange form of relaxation when worn. They are for the most part physically uncomfortable, but they create an excitement as a result of the risk taking, and mental explorative nature of the activity. Many authorities now believe that crossdressing releases endorphines in the body which are natures way of overcoming stress and pain. The "high" that we experience compensates for any discomfort from the wearing of the garments and enables us to take a break from our normal stress producing existence. This does not necessarily have anything to do with identifying as female, although to an outsider our external appearance may be what they are expecting of a female because of societal conditioning. It is simply a method discovered somewhat subconsciously over our lifetime of handling stress, which may have started by something as simple as curiosity.

We are all unique, have our own motivations, and derive our own forms of satisfaction from whatever we might do. I simply do not believe that the somewhat obvious but debatable conclusion that crossdressing is connected with gender identity is true in all cases.

Veronica

Pink Person

11-03-2011, 07:10 PM

ReineD

11-03-2011, 07:27 PM

Pink person, brutal honesty has it's place, but unless the recipients are completely objective, it tends to alienate people.

I've been guilty of writing strong opinion in this thread too, but it doesn't hurt to remember that human beings are complex and don't always fit neatly in a theoretical box. :)

We all come to conclusions about ourselves at our own speed.

Veronica27

11-04-2011, 10:34 AM

You do manly things because society forced you to do them? You do womanly things
because you are paying tribute to women who are definitely not like you? You have conveniently opted out of having any intrinsic gender characteristics, except your so-called masculine identity that doesn't spring from anything you can call your own. You must have skipped biology class while you were getting your superior education.

There are biological imperatives that drive most of our gender identification, expressions, and values. These imperatives are more powerful than anything society imposes on us. You can't cope with the mixed signals your body is giving you, that's why you deflect the main problem by blaming society for pushing you into your feminine behavior and why you blame women for pulling you into it.

A careful reading and comprehension of my various posts in this thread would reveal that I have not said any of the things that you are falsely attributing to me. Nowhere have I said that society has forced me to do anything, but rather I have described the expectations of society, based upon our sex. Force and expectation are not equivalent. We are free to conform or not, in whole or in part, but must be mindful of the circumstances when making our decision. The primary factor here is our circumstances, such as jobs, family and so on. Also, I have clearly stated that my interests have always fallen more along the lines of traditional masculine ones than feminine ones, so your claim that I have opted out of any intrinsic gender characteristics is laughable and indicative of a failure to comprehend. Appearance, which is society's determinant of what it EXPECTS each sex to wear, is in reality a very minor aspect of overall gender expression and identity, and basing a person's total persona on such a minor factor as what they happen to wear occasionally in specific situations is totally ludicrous.

I will not dignify your posts with any future comments except to point out that your insistence on referring to the term cisgender is indicative of your mentality. It provides a convenient means of distancing yourself and your confusion over your own gender identity from what you want to be, but know you are not, and enables you to denigrate others who do not share your confusion. You fear allowing expression to your own sense of femininity, and try to leave yourself somewhere in limbo between honesty, and the man you wish you were.

An alternate definition of cisgender is: macho, misogynistic male.

LeaP

11-04-2011, 11:24 AM

Well, ladies and gentlemen, at this juncture I fear thread closure. Too bad, too, as prior to the fire, some interesting depth on two radically polarized views was being driven to the surface (excuse the mixed metaphors). if Veronica and Pink Person can take out the ad-hominems and take a stab at discussion rather than propagandizing their respective viewpoints, I'd really like to see this continue.

FWIW: Veronica, I read some of Pink Person's characterizations into your responses as well. Pink Person, taking such a reading and recasting in extreme terms is unfair at its best. In both cases, some questioning and explication would have been useful. What came down was not.

Lea (hopeful, if not optimistic)

Kittyagain

11-04-2011, 11:36 AM

I agree with Kim on her original post. It could be the only between the different levels is how much we are willing to let go of our male side not how much we want to be a woman.

Kitty

Rianna Humble

11-04-2011, 12:07 PM

An alternate definition of cisgender is: macho, misogynistic male.

Not in any reputable dictionary

ReineD

11-04-2011, 12:58 PM

This is my understanding of the word, "cisgender":

Up until the last hundred years (?) or so, there was no real awareness of people who felt a disconnect between their birth sex and gender identity, let alone an understanding there could be a mild disconnect in some people and a strong disconnect in others, even though throughout our history there has been recognition of "third genders" such as the groups described here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_gender.

As we learned more about the complexities of gender non-conformity in recent history and particularly how widespread it seems to be, it became useful to find a word to include the binary people who don't feel a disconnect between their gender identity, role, and expression, with those that do, under an overarching "Gender" meaning.

"Cis" is a latin adjective that means "to the same side" and it describes people who do not wish to cross any gender lines.

So, it is my understanding that "cisgender" (binary male/female) + "transgender" (everyone else in between) = "gender" (every possible way that people can identify their genders).

:2c:

Pink Person

11-04-2011, 08:34 PM

Some people need a good dose of tough love sometimes. I wasn't speaking about you Lady Veronica. You're a cactus trying to be a canoe. I love the people on this site who are smart and self-aware, but might be struggling with their self-awareness.

Sometimes, I try to help by unpacking some of the nonsense that I read from obtuse people. In this thread, your nonsense is packed pretty tight, and unpacking it has become a large exhausting chore. Dynamite can't move it.

You can complain about my reading comprehension, but I think I read you better than you read yourself (and me). The next time you are wearing a bra, try contemplating your manly nipples. Perhaps you will have an epiphany about them.

litlejohn

11-04-2011, 11:27 PM

I do, there for I am, but so much more. it's like a relationship with so many levels of understanding. I know who i am but i also learn more about myself everyday.
does it really matter what label (cd,tv,ts, ect...)is put on us. so long we live our lives to the fullest with the one we love

Pink Person

11-05-2011, 03:51 AM

Do labels matter? It depends how meaningful your want your life to be and if you want to communicate with other people and have meaningful relationships with them. If you don't care about understanding yourself, communicating with other people, and having productive social relationships with them (that involve true love and such things) then continue to order the chicken when you want the waitress to bring you the fish. Keep in mind, also, that she will never love you because she isn't a waitress. She's a watermelon and you never tip her. The other women in your life won't love you either because you keep slicing them into pieces when you make a fruit salad.

Honestly, why does this question even get asked (you should ask yourself)? Gender labels matter because gender matters, to everyone. Misconceptions about gender cause a lot of grief in the world. You might have noticed it if you hadn't been so busy turning a blind eye to it.

Nigella

11-05-2011, 10:48 AM

This topic is worthy of discussion and so far has been kept civil up to a point. Too many threads are closed because members cannot accept a different point of view to their own. Unless you are specifically called to answer a point in your post, it is pointless trying to reinforce your opinion time and time again. Any further posts that do not add to the topic, but rather than de-rail it with a view to reinforcing a comment already made will be deleted.

Nigella
Moderator

Sophie86

11-05-2011, 02:19 PM

I've explained in the past that my objection to the term 'transgender' is just that it makes it easy to conflate crossdressers with transsexuals. This confusion exists among those outside the community, but it is also present within the community. There is a view popular with transsexuals that the well-adjusted TGs eventually recognize that they are TS, and work towards transition. The ones who don't are either in denial, or they're really just pervy fetishists. Are crossdressers TG? Let's consult an expert (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rebecca-juro/why-transgender-identity-_b_1069475.html).

Regardless of whether a person is a famous author and celebrity or just an average working class Joe or Jane, coming out and publicly identifying as a transgender person is no easy task. Even in the best of circumstances and in the most progressive of political climates, transgender identities are usually hard-won, generally involving reams of paperwork and documentation, court appearances, and psychological evaluations, not to mention completely reorganizing one's personal and professional life to accommodate their new gender presentation. Depending on the laws of the jurisdiction a transgender person lives in, works in, and was born in, transitioning from one gender to another is often a tedious, expensive, and time-consuming process, sometimes even actually impossible to accomplish entirely. While a gay or lesbian person can come out of the closet by simply declaring their identity to others, transgender people must fight for our identities, sometimes for years, before we will be legally and socially recognized in many quarters as the people we know ourselves to be.

Do those sound like the experiences of a crossdresser, or a transsexual? They are being presented as representative experiences of TGs in general, but they are obviously describing the difficulties of being transsexual. Why would an expert focus on those issues, rather than, say, the problem of coming out to one's spouse as a crossdresser, or the difficulty of moving back and forth between male and female presentation? The reason is because when it comes to counting numbers, CDs must be counted in order to swell the ranks of the TG community. When it comes to discussing issues, or representing the community, though, we don't count. We are seen as either proto-transsexuals, or we're labeled as fetishists and booted out of the community.

Being a crossdresser and being a transsexual are two different things. Some transsexuals may go through a "crossdressing phase" on their path towards discovery, but that is not the universal experience for crossdressers. We have a different relationship with our birth gender. 'Trans' suggests a crossing over from point A to point B. Its presence in both transgender and transsexual gives the false impression that it means the same in both cases: A one-way journey from one gender presentation to another. Not all crossdressers are on that journey.

So here's my view: Call us whatever you like. Stick whatever label you want on us. But treat our views with respect. Stop trying to shoehorn our experiences into your idea of what it means to be TG. Stop being derisive and dismissive. Stop doing the "oh, but you're MEN" thing. Stop telling us that we're in denial. Stop acting like you know what path we're on before we even know it. Just. Stop.

ReineD

11-05-2011, 03:49 PM

Being a crossdresser and being a transsexual are two different things. Some transsexuals may go through a "crossdressing phase" on their path towards discovery, but that is not the universal experience for crossdressers.

This is very true, thank you for reinforcing this. :)

A transsexual feels a complete disconnect with her birth sex, AND her assigned gender role and expression.

Unlike transsexuals, crossdressers DO NOT FEEL ANY disconnect with their birth sex (except maybe the crossdressers who toy with the idea of breast creams), although they do experience some disconnect (to varying degrees) with their assigned gender expression (and perhaps gender roles, for the crossdressers who fantasize about being maids, sissies, etc). This is why they dress. If there was no disconnect with socially assigned gender expression, they wouldn't dress with forms, wigs, and makeup, would they?

Rianna Humble

11-05-2011, 03:57 PM

Stop doing the "oh, but you're MEN" thing.

So, if your'e not MEN, you're not Transgender (according to you), and you are certainly not WOMEN - what are you?

Sophie86

11-05-2011, 11:05 PM

So, if your'e not MEN, you're not Transgender (according to you), and you are certainly not WOMEN - what are you?

I am a MtF crossdresser.

I did not say that I am not a man. I am a man with a strong feminine side that I like to express. When I am dressed, I prefer that people use femme pronouns to refer to me, especially people in the community who understand that sort of thing. When posting on this forum as Sophie, I am en femme. When someone here uses my underlying masculinity to deride me, or dismiss my opinion, I see that as a deliberate attempt to insult me. It is extremely rude.

I also did not say that I am not transgender. I said I don't like the term, because I think it causes confusion. If crossdressers are TG, though, then by definition I am TG. Furthermore, if crossdressers are TG--I mean all crossdressers, not just the ones who will eventually discover that they are TS--then don't you agree that transsexuals should treat them with respect as members of the same community who have at least some common interests?

If there was no disconnect with socially assigned gender expression, they wouldn't dress with forms, wigs, and makeup, would they?

I can't speak for all crossdressers. Let's consider the case of Drag Queens for a moment, though. Do they feel such a disconnect, or is it purely a form of artistic expression? Perhaps it's closer to the latter for some crossdressers? I don't know.

In my case, though, I think there is a certain amount of disconnect with my assigned gender role. Sophie is an expression of some qualities that I've felt the need to suppress over the years. Not so much the sensitivity/nurturing role, which I have been able to integrate with my masculinity, but the desire to be attractive, sexy, and sensual, which I just don't get from masculinity.

Pink Person

11-06-2011, 10:22 AM

I apologize for lighting a fire under anyone in this thread, so I'll turn off the heat. Sometimes when you roast a bird, delicious juices flow out. I was trying to get some good insights from one or two people who seemed capable of providing them. The results were not so sweet until Sophie joined us.

Sophie introduced the excellent point that conflating gender classifications is a serious problem for transgender people. Crossdressers do not like it when they are conflated with transsexuals, and vice versa. People in the middle range of transgender classification also struggle with being conflated with people who are not like them in important ways.

A related problem that doesn't get voiced much on this site but is voiced very loudly in the outside world is that cisgender people don't like being conflated with transgender people. CDs who object when they are conflated with transsexuals are frequently in favor of conflating themselves with cisgender people. Similarly, transsexuals who object to being conflated with other transgender people, frequently conflate themselves with cisgender men and women. Cisgender people do not want to be conflated with CDs and transsexuals. If you have any doubts, go ask one.

Why can't everyone have their own personal gender category if it makes them happy? The answer is that everyone isn't so special. Our similarities outweigh our differences for some groups of people.

If you are a crossdresser who wants to conflate yourself with a cisgender person then you will receive a much harsher response in the outside world than anything you get here. Try climbing over that fence and see where you fall.

ReineD

11-08-2011, 02:21 PM

I'm responding to a post that Veronica 27 made in another thread, since the topic is a continuation of the discussion here.

Identity, cannot be separated from the role/expression, because by definition it is determined by the roles with which we identify.

Dress and external appearances are a very small aspect of the overall gender role in life, and when you factor in that this is, for many, more of a leisure time activity, it has little impact on their overall identity or awareness of who they are.

Don't these two thoughts contradict each other? If identity cannot be separated from gender expression, doesn't it follow that gender expression is to varying degrees tied to identity even if minutely?

Transgender describes who the individual is, and has a tendency to imply constancy.

Transgender does describe who the individual is, and it also describes what he does, since ultimately we propel our own behaviors. Who else drives our decisions, if it is not our own sense of "I"? It is also true that transgender implies constancy, but so does crossdresser. A man can hardly be called a CD if he has only worn panties a few times in his life while having sex. I do not call myself bi just because I had a threesome in my 20s.

How would you define someone who comes into this forum identifying as a CD who is looking for breast creams to enhance his breasts "just a little bit so it won't show in guy mode, even if only to fit into a 36A"? And what is the difference between this person, and another who is satisfied with only donning breast forms while dressed? Don't they both want to appearance of breasts when they are dressed?

What is the motive for presenting fully as a woman, even if it is only done occasionally? If it is only for pleasure, then the question remains, what is it about crossing the gender presentation boundary that gives you (and others) pleasure or comfort, and how can it not be a sense of identification with the opposite gender even if this is experienced only during the crossdressing?

I believe that we are what we do.

For that reason, I prefer not to apply it to myself, and if any descriptive is needed simply use crossdressing as it refers more to the activity.

This is your prerogative, but again, what motivates the choice to CD particularly, as opposed to dressing like a cat or Superman? We all have likes and dislikes. I dislike fast fairground rides because they make me feel dizzy and they upset my sense of balance. I love to ski because I enjoy the speed, the sound, the swaying and gliding motions, and also feeling in concert with the ground below me. I like puzzles and logic problems because I enjoy challenging my mental acuity. I am among other things, a skier and a puzzle aficionado. I am not a fair ground ride fan. I love to draw and paint and so I am an artist, even if I do not exhibit or sell my work commercially.

Sorry to be repetitive, but you've got to admit that to the rest of us who do choose our fashions based on the way we see ourselves (whether it is goth, prep, business, outdoorsy, biker, emo, extreme, loud, conventional, etc), it is difficult to understand that a man presenting as a woman does this completely divorced from his sense of self. This just seems too disjointed.

kimdl93

11-08-2011, 02:42 PM

I began this thread with what was a loaded question...and obviously, I have a point of view on the subject. It has precipitated far more and more heated discussion than I would have imagined. Perhaps I could have asked the same question in a less provocative manner...but it certainly has been interesting to see the reaction.

The point of the question was not to achieve a resolution. The query doesn't yeild scientifically valid data. And since there's no blood test that I aware of that can definitively answer the question, so all we can do is observe how this highly selective sample of CDrs (Am I safe to assume that most of the respondents are CDrs?) perceive themselves. And it appears that many of us do identify ourselves as TG, while others are quite adamant that they dress for other reasons. Perhaps that's all we need to know on the subject.

Aprilrain

11-08-2011, 02:56 PM

Wether people like it or not the word Transgender is now an umbrella term used to include all gender variant people. Lets face it if you wear clothes designed for the other sex (and your male) your a CDer (unless your TS) and it matters not what your reasons for doing so are. the term CD falls under the transgender umbrella term at least this is its most common usage as far as I can tell. I have noticed the term transgendered being use to differentiate someone from a CDer. i don't see how this clarifies anything or what the purpose of doing so is. I suppose those people who Identify as transgendered in a way to differentiate themselves from CDers do so to say they are more serious about their CDing or they feel they have a female identify (to some degree) but express it through CDing rather than transitioning. this is speculation on my part though.

Kaitlyn Michele

11-08-2011, 03:04 PM

Do labels matter? It depends how meaningful your want your life to be and if you want to communicate with other people and have meaningful relationships with them. If you don't care about understanding yourself, communicating with other people, and having productive social relationships with them .............

this is a productive way to think of this question...its a cop out to say labels are bad, or "im just me"
...it's a valid point of view, but you are reducing yourself to 1 in 7 billion...nobody cares who you are...there is no Kaitlyn nite at the club..but there is ladies night.. and i care that people communicate to me in a meaningful way..

As you have a healthy respect for your own sense of self, you should be willing to accept that the cost of belonging is sometimes to compromise on who you belong with..

if you ascribe no value to belonging, who cares what you think?? why are you even here?

so even though I'm not a fan of the word transgender to describe crossdressing, it's fine.....lots of ts women say they are woman, and refute being ts....i have learned however that the "ts" label is sometimes neccessary and i use it to as such..

kimdl93

11-08-2011, 03:12 PM

I've already stated my position. I view labels as useful tools for understanding...and I'm perfectly happy to ascribe the term Transgender to myself and to associated myself as part of that universe. I find I'm increasingly both happy and proud to be TG.

Sophie86

11-08-2011, 04:34 PM

Wether people like it or not the word Transgender is now an umbrella term used to include all gender variant people.

No one ever asks the platypus how he thinks he should be classified.

ReineD

11-08-2011, 04:47 PM

I began this thread with what was a loaded question...and obviously, I have a point of view on the subject. It has precipitated far more and more heated discussion than I would have imagined. Perhaps I could have asked the same question in a less provocative manner...but it certainly has been interesting to see the reaction.

Kim, it's impossible to convey tone through text, but I just want to say that for me this is a discussion, an exchange of ideas, and nothing more than this. I see the conversation between Veronica and I, for example, as an attempt to determine which concepts we agree with, and which we do not. The overall topic of "Gender" has many components.

How else are concepts developed other than through discussion?

I think this thread and others like it will be helpful to someone down the line who might be asking himself a few questions. He'll be able to identify with what fits here and discard the rest, but most importantly he'll have developed the beginning of a language that might better describe how he feels.

:hugs:

kimdl93

11-08-2011, 05:33 PM

Reine, I don't object to the tone, for the most part, even when it gets a bit heated. And I do agree that the principle value of these discussions is to help individuals sort things out for themselves.

Kaitlyn Michele

11-08-2011, 05:52 PM

How else are concepts developed other than through discussion?

I think this thread and others like it will be helpful to someone down the line who might be asking himself a few questions. He'll be able to identify with what fits here and discard the rest, but most importantly he'll have developed the beginning of a language that might better describe how he feels.

:hugs:

exactly......................

Veronica27

11-08-2011, 06:18 PM

Don't these two thoughts contradict each other? If identity cannot be separated from gender expression, doesn't it follow that gender expression is to varying degrees tied to identity even if minutely?

.

There is no contradiction here. I was replying to your assertion that CD's who do not consider themselves to be TG are considering only two gender factors, their biological sex and their gender identity, and not the third component which is the gender role/expession. I pointed out that gender identity is based upon gender roles/expression by definition and that gender roles/expression are much more than clothing and appearances. Putting on a dress does not necessarily mean that your whole sense of being is now that of a woman. If all of your other major interests, and thought processes remain masculine, then you are hardly becoming transgendered.

It is also true that transgender implies constancy, but so does crossdresser.

I was referring to the concept of transgender as being a condition of the individual. It remains constant, regardless of where they are and how they are dressed. It is who they are. The desire to crossdress may not go away, but it does not define the individual in the same sense as transgendered. Crossdressing is an activity in which the individual engages, and he is a crossdresser only with reference to this one activity, just as you are a skier if you partake in that activity. But skier does not define you as an individual. Transgender is not what we do. I have never seen it used as a verb, but rather it is an adjective.

How would you define someone who comes into this forum identifying as a CD who is looking for breast creams to enhance his breasts "just a little bit so it won't show in guy mode, even if only to fit into a 36A"? And what is the difference between this person, and another who is satisfied with only donning breast forms while dressed? Don't they both want to appearance of breasts when they are dressed?

My definition of such an individual is not the relevant one. However, I do think that such an individual may have some TS tendencies, but is it my place to say? People do a lot of things to their bodies that I may not agree with, or choose for myself such as tatoos, piercings, and enhancements of various sorts, and they do them for a myriad of reasons. There is a big distinction between that person and the person who uses breast forms, but I wouldn't necessarily say it distinguishes a TG from a CD. Breasts are a part of the external image being created by a crossdresser. Seeking to physically enhance oneself, may go beyond the desire to make the image more realistic. As this is not an aspect of my activities or desires, anything further I might say is pure speculation.

What is the motive for presenting fully as a woman, even if it is only done occasionally? If it is only for pleasure, then the question remains, what is it about crossing the gender presentation boundary that gives you (and others) pleasure or comfort, and how can it not be a sense of identification with the opposite gender even if this is experienced only during the crossdressing?

It is not a sense of identification with the opposite gender, because it has no impact on my gender identity. That is a back door way of trying to elicit the desired response. Are you a lawyer by any chance?:heehee: Crossdressing is really quite simple. You are experiencing some of the tactile sensations in which you observe women being allowed to indulge, but which are denied to you as a man by society's conventions. It can be relaxing, exhilerating and much more as it allows a temporary respite from the monotony and boredom of certain aspects of the masculine image to which we are expected to conform, while allowing the expression of certain parts of our persona that as men we are expected to suppress. These elements of our personality exist regardless of how masculine (or cisgendered) we might be, because they have little to do with gender which is a societal construct, not an individual one.

..it is difficult to understand that a man presenting as a woman does this completely divorced from his sense of self. This just seems too disjointed.

As you are of the opinion that you are transgendered, then you would be looking at crossdressing from that point of view. Your sense of self, at least at times, is probably that of being a woman. Your statement in the quote assumes that my sense of self must also be that of a woman. Again, sounds like one of those lawyery twists. My sense of self is that I am a man, and crossdressing has no impact on that sense, and is not indulged in because of any latent or repressed thoughts of being a woman.

Part of the misunderstandings might have to do with the meaning and concept of being transgendered. I think the term is applied in far too loose a manner, but that is just my opinion. I have a sense that the desire to make it an umbrella term is for political gain, as it swells the numbers. The same goes for aligning the term "T" with LGB. The aims of these activists in gaining recognition for trans people is in fact a very noble one, but the watering down of the term by the inclusion of people like myself does nothing to help the cause. As long as crossdressing is not a criminal offense, I have no personal need for transgender rights, but the same does not apply to a TS or full time TG who is seeking workplace recognition. When every crossdresser and drag queen as well as others is seen as being a part of TG, it makes that recognition more difficult to achieve. It also creates false stereotypes that are assumed to apply to everyone.

What started out as a simple answer to a question "can you CD without being TG" has somehow gotten out of hand because people refuse to acknowledge the opinions of others. Again, if you answer yes, you are not claiming universality to that answer, but if you answer no, you are denying the existence of yes, and therein lies the problem.
I feel that enough has been said on the subject and don't wish to be drawn into any further debate. Crossdressing is too enjoyable and should be fun. Let's let everyone enjoy it in their own way.

Veronica

Asche

11-08-2011, 06:32 PM

... for me this is a discussion, an exchange of ideas, and nothing more than this. I see the conversation between Veronica and I, for example, as an attempt to determine which concepts we agree with, and which we do not.
Actually, I have found it more useful for helping me clarify my own ideas.

I've discovered that much of my thinking is not on a verbal level and I don't have a lot of practice translating it into words. Especially on topics like this, which are not exactly the sort of things one talks about at a coffee break at work.

I'm also grateful that people have been pretty decent to one another on this thread, if not always as understanding as I would have liked. (But, as an old physics prof. of mine once [should have] said, "if you really want people to completely understand you, you'll have to turn into a hydrogen atom.") Some of it has been tough for me, and there have been times when I wanted to jump up on the table and shout, "you've got it all wrong, listen to ME!"

What is the motive for presenting fully as a woman, even if it is only done occasionally? If it is only for pleasure, then the question remains, what is it about crossing the gender presentation boundary that gives you (and others) pleasure or comfort, and how can it not be a sense of identification with the opposite gender even if this is experienced only during the crossdressing?
This is IMHO raising the questions: what is crossdressing? What constitutes "presenting as a woman"? Is it enough to wear some "women-only" clothing? Or does one have to intend to pass as a woman?

If I put on a dress, tights, and petticoat and go off to a Contra dance (which is pretty much what I do several times a month), am I crossdressing? Am I presenting as a woman? Does it matter that I have a beard, am balding, and don't wear a wig? Does it matter whether I dance the woman's role or the man's? How about if my body type were androgynous enough that people might mistake me for a woman even in drab?

It's easy enough to say that what the majority of guys here are doing is "crossdressing" and that they at least intend to present as a woman (I refer to this as "orthodox crossdressing.") But what about the people who don't fit so neatly into the ISO standard crossdressing box?

And even for those whose crossdressing is quite conventional, how many are, underneath it all, really interested in the "being a woman" part, and how many simply interpret their desire for the pretty clothes and the makeup &c. as "wanting to be a woman," because they've been taught from the age of 3 months on that wanting or enjoying this stuff makes you a woman?

ReineD

11-08-2011, 09:35 PM

Veronica, I'll get back to you on post #136, but just to answer Asche real quick:

If I put on a dress, tights, and petticoat and go off to a Contra dance (which is pretty much what I do several times a month), am I crossdressing? Am I presenting as a woman? Does it matter that I have a beard, am balding, and don't wear a wig?

Asche, I do see a difference between a man who presents as a man but who wears women's clothing, like you do. I personally don't understand what motivates your clothing choices, but you are not attempting to present as a member of the opposite sex. If you say you identify as a man it makes sense to me, since you are presenting as a man (albeit with unconventional taste in clothes :p). I also imagine that if by chance all men were to suddenly tomorrow prefer to leave the constraints of wearing men's trousers and adopt the wearing of skirts, then you'd be happy as a clam. :)

BUT ... a crossdresser who desires to emulate the appearance of a woman with breast forms, makeup, wig, shaving, hiding facial hair, etc (not just wearing the clothes), I don't think would be happy wearing the same skirts that all the other men would wear if again, it were to become wildly popular tomorrow for all men to wear skirts. Such CDers would still choose the styles that the ladies wear, and would still wish to mask any maleness from their appearance.

This is not what you do, Asche, judging by your description. I dare say, I think you are in the minority here, but that's OK. :hugs:

sara.s

11-08-2011, 10:23 PM

Asche, I do see a difference between a man who presents as a man but who wears women's clothing, like you do. I personally don't understand what motivates your clothing choices, but you are not attempting to present as a member of the opposite sex. If you say you identify as a man it makes sense to me, since you are presenting as a man (albeit with unconventional taste in clothes :p). I also imagine that if by chance all men were to suddenly tomorrow prefer to leave the constraints of wearing men's trousers and adopt the wearing of skirts, then you'd be happy as a clam. :)

BUT ... a crossdresser who desires to emulate the appearance of a woman with breast forms, makeup, wig, shaving, hiding facial hair, etc (not just wearing the clothes), I don't think would be happy wearing the same skirts that all the other men would wear if again, it were to become wildly popular tomorrow for all men to wear skirts. Such CDers would still choose the styles that the ladies wear, and would still wish to mask any maleness from their appearance.

There are other factors at play here too. Even when some CD's have their personal lives messed up (SO issues, TG/TS confusion...) the number of their pics(some CD's have like 1000 pics); their beautiful makeup; the smile, joy and contentment on each pic and their outdoor adventures paints a totally different picture to the outside world. The before and after transformations posted online are truly amazing. Any guy would be curious after seeing these pics. A CD in the closet might just be envious, that he is unable to have fun like others. So, full transformation and outing would be like an ultimate goal. I hope i am not wrong on this.

ReineD

11-08-2011, 10:34 PM

I hope i am not wrong on this.

No one is wrong. :hugs:

Everyone has their own opinions. My views are just that too ... my opinions. :)

Asche

11-08-2011, 11:21 PM

I personally don't understand what motivates your clothing choices, but you are not attempting to present as a member of the opposite sex. If you say you identify as a man it makes sense to me, since you are presenting as a man (albeit with unconventional taste in clothes :p).
I present as a man because, with my body, I figure I would have as much success presenting as a woman as I would trying to present as a flying squirrel. If I woke up tomorrow morning in a female body, I guess I would start presenting (and "identifying") as a woman -- but still with unconventional taste in clothes. I can't speak from experience, but I imagine I would feel like the same person, just with a different body and having to deal with a different set of expectations from the people around me.

I still don't know if people here would call what I do "crossdressing."

I also imagine that if by chance all men were to suddenly tomorrow prefer to leave the constraints of wearing men's trousers and adopt the wearing of skirts, then you'd be happy as a clam. :)
Not necessarily. I suspect that then the fashionistas would start trying to tell me what kind of dresses were OK and which weren't. (The sort of c*** women have to put up with all the time.) As it is, the fashionistas take one look at me and give up on me as a lost cause, and leave me in peace to wear what I want and to be as "masculine" or "unmasculine" as I want. Which suits me just fine.

BUT ... a crossdresser who desires to emulate the appearance of a woman with breast forms, makeup, wig, shaving, hiding facial hair, etc (not just wearing the clothes), I don't think would be happy wearing the same skirts that all the other men would wear if again, it were to become wildly popular tomorrow for all men to wear skirts. Such CDers would still choose the styles that the ladies wear, and would still wish to mask any maleness from their appearance.
Maybe some -- or most -- would.

And maybe it would depend upon what those "skirts that all the other men would wear" are.

The thing is, I suspect that there are many underlying motivations for crossdressing, but because the only socially acceptable way to dress in women-only clothing or to take on any other characteristic that society deems "feminine" is to be a woman, men who aren't social refuseniks like me will tend to frame it as in some sense being a woman, and feel they have to become a woman (if only in their imagination) in order to allow themselves to do it.

However, I grant you that this last paragraph is something of a moot point: society isn't going to change in that way any time soon, and even if it did, crossdressers' attitudes wouldn't change that fast.

What I mainly wish for is that people would simply keep an open mind. Just because it looks to you like a man wants to be a woman (or be taken for one), or like a boy wants to be a girl, doesn't necessarily mean that that is what is going on. Sometimes a pretty dress is just a pretty dress.

ReineD

11-09-2011, 12:01 AM

What I mainly wish for is that people would simply keep an open mind. Just because it looks to you like a man wants to be a woman (or be taken for one), or like a boy wants to be a girl, doesn't necessarily mean that that is what is going on. Sometimes a pretty dress is just a pretty dress.

No, no don't get me wrong! I'm not saying that CDs who fully present/emulate women when they dress WANT to be women!!! Not at all! A CD feels no disconnect between his male gender identity and his biological sex (except perhaps the CDs who want real breasts or vaginas, or who want to be a wife to a husband, or who dreams of being a woman in bed with a man while dressed ... but that's a different topic :p).

I'm saying that a CD who crosses one of the gender boundaries (the gender expression), is "trans"gender (a.k.a. crossing a gender (expression) boundary). Doing this, and wanting to be, or believing oneself a woman are two entirely different things! :)

"trans" = to cross over (and come back. lol)

In my post on the previous page I wrote about the three components of gender: biological sex, gender identity and gender role/gender expression. A person of one biological sex who crosses either one or both of the other two gender markers is by definition crossing=trans gender. A man who knowingly presents as a man even if wearing a skirt is not fully adopting the gender expression of the opposite sex, and so in my view, does not fully cross the gender expression boundary. He is not wanting or hoping to convince others that he is a woman.

A CD who identifies as a man but who wants or hopes to convince others he is a woman while dressed, is still a man who crosses the gender expression boundary. So, he is a transgender male.

Kaz

11-09-2011, 12:39 AM

I have dipped in and out of this thread as I have been away a lot and not able to provide focused concentration.. BUT... it has been enormously rewarding and helpful in the insights that people have provided.

Yes, we are all different, and yes, we have areas of similarity and isn't this so confusing when we try to categorise?

Kim's original post has created an opportunity for us to really question why we do this... and fro me this has been extremely helpful, both in my own reflection and in my developing understanding of what others have posted that don't immediately hit my frame of reference.

What am I saying? If we are all the same, then we fit under a normal distribution curve with vaiance. If we are not all the same, there will be a seperate distibution for each 'category'... and the categories will overlap... so we will think we are part of something that we aren't.

Difficult to explain in text... much easier with pictures...

sara.s

11-09-2011, 12:45 AM

Hmm. I was working on a list of definitions to post as a sticky, and it went on the back burner. I think it's time to post it now. The definitions come from the WPATH (World Professional Association for Transgender Health), their latest Standards of Care (SoC), version 7.

You can't get any more definitive than that. And anyone who reads it and disagrees, ... well, then they're just speaking a different language than everyone else. You know, like someone who refuses to call a television a television because they think that "DFWMP" (device-for-watching-moving-pictures) is a better and more descriptive term. Or, someone who doesn't want to call it anything because, well, there are too many different opinions as to what a television should be called. :p

Here's the new sticky, posted in the M2F: http://www.crossdressers.com/forums/showthread.php?162497-Some-Common-Definitions&p=2636716#post2636716

It was then in post#29, you gave the definition of TG from WPATH and said that this is the most accurate source and i have marked your quote in bold.

I'm saying that a CD who crosses one of the gender boundaries (the gender expression), is "trans"gender (a.k.a. crossing a gender (expression) boundary). Doing this, and wanting to be, or believing oneself a woman are two entirely different things! :)

"trans" = to cross over (and come back. lol)

A CD who identifies as a man but who wants or hopes to convince others he is a woman while dressed, is still a man who crosses the gender expression boundary. So, he is a transgender male.

Well, now in total contradiction to your earlier post, here you say: TG = crossing over from one gender to another. This is not in any way related to the clinical term. If we just keep changing the definition to whatever suits our fancy, I just don't see any point in subscribing to this thread. Sorry, but I am out of here.

Johnnifer

11-09-2011, 12:49 AM

No, no don't get me wrong! I'm not saying that CDs who fully present/emulate women when they dress WANT to be women!!! Not at all! A CD feels no disconnect between his male gender identity and his biological sex (except perhaps the CDs who want real breasts or vaginas, or who want to be a wife to a husband, or who dreams of being a woman in bed with a man while dressed ... but that's a different topic :p).

*hugs you tight* You left out the idea of TG's who want to dress and not emulate a woman. But the Hug was to cover lots of things I have felt and wondered on that no other TG chat I have been on before mentioned. The concept of IDing as male but dressing, and having breast envy, and wondering on being/having a male girlfriend emphasis on male, etc.

On most sites I seen over the years accepting male as your identity and especially your and your partners Identity while crossdressing gets you rejected. This is the first time I seen anyone but me acknowledge this as a real possibility in my years searching TG sites looking for a place to fit in.

Johnnifer

11-09-2011, 12:53 AM

I read this in another thread and wondered, is it really possible to be a CDr but not be TG.

In my view, CDing is a manifestation of transgenderism. I would concede that individuals may be more or less TG, but I have a hard time imagining anyone CDing without being TG.

What are your thoughts?

I think it is possible for someone to CD without being TG of it is a one off joke, a costume for halloween, or for an acting role. But if it becomes more than that they fall into the TG spectrum in its broadest definition. (Though I have met some narrow minded people who tried excluding CD's from the definition of TG but that is a rant for another day).

Rianna Humble

11-09-2011, 01:42 AM

Crossdressing is really quite simple. You are experiencing some of the tactile sensations in which you observe women being allowed to indulge, but which are denied to you as a man by society's conventions.

And do you still say that this is the opposite of the internationally agreed definition of Transgender which Reine linked to previously?
As a reminder, that said:

Transgender: Adjective to describe a diverse group of individuals who cross or transcend culturally defined categories of gender.

So you confirm that you are experiencing sensations which are culturally restricted to the gender role opposite to the one with which you are identified but also affirm that you are not transcending any culturally defined categories of gender?

Rachel Flowers

11-09-2011, 06:00 AM

I am sat here with a class of four students. 3 are GGs and each is wearing a pair of jeans. Are they CDs? I'm assuming they're not TG... TG seems to cover everything in this forum from wearing a pair of panties under your trousers to trans- and inter-sex up to post op and living their preferred and chosen gender role. Someone like me who enjoys the look and feel of the clothes and expresses his feminine side happily and easily in his day to day interactions as a man is just a mild case of the same things as someone who cannot bear to live as male any longer.

I think we want to be very wary of falling into the same taxonomic trap that the rest of the world wants ot put us into.

Let's reject the idea that people are EITHER male of female, EITHER gay or straight which is society's current position, but with it let's also abandon the craziness that has us doing the same polar thinking among ourselves. It's not only a spectrum, it's a continuous spectrum and no two people are exactly the same cmobination of genetics / anatomy / brain chemistry / preference / identity / presentation. I don't see why the spectrum can't run on at either end to incorporate people who are fully settled in their chosen gender.

And clothes aren't evolutionary, they're constructed. - wearing lovely silky, shiny, sexy, lacy, stuff is only girly because society says so. Society is wrong!

LeaP

11-09-2011, 09:13 AM

I think we want to be very wary of falling into the same taxonomic trap that the rest of the world wants ot put us into.

Let's reject the idea that people are EITHER male of female, EITHER gay or straight which is society's current position, but with it let's also abandon the craziness that has us doing the same polar thinking among ourselves. It's not only a spectrum, it's a continuous spectrum and no two people are exactly the same cmobination of genetics / anatomy / brain chemistry / preference / identity / presentation. I don't see why the spectrum can't run on at either end to incorporate people who are fully settled in their chosen gender.

There are three traps. The first is an attempt to undermine classification. That's a mistake as classifications have endless utilitity. I view your spectrum argument as a variation of this. Not that the TG spectrum isn't wide and varied - it is - but that in deliberately extending beyond certain boundaries ("... incorporate people who are fully settled in their chosen gender"), you've destroyed the utility itself.

The second trap is trying to have classification both ways. This happens in the attempt to redefine from both the trans and cisgender points of view. The non-TG population is not prepared to accept behavior like CDing in their view of gender-normal behavior. Recasting cismale from the trans point of view (or CD POV, if you like) accomplishes nothing for them.

The third is a logical trap, arguing the specific vs. the general. The fact that any classification system encompasses wide variation doesn't invalidate the classification. That's like arguing that bluebirds are, after all, just birds, and shouldn't we view them as a spectrum? The answer is yes and no. No, because the narrow classification (bluebirds) has utility, including understanding such things as specific habitat, nesting and feeding behavior, and conservation needs. Yes because there is a hierarchy of bird classification, wherein each becomes more generalized. You don't eliminate one for the other, you deal with the utility of the respective classifications.

Utility is an extremely important concept in classification systems. Ultimately, it's the differentiator between superficial and non-superficial differences. Sometimes it's a biological function (e.g., one species can't mate with another). Sometimes it's a social difference (e.g., norms, acceptance, and role). Unilateral declarations don't eliminate real differences. Legitimate attempts at classification recognize them, even when they are subject to change over time, as are many real-world social issues.

Finally, to focus on concepts of right and wrong also misses the utilitarian point. Norms may be "enforced" by social pressure, but their function is different than proscribed behavior which is reflected in explicit rules and in law. Norms are social lubrication, the (mostly) unstated and unthinking assumptions that underpin interaction and relationships in any society. They trigger reactions along right and wrong lines when boundaries are crossed, but, unlike legal boundaries, are still only subject to social pressure.

Lea

Kaitlyn Michele

11-09-2011, 11:11 AM

ReineD

11-09-2011, 11:31 AM

It was then in post#29, you gave the definition of TG from WPATH and said that this is the most accurate source and i have marked your quote in bold.

Well, now in total contradiction to your earlier post, here you say: TG = crossing over from one gender to another. This is not in any way related to the clinical term. If we just keep changing the definition to whatever suits our fancy, I just don't see any point in subscribing to this thread. Sorry, but I am out of here.

It's certainly your prerogative to choose which threads you will participate in.

My statements aren't contradictions.

I am of the opinion that the people who dispute the WPATH definition speak a different language than members of the LGBTQ community and also the professionals in the field. I also later said, "crossing gender expression lines [and coming back]" to illustrate that the crossing need not be permanent as it is with transsexuals who transition. This was to answer the concerns of the CDers who erroneously equate "transgender" with "transexual". The definition of transgender does state "to varying degrees", and this includes people who present as the opposite sex occasionally. I know of no transsexual who is TS one day, and not the next.

You can agree with this or not, it is still your prerogative.

Randi_TGFM

11-09-2011, 11:35 AM

Last weekend I sent my boys an email telling them I crossdress. The only purpose in telling them was not for validation or acceptance, but living alone with my dog and being 59, might be police who find my female clad dead body, when that happens..:). The female clad would probably be considered news worthy, so I told my boys so they would hear it from me first..:). I also told them, that if my passing is a public outing..:), just let those questioning know you knew and your dad was a Free Spirit..:).

That's the best label that I think really describes me..:).

kimdl93

11-09-2011, 01:14 PM

.... living alone with my dog and being 59, might be police who find my female clad dead body, when that happens..:). The female clad would probably be considered news worthy, so I told my boys so they would hear it from me first..:).... just let those questioning know you knew and your dad was a Free Spirit..:).

That's the best label that I think really describes me..:).

Hopefully it won't be any time soon! Have you gotten any reaction from your sons?

Sophie86

11-09-2011, 01:16 PM

Does anyone else find it amusing that a non-CD male who stays home with the children, does the lion's share of the housework, goes grocery shopping, cries while watching old movies, prefers to let his wife drive when they go places, and doesn't hog the remote is not "crossing gender expression lines;" but another guy who is in every other way a stereotypical male, yet likes to put on a dress now and then to get off, is considered a gender rebel. :)

kimdl93

11-09-2011, 01:20 PM

LeaP

11-09-2011, 01:37 PM

I'm not sure that challenging some traditional male role models or being considerate of others necessarily crossing a gender line.

Neither am I. That's the nature of norms, though. It's in virtually everyone's experience that participating in some things results in people viewing your masculinity differently and not so when participating in others. I'll say this, though: Just about everyone on the planet is *actutely* aware, to the minutest detail, of behaviors that would trigger the question.

Lea

Sophie86

11-09-2011, 01:47 PM

I'm not sure that challenging some traditional male role models or being considerate of others necessarily crossing a gender line.

When it comes to gender, do you consider external presentation more important than internal modes of thinking?

kimdl93

11-09-2011, 02:40 PM

When it comes to gender, do you consider external presentation more important than internal modes of thinking?

Do we really need to go around in this circle again, Sophie? Is a male who cares for children, lets someone else drive and cries at certain films really expressing feminine charactersitics. Or is he simply a good parent, who hates traffic and has a soft heart? Perhaps they are, if you assume all of those things are inherently feminine. But let me remind you that the OP wasn't whether men who defy stereotypes are TG, it was whether men who CD are necessarily TG. Your premise might make for another interesting thread.

Veronica27

11-09-2011, 02:47 PM

I wasn't going to add any more to this discussion, but the last few contributions have brought to the forefront a thought that I had not mentioned previously. There are men who reflect far more of what society deems to be feminine, in their everyday life, than do most men. However, regardless of this fact, they consider themselves to be male, and nobody would challenge them as being transgendered. Their interests are primarily feminine in nature, they often engage in feminine style occupations, they do not suppress the expression of their emotions, and they often show a disdain for many of the more stereotypical male activities such as sports, home repairs, cars and so on. Some idiots may call them names, or poke fun at them, but they are rarely thought of as being transgendered.

The only form of expression that seems to rate that nomenclature, in the minds of many, is the wearing of clothing and the adoption of a few other aspects of appearance that society considers to be applicable to the female. However, appearance is such a minor part of our overall persona, and external rather than internal, that it is ludicrous to use it as the sole determinant of an individual's entire gender identity. There are a myriad of reasons to crossdress and a myriad of benefits, both psychological and physiological that may result. And yes, some of them may have an impact on identity in one way or another, but there is no hard and fast rule that says that this must be so in every individual case.

Gender identity is defined by WPATH as being "A person’s intrinsic sense of being male,...female...etc." How we may express certain elements of our personality and so on does not necessarily impact upon that basic intrinsic sense, especially if it is a relatively minor aspect. I believe that transgender can be a very useful term to describe and categorize certain types of individual. However, to fit into that category, there has to be something in one's intrinsic sense that they are not solely a man but also a woman or something in between. They have to feel that they become a woman, or are a woman depending upon the impact of their gender role/expression. Intrinsic means "belonging to a thing by its very nature". It is not sufficient to simply appear to others like a woman. You have to be a woman (temporarily, partially or completely), and want to project that to others.

In my case, I have no desire for anyone to think that I am a woman, I am not attempting to fool anyone, and any futile attempts I may make to appear passable are to satisfy my own artistic desires, not to become a woman. Those who insist that all crossdressers must be TG are basing it on external appearances and not the individual's intrinsic sense of who they are, which nobody but that individual really knows.

After reading through this entire thread, I cannot understand why some of those who feel they are transgendered, have convinced themselves that everyone who crossdresses must be as well. Perhaps Asche has hit the nail on the head by the following quote a while back

"... because the only socially acceptable way to dress in women-only clothing or to take on any other characteristic that society deems "feminine" is to be a woman, men who aren't social refuseniks like me will tend to frame it as in some sense being a woman, and feel they have to become a woman (if only in their imagination) in order to allow themselves to do it.....

What I mainly wish for is that people would simply keep an open mind. Just because it looks to you like a man wants to be a woman (or be taken for one), or like a boy wants to be a girl, doesn't necessarily mean that that is what is going on. Sometimes a pretty dress is just a pretty dress."

Veronica

Aprilrain

11-09-2011, 04:08 PM

Sophie86

11-09-2011, 04:24 PM

yeah I'd be concerned if I was his wife. 'is my husband gay?'
I preferred to let my wife drive, see what happened!

That was an 'and' in my list, not an 'or'.

You're young though. You probably don't remember the days when chores had gender.

Rianna Humble

11-09-2011, 04:31 PM

That was an 'and' in my list, not an 'or'.

You're young though. You probably don't remember the days when chores had gender.

You mean like when a batman ironed a general's uniform, prepared his breakfast and so on?

Or were you thinking of when menservants dressed their "master", tidied his room and so on?

Both of these things happened commonly during my lietime and no-one would have accused those people of doing "women's chores"

Kaitlyn Michele

11-09-2011, 05:52 PM

That was an 'and' in my list, not an 'or'.

You're young though. You probably don't remember the days when chores had gender.

sophie you are right...chores used to have gender...not all chores as rianna points out, but many were stereotypically feminine...
but today chores really don't have gender...its not a cross gender thing for a guy to be mr mom anymore..its just not..

you are mixing up gender roles and expression of gender... churning the butter may have been women's work, but she didn't do it to express her womanhood...that was done the same way as today..often by dressing in a typical way that other women did..

Frédérique

11-09-2011, 06:00 PM

There are men who reflect far more of what society deems to be feminine, in their everyday life, than do most men. However, regardless of this fact, they consider themselves to be male, and nobody would challenge them as being transgendered. Their interests are primarily feminine in nature, they often engage in feminine style occupations, they do not suppress the expression of their emotions, and they often show a disdain for many of the more stereotypical male activities such as sports, home repairs, cars and so on. Some idiots may call them names, or poke fun at them, but they are rarely thought of as being transgendered.

The quoted text describes me very well. I am living proof that you can be a crossdresser, but not be transgendered. I would not insult TG’s by saying I’m transgendered – I’m just an ordinary CD (or TV, to be more accurate), since it is more about dressing and less about gender. Perhaps the term “trans-dressing” would be better, since “cross-gender” also does not describe what I do, or how I feel. I am compelled to dress, but I identify as a male. For me, there is no confusion about it – I’m not female, I’m never going to be female, and, if there was “a pill,” or a “genie with three wishes,” or a way to go back and start all over again, I would still wish to be a male, albeit an effeminate male who dresses in female clothing. It’s all about the DRESSING, so please refer to me as a crossdresser, OK? Better still, just call me Freddy…
:battingeyelashes:

Sophie86

11-09-2011, 06:24 PM

You mean like when a batman ironed a general's uniform, prepared his breakfast and so on?

Or were you thinking of when menservants dressed their "master", tidied his room and so on?

Both of these things happened commonly during my lietime and no-one would have accused those people of doing "women's chores"

I'm talking about the house where I grew up. We didn't have menservants. We had Mom, and she had my four sisters to help her with chores when she needed help, but I was not expected to wash dishes, clean house, or even make my own bed. I had my chores--feeding the dogs and taking out the garbage--and when I was 12, I started going to work with my dad, learning a trade in construction. My dad never changed a diaper, never made the bed, never washed dishes, nor did anything that looked like "woman's work."

ReineD

11-09-2011, 07:48 PM

^ Sophie, my father didn't either. He didn't have to because my mom was home. But my husband did, and my sons do. They have to because they are single .. they really do their own cooking, laundry, clean their own bathrooms, in fact one of my sons is well on his way to becoming an excellent cook! And I can't see them become couch potatoes when they get married to women who also have jobs. Times have changed. :)

Aprilrain

11-09-2011, 08:19 PM

Rianna Humble

11-10-2011, 04:49 AM

I'm talking about the house where I grew up. We didn't have menservants. We had Mom, and she had my four sisters to help her with chores when she needed help, but I was not expected to wash dishes, clean house, or even make my own bed. I had my chores--feeding the dogs and taking out the garbage--and when I was 12, I started going to work with my dad, learning a trade in construction. My dad never changed a diaper, never made the bed, never washed dishes, nor did anything that looked like "woman's work."

That may have been the case in your household, but I would no more make a universal case out of what happened in my household when I was growing up than you should from yours. For contrast - all the children in my family regardless of natal sex were expected to do the housework and cook meals when appropriate. The school I went to in the 60s and early 70s was regarded across Europe as being a model of excellence, but there the girls did metalwork alongside the boys and the boys did cookery and sewing alongside the girls.

Veronica27

11-10-2011, 12:54 PM

There are always exceptions to any generality. The fact, which any history book will reveal, is that for most of the twentieth century, (up until close to 1970), in western society, mom stayed home and dad was the income earner. Exceptions existed, of course, such as war time, death of a spouse, illness and so on, but in my childhood, the 1940's through to late 1950's, it was not expected that I would do any housework. I was taught how to do all the household repairs, painting, gardening and so on, and the burden of much of that fell on me when my father became ill and my older siblings had left home. At school, boys were given shop classes, while girls were given home economics classes. There was no exception to this.

The gender roles may not exist today, to the same extent as they did back then, but they still exist. Much of it has to do with the social graces, but attempts are being made to break down those as well. I am referring here to the man paying the expenses of the date, holding doors for the lady, proposing, walking on the outside, pulling out the chair at the table etc. etc. All of this blurring of the gender lines has in fact led to the separation of gender lines in other more subtle ways. Women's clothing has become much more provocative than it was in years gone by which can be interpreted as a way of emphasizing their womanhood as much as the changing of moral values. Men in prior times did not have to concern themselves as much with their manhood as we find today, because it was defined by their role in life. We now find more men trying to prove their machismo by their attitudes and leisure activities than ever before. Six pack abs and sexual prowess were matters that nobody cared about sixty years ago, but tune into any sitcom today, and they define the male role model. Jim Anderson has gone the way of the dodo.

But the basic argument here is that gender roles do exist, and gender identification is much more than simply what we happen to wear. In fact the blurring of the gender line has happened to a greater extent in appearance than in other areas. Dressing in women's clothing is not in itself any indication of being transgendered.

Veronica

Asche

11-10-2011, 01:23 PM

I'm saying that a CD who crosses one of the gender boundaries (the gender expression), is "trans"gender (a.k.a. crossing a gender (expression) boundary).
This comment sounds to me to be saying that it is possible to be transgender without any particular intent to "cross a gender boundary." One's actual intent doesn't matter, only what other people infer from one's behavior.

As I see it, the terms "transgender" and "crossdressing" seem to make sense when you're only thinking about crossdressers as society is used to thinking about them -- men who spend some of their free time dressing up "as women", using female names, calling each other "girls," and generally acting out their idea of what being female means.

They make less sense and are less useful when dealing with men/boys who don't fit that picture of "crossdressing," but may do some things or act in some ways that we think of as exclusive to women/girls.

But I see a lot of people at CD.com and elsewhere insisting on shoving people into one box or another -- if you're not "cisgender" enough, then it's into the "transgender" box with you. They're like the little boy I ran into on a train about 40 years ago who looked at my (relatively!) long hair and asked "are you a hippy?" And then announced, heedless of anything I'd said, "you're a hippy!" and walked off, happy that he'd found a box to put me in.

It reminds me of the reports that crop up every now and then in the press of little boys who like to wear dresses or play with dolls. Even when they announce to the adults "I'm a boy!", as if they must be stupid not to have figured it out without asking, people still assume that they want to be a girl, or are at least confused as to the difference between boys and girls.

Aprilrain

11-10-2011, 02:38 PM

It reminds me of the reports that crop up every now and then in the press of little boys who like to wear dresses or play with dolls. Even when they announce to the adults "I'm a boy!", as if they must be stupid not to have figured it out without asking, people still assume that they want to be a girl, or are at least confused as to the difference between boys and girls.

hhhmm? i probably would have said the same thing. It seemed rather obvious to me for a very long time that I was a boy (ie. male) girls don't have the dangler and there it was! Perhaps the better question from the adults would be "if you could choose to be a boy or a girl, which would it be?" I'm not even sure what i would have answered to this question looking back I can say with some confidence that I was not dysphoric as a child. Yeah, I liked to get in to my moms and sisters clothes and I loved it when my sisters dressed me up but its not like being a boy was horrible for me. Being a "man" was awful though.

DonniDarkness

11-10-2011, 03:39 PM

thats cause men cant handle REAL work!Gawd i hope your joking!

But I see a lot of people at CD.com and elsewhere insisting on shoving people into one box or another -- if you're not "cisgender" enough, then it's into the "transgender" box with you.Actually it is simplistic and this discussion is complicated by case by case situations.

Transgender (pronounced /trænzˈdʒɛndər/ (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:IPA_for_English)) is a general term applied to a variety of individuals, behaviors, and groups involving tendencies to vary from culturally conventional gender roles (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender_role).
Transgender is the state of one's "gender identity (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender_identity)" (self-identification as woman, man, neither or both) not matching one's "assigned sex" (identification by others as male, female or intersex (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intersex) based on physical/genetic sex (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SRY)).[1] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transgender#cite_note-glaad.org-0) "Transgender" does not imply any specific form of sexual orientation (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_orientation); transgender people may identify as heterosexual (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heterosexual), homosexual (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexuality), bisexual (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bisexual), pansexual (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pansexuality), polysexual (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polysexuality), or asexual (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asexuality); some may consider conventional sexual orientation labels inadequate or inapplicable to them. The precise definition for transgender remains in flux, but includes:

"Of, relating to, or designating a person whose identity does not conform unambiguously to conventional notions of male or female gender (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender) roles, but combines or moves between these."[2] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transgender#cite_note-oeddraft2004-1)
"People who were assigned a sex, usually at birth and based on their genitals, but who feel that this is a false or incomplete description of themselves."[3] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transgender#cite_note-usi-2)
"Non-identification with, or non-presentation as, the sex (and assumed gender) one was assigned at birth."[4] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transgender#cite_note-3)

A transgender individual may have characteristics that are normally associated with a particular gender, identify elsewhere on the traditional gender continuum, or exist outside of it as "other", "agender (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Androgyny#Alternatives)", "Genderqueer (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genderqueer)", or "third gender (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_gender)". Transgender people may also identify as bigender (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bigender), or along several places on either the traditional transgender continuum, or the more encompassing continuums which have been developed in response to the significantly more detailed studies done in recent years.

Society has said as a whole "We dont really understand why you are different, we just know that you are different"

In order to help describe those of us who are different, the term Transgender was adopted to help understand the gender fluctuation.

So by definition: if you cross any gender role or expectancy in any degree you are considered to be Transgender by those who wish to understand their peers better.
Dont confuse them by taking away a word that gives them further insight to your individuality

-Donni-

ReineD

11-10-2011, 04:58 PM

^ Ah, but Donni, the CDs in this thread who say they are not transgender will say they feel no ambiguity with their gender identity as it relates to their birth sex. Hence the issue.

We all can only experience things from our own perspective. For example, since I do not live in my best friend's skin, how can I know without a doubt how she feels about some things? I can only imagine how she might feel by comparing how I feel when faced with the same situation.

I propose that a man who CDs knows no other way of being a male, and therefore he imagines that he feels the same way about his gender identity as any male who does not CD. But, if he were to temporarily inhabit the non-CD's mind and body, he might discover a total revulsion for wearing anything that is feminine. Do both these men have the same male-identity?

Just food for thought.

Asche

11-10-2011, 05:56 PM

I propose that a man who CDs knows no other way of being a male, and therefore he imagines that he feels the same way about his gender identity as any male who does not CD.

Well, assuming you consider me to be CDing (some would say yes, some would say no), I would say that it's not true for me.

My "gender identity," to the extent that I can make any sense of the term, consists in (a) realizing that I have a male body and (b) having gone through the usual training program in "being a man." (The trainers can't be blamed for how poorly it took :) ) If I woke up tomorrow in a female body, I think I'd feel like I'm still the same person (though having a different body would take some getting used to.) Once I got used to it, I'd probably say my gender identity was female.

However, I can see that "being a man" means a lot more to most men, and I know that they feel that there's this thing called "masculinity" which they're always trying to find or worry about losing, which I assume this is somehow connected with gender identity. And based on their reaction to being contaminated with anything "feminine," I think they'd rather die than become female. So I figure, yes, they have a different sense of "gender identity" from me.

Josie M

11-10-2011, 08:46 PM

Interesting thread....not chiming in because I don't think there is much I can add. Very enlightening reading though...

I guess for me, the gender expression is an important part of the equation and has been that way for as long as I can recall, way before puberty ever set in for sure. I guess that would put me in the transgendered camp.

Pink Person

11-11-2011, 01:08 AM

There is more than one way to be a man, but only one categorical way to be a cisman. Men who dress like Strawberry Shortcake for a hobby are too sweet to be cismen. They have no manly peers who don't crossdress and who self-identify with them. Their only potential peers are other men who crossdress. So, will the real cismen please stand up? If you have to smooth out your skirt when you leave your chair then you should definitely sit back down.

Transgender people come in different stripes but they all have stripes. They range from multiple types of transmen to multiple types of transwomen. Being transgender is about being something and not being something else. The something else that transgender people are not is cismasculine cismales or cisfeminine cisfemales. All other grades of sex and gender combination that don't involve these four attributes are possible. Some transmen were born with female genitals. Some transmen were born with male genitals, like to wear prom dresses, and give long boring speeches about how trivial their dresses are compared to the significant dresses worn by real women. It's still possible to be a transman in this sense (using the last word loosely).

Pink Person

11-11-2011, 08:08 AM

This framework allows the crossdressing transmen who were born with certain male parts to keep their transmanhood that is a close approximation of cismanhood, but is not equivalent to it. It also allows the transsexual transmen who were born with certain female parts to keep their special category that is also a close approximation of cismanhood, but isn't equivalent to it. The fact that the (relatively) opposite sexes can occupy similar (but not the same) positions in the transgender range gives another dimension of meaning to the word transgender that isn't but should be more widely acknowledged.

DonniDarkness

11-11-2011, 10:34 AM

The fact that the opposite sexes can occupy similar positions in the transgender range gives another dimension of meaning to the word transgender that isn't but should be more widely acknowledged. And out of the mouth of madness spews forth the truth.

^ Ah, but Donni, the CDs in this thread who say they are not transgender will say they feel no ambiguity with their gender identity as it relates to their birth sex. Hence the issue.

We all can only experience things from our own perspective. For example, since I do not live in my best friend's skin, how can I know without a doubt how she feels about some things? I can only imagine how she might feel by comparing how I feel when faced with the same situation.

I propose that a man who CDs knows no other way of being a male, and therefore he imagines that he feels the same way about his gender identity as any male who does not CD. But, if he were to temporarily inhabit the non-CD's mind and body, he might discover a total revulsion for wearing anything that is feminine. Do both these men have the same male-identity?

One does not have to feel Transgender to be Transgender. Transgender is a descriptive of both who we feel we are but also can be a descriptive based on what we do. Wearing clothes of the opposite sex is crossing a gender role.

If that said CD who does not think he is TG was wearing a dress that was manufactured and sold in the stores exclusively as a mans dress (im not talking about kilts) then i could see where they would argue the fact. But actively knowing that you are wearing a article of clothing that was designed for women IS crossing a gender variance. By exercising that personal style they are considered to be Transgender by definition. No matter how they feel about it

Good morning,
-Donni-

ReineD

11-11-2011, 11:12 AM

^ I didn't quite understand what Pink Person was saying either, but although it is unconventional, I can see where the literal term "transman" could apply to both natal genders if it is understood that "transsexual transmen" are FtM and and "CDing transmen" are MtF CDers. Both are men, and both are crossing gender boundaries. (Transitioned MtF TSs also use the same word as birth females when they call themselves women.)

But, to prevent confusion, I think it's best to use two different terms altogether: transmen for FtM, and CD for CDing males (although most people do believe that CD falls within the TG umbrella).

Pink Person, I think you will continue to confuse people using the same term for both. That's not saying the community might not alter the terms down the line, but for now I think it's best to stick to the WPATH definitions, if you want people to understand who you refer to when you use the term "transman".

Aprilrain

11-11-2011, 11:43 AM

Why complicate things?

transman = Female to male transexual
transwoman = male to female transexual

Why would a transman crossdress? Most TS would rather die than wear the clothing of their birth sex. not because it has anything to do with clothes but the clothes imply gender. For someone who is trying desperately to cross that difficult divide and aline their bodies with their minds often times the clothes, especially early on, are the only way to really get the outside world to "see" your internal gender and therefore socialize with you accordingly

What CDers choose to do with the term "crossdresser" is up to them. Frankly the prefix M2F in front of the CD label is pretty unnecessary since F2M crossdressers are as rare as hens teeth. Crossdresser implies a male dressed as a woman.

ilovepanties

11-11-2011, 11:44 AM

You can absolutely CD and not be TG. I love dressing up in women's clothing, but I do not have any desire to be a woman. I love being a man, and wouldn't change that, but I also love dressing up.

Aprilrain

11-11-2011, 11:53 AM

DonniDarkness

11-11-2011, 11:56 AM

Just so know one gets thrown to the wolves...

trans(space)man = Female to male transexual
trans(space)woman = male to female transexual Ive been yelled at before, so i am just passing the knowledge, not trying to be a jerk

-Donni-

p.s.

its getting annoying that people think TG = TS

Me too April...

Veronica27

11-11-2011, 11:59 AM

I found this rather disgusting definition of "cisgender" as one of 3 descriptions on a website called "urban dictionary".

"cisgendered
a word created by an attention whoring, douche bag, drama queen which describes how the majority of people view their own sexual identity. often used as a pejorative against normal people by fat, ugly gender studies majors who are so absolutely f***ing dull that they must create interesting aspects of their personalities such as identifying as gender-queer or developing an eating disorder."

My point in posting this is not to inflame or disparage anyone for their views, but simply to emphasize that there is no real definition for the word other than that it means you are not transgendered. In other words it does not describe what anyone is, just what they are not, and there are multiple opinions about it. Transgender, by definition refers to the expression gender identity. Gender Identity is dependant upon the definitions of the words gender and identity. Gender is dependant upon the whims of the culture at any point in time, and gender identity is our intrinsic sense of being male, female or a combination. Intrinsic means belonging to a thing by its very nature.

The convoluted nature of all of this means that any discussion about anything to do with TG, CD etc. is totally dependant upon the meaning and interpretation that you are placing upon each and every one of those terms. The highly subjective nature of them renders most arguments meaningless as nobody knows the thoughts and feelings of others, and any opinions thereon are purely speculative. Since cisgender is at the top of that chain of highly subjective definitions it has no actual meaning beyond the intentions of the user.

So the question posed by Pink Person "So, will the real cismen please stand up?" would likely result in virtually everyone remaining seated, as there is no such thing except in the mind of the questioner. The proper question should be "All those who identify solely as male please stand up." All males but those who believe in their mind that they are transgendered, would pop right up.

Veronica

Aprilrain

11-11-2011, 12:20 PM

"The word has its origin in the Latin-derived prefix cis, meaning "to/this the near side" as in the cis-trans distinction in chemistry, or in the ancient Roman term "Cisalpine Gaul", i.e., "Gaul on this side of the Alps". In the case of gender, however, "cis" refers to the alignment of gender identity with assigned gender." wikipedia

So its not something some "gender studies nerd" pulled out of his or her ass. This is how words get made this is how we assign meaning to them.
It doesn't do us any good to ask each individual how he or she "feels" about a particular word. No one cares how you "feel" about the word "room" we all agree that it means an enclosed space. The "room" could be a banquet hall or a walk in closet so there is a lot of ambiguity to the word room until other words are added to the sentence to clarify and further define the meaning. Context maters as well. If I walk into a motel office and ask for a "room" there need not be a discussion about what kind of room I want beyond wether said room has a king or 2 queens.

LeaP

11-11-2011, 12:45 PM

You can absolutely CD and not be TG. I love dressing up in women's clothing, but I do not have any desire to be a woman. I love being a man, and wouldn't change that, but I also love dressing up.

If by "be" you mean transition, that has nothing to do with transgendered as being discussed. Although transsexuality points are introduced for clarity's sake in making points, we are talking about CDers who do not wish to transition. I do not wish to transition, yet I am TG.

Lea

Veronica27

11-11-2011, 02:39 PM

"The word has its origin in the Latin-derived prefix cis, meaning "to/this the near side" as in the cis-trans distinction in chemistry, or in the ancient Roman term "Cisalpine Gaul", i.e., "Gaul on this side of the Alps". In the case of gender, however, "cis" refers to the alignment of gender identity with assigned gender." wikipedia

Not to nitpick, but the meaning of "cis" which you reference above "the near side of" or "this side of" would tend to imply that a cisgendered male, was a little on the TG side of pure male. Some of the references that I have looked up, have stated that the origin of "cis" was Greek as opposed to Latin, but I will not argue that as I do not know which is correct.

Also, I cannot argue with most of what you describe about words, except to say that with a subjective definition, how one "feels" becomes a part of the context. Just as we need to know the type of room, the furnishings, whether or not it is adjoining, smoking, balconied, large, small etc., we also need to know the context in which all the gender words are being used. I think that a lack of clarity causes much of the debate in threads like this.

Veronica

Pink Person

11-12-2011, 04:46 AM

To be clear, Mother Nature created transgender variety, not me. If you are a man who is transgender then you are a transman. Since there is more than one way to be a man who is transgender, there is more than one way to be a transman.

If some male crossdressers weren't prone to such ridiculous fits of self-deception and delusions about their gender status and social status then we wouldn't be having this conversation. Their masculinity and their masculine behavior are very meaningful, they claim. Their femininity and their feminine behavior are very meaningless, they also claim out of the other side of their mouths. Both gender types and gender behaviors are meaningful or both are meaningless. If they are both meaningful then you are transgender. If they are both meaningless (to you and no one else) then you are still transgender because your opinion on the subject is beyond the rational comprehension and experience of anyone who has ever lived. You only make sense to yourself. You are a nonsensical army of one.

DonniDarkness

11-12-2011, 11:01 AM

If you are a man who is transgender then you are a transman.Incorrect

The term trans man (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trans_man) refers to female-to-male (FtM or F2M) transgender people, and trans woman (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trans_woman) refers to male-to-female (MtF or M2F) transgender people.
A transvestite (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transvestism) is somebody who cross-dresses.[37] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transgender#cite_note-TV1-36)[38] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transgender#cite_note-TV2-37) The term "transvestite" is used as a synonym for the term "cross-dresser",[39] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transgender#cite_note-TV3-38)[40] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transgender#cite_note-TV4-39) although "cross-dresser" is generally considered the preferred term
"Transgender man" is an umbrella term that may include anybody who was assigned the female sex at birth but identifies as male.
If some male crossdressers weren't prone to such ridiculous fits of self-deception and delusions about their social status then we wouldn't be having this conversationSome would also say that if some male crossdressers took five-ten minutes researching what these common definitions really meant and why, this conversation would go on with a lot less egotistical assumptions.

Crossdresser and Transvestite are the same thing.

A transvestite (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transvestism) is somebody who cross-dresses.[37] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transgender#cite_note-TV1-36)[38] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transgender#cite_note-TV2-37) The term "transvestite" is used as a synonym for the term "cross-dresser",[39] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transgender#cite_note-TV3-38)[40] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transgender#cite_note-TV4-39) although "cross-dresser" is generally considered the preferred termGood Morning Again,
-Donni-

Veronica27

11-12-2011, 11:18 AM

In order to have a lie, there must be a truth. What we have been dealing with in all of these discussions is opinion, which is much different than truth. I do not project my opinions on anyone and simply derive them from introspection about my personal situation, and my understanding of the terminology involved. You consider your opinions to be truths and try to impose them upon everyone else. My only reason for challenging them is to hopefully prevent others from mistakenly taking them as gospel, and to provide them with some food for thought to enable them to arrive at their own conclusions.

Veronica

Pink Person

11-12-2011, 11:29 AM

You say my definition of transman is incorrect, I say your definition is incomplete. You are correct but not completely correct.

I was only trying to help some poor souls rescue their false pride. I don't want to open a debate on terminology because it is still evolving in some areas. The basic gender concepts are settled issues though and they apply to this discussion.

Thanks for the response anyway.

P.S. I think I used the word delusion correctly. Let's take a vote.

Soriya

11-12-2011, 12:27 PM

.. labels and definitions are the bane of the crossdresser..lol

And to TS's, TV's, all of them!

In my opinion, at least the way I look at it since I don't like definitions (who made them and who says they are right) but I don't look at TG as an unbrella term or a spectrum. Rather, I look at Gender as simply one spectrum that everyone is under. At the ends you have strictly men and women and everything else falls between somwhere. :)

Rianna Humble

11-12-2011, 01:35 PM

I don't look at TG as an unbrella term or a spectrum. Rather, I look at Gender as simply one spectrum

IOW: I reject your definition and trump it with my delusion

Sophie86

11-12-2011, 01:36 PM

TS = "desire" to be a woman
TG = umbrella term used to lump us all together

its getting annoying that people think TG = TS

Transcontinental doesn't equal transoceanic either. However, a person who knows the definition of 'transoceanic' and 'continental' will assume he also knows the definition of 'transcontinental'. That is what is happening with transsexual and transgender, and it's why even people who know the official definition of transgender still shy away from the word. A transsexual wants to be the opposite sex, ergo a transgender person must be someone who wants to be the opposite gender. You cannot stop people from reaching that conclusion. It's in the etymology of the words. Why not just pick a different word to be the umbrella term, one that acknowledges and respects the difficulty that crossdressers have with being called transgender? Why insist that they're just being silly? Why treat them like retrograde morons? What's the point of insisting on this problematic, controversial term?

:wall:

Rachel Flowers

11-12-2011, 01:38 PM

Labels and definitions are the bane of everyone and everything. We naturally slot other people into them ( it's how our brains work!) while declinging to be constrained by them ourselves!

Rianna Humble

11-12-2011, 06:37 PM

A transsexual wants to be the opposite sex, ergo a transgender person must be someone who wants to be the opposite gender. You cannot stop people from reaching that conclusion. It's in the etymology of the words. Why not just pick a different word to be the umbrella term, one that acknowledges and respects the difficulty that crossdressers have with being called transgender? Why insist that they're just being silly? Why treat them like retrograde morons? What's the point of insisting on this problematic, controversial term?

The fallacy starts with your definition of transsexual, we don't want to be anything other than at one with our identity.

A transsexual crosses the divide from their natal sex to their true gender (and doesn't want to go back).

A transgender person crosses the divide between the genders. The difference is that this crossing does not have to be permanent.

Kaz

11-12-2011, 06:59 PM

Categories by definition are Work In Progress... they satisfy the current level of knowledge. As we move forward with more knowledge, categories will be challenged, and this is the nature of learning and knowledge creation. We use to think the Earth was flat... Ok some still do, but the growing body of opinion is otherwise. We have also accepted that the universe is expanding from a fixed point (the big bang) - this is based on available data. We have just discovered that Homo Sapiens may have co-existed with Neanderthals for thousands of years... this changes our perceptions.

There are few fixed points... a true learner accepts that these may change. But we use them to orientate current knowledge. When data conflicts with the fixed point and/or established/recieved wisdom, then we have to challenge our underlying models and beliefs...

For everyone else there is self-delusion and fundamentalist religions.

Aprilrain

11-12-2011, 09:42 PM

I think that a lack of clarity causes much of the debate in threads like this.

I think, as Donni pointed out, that a lack of the ability to use google or perhaps the willingness to do so is more to blame than a lack of clarification.
I didn't make up the term "transgender" but the person who did did so to create a word that could be used to describe the "community" (I use that term loosely) of gender variant individuals. Personally I couldn't give a shit less about it. I'm not a political person and when my transition is as physically complete as I can achieve my mental, emotional and spiritual transition will continue with me as a woman.

I really don't see why the term transgender, as an umbrella term for all of us, is such a problem for some. Just because you cross a gender line doesn't mean you can't come back. Gender is NOT sex. I have met 'trans-SEXUALS" who have done very little to "trans-GENDER". To me they seemed like dudes with pussies, Im not judging, just saying if they hadn't told me they had had SRS I would have thought they were just CDers. I have met CDers who are very convincing and quite cute all dolled up and even change their voices pretty well which is not easy to do if you are not full time! i have met individual who were hard to gauge, my guess is they were long term full timers perhaps on hormones perhaps not. what we all have in common is that we trans-GENDER to some degree or another, we look, act, dress, talk, etc. like the gender other than the one we were assigned at birth and were subsequently raised as. Whether one goes back and forth or one chooses to stay is immaterial

Ayame

11-12-2011, 11:55 PM

I feel many people are mixing up terms. Transgender is an umbrella term and cross dressers most definitely fall under it. Many people are mixing up transgender with transexualism. The definition of transgender is "Of, relating to, or designating a person whose identity does not conform unambiguously to conventional notions of male or female gender roles, but combines or moves between these.". This makes cross dressers, transexuals, androgynous, genderqueer, etc all transgender. I feel many people are just afraid of the word transgender and want to justify why they do something, while avoiding the label. The truth is by the current definition and I understand definitions change all the time, but the current definition of transgender, makes cross dressers an area under the transgender umbrella.

Sorry all you deniers... Haters gonna hate :3

Sophie86

11-13-2011, 12:20 AM

The fallacy starts with your definition of transsexual, we don't want to be anything other than at one with our identity.

A transsexual crosses the divide from their natal sex to their true gender (and doesn't want to go back).

A transgender person crosses the divide between the genders. The difference is that this crossing does not have to be permanent. (Emphasis added.)

But there is nothing in the form of the words to indicate that difference. That's the whole point! It's not that I don't believe you when you say that some group of academics have decided that this will be the definition of the word, it's that I don't think that's how the word is commonly understood. Why can't there be an umbrella term that doesn't require me to explain to people that it doesn't mean what they think it means?

ADDENDUM: Some of you just aren't LISTENING. You keep repeating that "official definition" over and over again like that should be the end of the discussion. We know the official definition, okay? Can you stop quoting it long enough to try to understand what we're saying?

ReineD

11-13-2011, 12:40 AM

Sophie86

11-13-2011, 01:17 AM

^ Sophie, then your main objection is, if you tell someone you are transgender they might misconstrue this and believe you want to be a woman?

Keep in mind, you don't have to get into any details with the muggles and you can continue to refer to yourself as crossdresser. But, the first question most people ask is still, "Do you want to be a woman?" followed closely with, "Do you like men?" People outside the community understand very little about the nuances, so I really don't think it matters what word you use. If they want to learn more, then you can get into it all: transgender as an umbrella term, the three components of gender, the difference between CD (a mismatch between two of the compoments) & TS (a mismatch between all three components), and the fact that sexual preference is not necessarily tied to gender, etc.

Some people will be fascinated with all of this. :)

It's true that some explanation will be needed regardless. (In my experience, they ask whether you're gay first, and then whether you want to be a woman. :) )

It caused my wife some initial concern when I used the word 'transgender' to describe myself. I had to explain to her that it doesn't mean what it appears to mean. Fortunately, she's accepting of my crossdressing, and she trusts what I tell her about it. Not all CDs are that lucky, and I wonder if there is a difference in how their wives would respond to a CD Support Group vs a TG Support Group. Perhaps you should ask the ladies in FAB how they respond to the term 'transgender', and whether it puts them off? Do they prefer to think of their husbands as CD?

And thanks for being someone who has listened. :)

April_Ligeia

11-13-2011, 01:20 AM

This is a great point, Ayame. I don't understand why some people worry about terms like this, but I am a crossdresser and I am therefore transgender. And if the original question meant can you be a crossdresser without being a transexual, the answer is yes, because I am not a woman trapped in a man's body, I am a crossdressing male, and am not attracted to other men. I am quite happy with that, and so is my girlfriend.

ReineD

11-13-2011, 01:37 AM

Perhaps you should ask the ladies in FAB how they respond to the term 'transgender', and whether it puts them off? Do they prefer to think of their husbands as CD?

I often mention my SO's TG support group in FAB and elsewhere in this forum, since it is a TG group; there is a healthy mix of TS, CD, and no doubt TS Questioning.

When I refer to the membership as a whole, I use "TG". If I refer to someone's husband in particular, I use either CD or TS (some of our FABs are married to TSs). I've not heard a GG quibble about the terms. I'm pretty sure that most GGs understand that TG is an umbrella term, once they begin to learn about all of this. I refer to my own SO as a CD or dualgender, or transgender, depending on the context and the person's depth of understanding.

Phoebe P.

11-13-2011, 02:04 AM

I'm here in panties, a dress and a wig. I wouldn't trade it for anything. I Love being a girl/man. I wish I was a woman but don't have a choice.

sara.s

11-13-2011, 03:14 AM

I am of the opinion that the people who dispute the WPATH definition speak a different language than members of the LGBTQ community and also the professionals in the field.

The WPATH definition is different from the LGBTQ definition. As per the LGBT community, all CD's are TG, but as per the WPATH this is the case only if their gender identity varies (not their gender presentation) see the defns below. Many of you just don't want to believe that there TG has 2 different definitions (at least). This is what annoys me.

The definition of transgender does state "to varying degrees", and this includes people who present as the opposite sex occasionally. I know of no transsexual who is TS one day, and not the next.

This is really BS. Kindly have a look at the definition of the crossdresser/TG/TS below. The definition of transgender says that the gender identity of a person must vary to a certain degree, not the gender presentation. And by gender identity, it means the inner sense of oneself not the girl name you give for crossdressed image.

Definitions posted again for those who keep ignoring them or twisting them.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Crossdressing (transvestism): Wearing clothing and adopting a gender role presentation that, in a given culture, is more typical of the other sex.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Transgender: Adjective to describe a diverse group of individuals who cross or transcend culturally defined categories of gender. The gender identity of transgender people differs to varying degrees from the sex they were assigned at birth.

Gender identity: A person’s intrinsic sense of being male (a boy or a man), female (a girl or woman), or an alternative gender (e.g., boygirl, girlboy, transgender, genderqueer, eunuch).
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Transsexual: Adjective (often applied by the medical profession) to describe individuals who seek to change or who have changed their primary and/or secondary sex characteristics through femininizing or masculinizing medical interventions (hormones and/or surgery), typically accompanied by a permanent change in gender role.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

ReineD

11-13-2011, 05:28 AM

Sara ... excluding yourself, since for you dressing is a costume, what do you think drives the desire to transcend gender roles and/or presentation for the bulk of the CDs in this forum who enjoy looking, feeling, and acting like women on occasion?

Also, have you read my post #173 (http://www.crossdressers.com/forums/showthread.php?162444-Can-you-CD-w-o-being-TG&p=2652361&viewfull=1#post2652361)?

Pink Person

11-13-2011, 05:43 AM

Crossdressers need to weigh the different meanings of transgender and cisgender to find their
place in the world. If they have done that and still think they are cisgender then they clearly don't understand the meaning of that word.

Cisgender men and women are the north and south poles of the gender world. As far as gender is concerned, the earth is indeed flat, and most people live in the polar regions. However, some people, Canadian crossdressers for instance, live south of the north pole and perhaps were born there. Other people might have been born in South America and moved to Canada. They occupy the same general area but arrived there in different ways.

Crossdressers and other transgender people do not inhabit the polar regions of the gender world. Every time crossdressers put on a dress or a bra they are flying a flag that says so. You can tell people you are flying your gender flag just because it is pretty or feels good and not because it is symbolic of anything that flags generally represent, but no one will understand or believe you. Also, if you try to move to the North Pole, you will be deported as a nonresident alien.

Michelia

11-13-2011, 05:44 AM

The problem is that through the years the terminology continues to evolve. There have been quite a few shifts in the way these term are used. And they will probably will continue to do so. It does not help that so many people have different definitions...even within the medical community. And the definitions can vary from culture to culture.

Currently, in our culturem, transgender is generally a term used to encompass anyone whose gender expression is outside the norms of their expected gender behavior. That includes all of us, genderqueer, gender-benders, genderf***s, transgenderists, transvestites, TS and all in between.

Aprilrain

11-13-2011, 10:11 AM

But there is nothing in the form of the words to indicate that difference. That's the whole point! It's not that I don't believe you when you say that some group of academics have decided that this will be the definition of the word, it's that I don't think that's how the word is commonly understood. Why can't there be an umbrella term that doesn't require me to explain to people that it doesn't mean what they think it means?

I agree with you that the nuanced differences between CD, TG, and TS are lost on the general public. Frankly if you plan on telling people then plan on having to explain it and then plan on them still not understanding! No matter what term is invented, TG issues just aren't on the publics radar. I don't see this as a problem with regards to non-TG individuals, I see this lack of understanding and gross misuse of terminology as a problem for the "community". We need cohesive definitions for the people who are new and are trying to figure themselves out.

Again, gender and sex are different things. I take issue with any CDer who wears the full "kit" and claims to not be TG. If its just about the clothes why bother with the wig, fake tits and make up? Being TG has nothing to do with wanting to change ones sex.

sara.s

11-13-2011, 11:28 AM

Sara ... excluding yourself, since for you dressing is a costume, what do you think drives the desire to transcend gender roles and/or presentation for the bulk of the CDs in this forum who enjoy looking, feeling, and acting like women on occasion?

veronica27 has already added a lot on this side of the discussion, and i can't add to that as i am not "other cd". But a person who "transcends gender roles" on occasion doesn necessarily self-identify as a woman, when dressed. They might feel feminine, but that is different. I have seen posts from cd's saying they cant find inner woman, or just want to feel feminine, or do it as a fetish. I have seen posts saying cd'ing is something which they just "DO". Even drag queens crossdress on the "occasion", but they still retain their male "self-identity". Some cd's don't even have a female name on this site and go with something like "pantywearer", "delaware blonde" etc There are probably million's of cd'ers out there who "get off" to wearing SO's clothes but would never self-identify as a woman and would never come out to anyone as there is no incentive. You said you agreed to my post http://www.crossdressers.com/forums/showthread.php?161994-Why-other-men-do-not-want-to-cross-dress&p=2632382&highlight=Why+other+men+do+not+want+to+cross+dress %3F#post2629223

Also, have you read my post #173 (http://www.crossdressers.com/forums/showthread.php?162444-Can-you-CD-w-o-being-TG&p=2652361&viewfull=1#post2652361)?

I propose that a man who CDs knows no other way of being a male, and therefore he imagines that he feels the same way about his gender identity as any male who does not CD. But, if he were to temporarily inhabit the non-CD's mind and body, he might discover a total revulsion for wearing anything that is feminine. Do both these men have the same male-identity?
Just food for thought.
non-cders are not monsters and they too feel feminine(calm, caring, weak etc). Even if there is revulsion to others crossdressing, they still have a male identity. And don't expect every guy to give a same answer to "how do you define a male?". Media mostly plays a big role in affecting one's perceptions.

LeaP

11-13-2011, 11:48 AM

I agree with you that the nuanced differences between CD, TG, and TS are lost on the general public.

Probably, April. I checked my company's HR EO policy statement the other day, though. Expression of both gender and gender identity are covered. I take the spread of policies like this as an indication of some level of public awareness.

Lea

Pink Person

11-13-2011, 02:02 PM

You can take the chicken out of Kentucky, but you can't take Kentucky out of the chicken. By chicken, I mean crossdresser. By Kentucky, I mean the femmy transmasculinity of some guys with girl names who live there.

P.S. I know. I know. Guys with girl names only wear them because they look good and feel silky smooth against their skin. Don't bother telling us again, Mary.

Veronica27

11-13-2011, 04:35 PM

The question presented at the outset is quite simple, and by its nature offers an opportunity for some great intellectual discussion. My answer is yes, but as with any such question, either a yes or a no should be accompanied by an explanation. I attempted to provide that, and as I might expect, was challenged by numerous people on the "no" side. And so I increasingly attempted to elaborate on my explanation. As I mentioned, part of the difficulty with the question was the fact that a "no" answer precludes the possibility that for some individuals a "yes" answer could even exist, while the reverse is not the case for a "yes" answer. For that reason, many of the "no" responses were very forceful, and placed the "yes" responders into a defensive position. The "yes" responses appeared to fall on deaf ears, in many instances, and were even met with derision by some. At times, my replies became a bit testy, and for that I apologize.

The reality here is that while the question is quite simple, the answer is extremely complex. Despite what some would have us believe, there is no general concensus on the meaning of many of the terms that have been bandied about here, particularly transgender. A study of the history of the term reveals that its original intent was quite different from the all inclusive approach that many here espouse. Some argue that it has evolved into the umbrella term, but the evolution of most words is more of an elongated process over decades and even centuries with a gradual shifting towards slightly alternate applications of the root word. With transgender, this did not happen, but rather it was suggested by certain activists that this broadening of the original word should take place. While a bit of an oversimplification of what transpired, this was essentially what happened and it was primarily for political purposes.

If you google transgender, you will get an excellent Wikipedia page on the subject. One of the references at the bottom of the page is to a study report entitled "Who put the 'trans' in transgender". This paper outlines four distinct approaches to the term, and describes the ongoing significance and impact of each. We have basically been arguing the first two approaches here, so I will not complicate matters by attempting to explain numbers 3 and 4, which I found somewhat confusing. Number 1 was that of Virginia Prince who coined the term to refer to those who wished to live as the gender opposite to their birth sex, without SRS, while Number 2 was the application of the term as an umbrella term largely for political gain by the activists in the 1980's.

From a strictly linguistic approach, the word combines two root words, trans and gender. The definition of the prefix trans is "across, through, over....etc." For example a trans-continental railroad stretches across a continent. The trains can move back and forth, but the railroad remains a fixture between two end points. The prefix trans describes the railroad and not the train. The train's timetable can be described as trans-continental, but by strict definition the train is not. In applying this prefix to gender what are we really saying? The individual is like the train. He goes back and forth but it is not he who spans across anything. The train's timetable is not transcontinental if it just goes between two towns that are mid-route. Some here say any cross gender or cross dressing activity makes you transgender, but you are only the passenger, and in most cases are not actually crossing the entire gender spectrum. Image is but one aspect of gender.

There are various definitions of the word gender (none of which were included in the sticky about definitions the last time I checked). Most definitions put it as a construct of society. In other words it is not a part of you, like your personality, sexual orientation, right or left handedness and so on. It is purely subject to the whims of society at any time and place. The word is so nebulous that any word such as transgender has very little meaning, except what we want it to mean for our own purposes. It certainly should not be imposed upon anyone by another, if the individual disagrees with such an application.

So why am I so opposed to this term? I am not opposed to its existence as I think it can be useful for some people and groups. It certainly has benefits for the political activists. As individuals, we all have our own identity. It is who we are. We live in a world that from a sexual standpoint is primarily binary. As individuals we identify in most cases with our birth sex. It is who we are. Some identify sometimes or all the time, as the opposite sex, for a variety of reasons. They may "want to be", "feel that they are", not always sure which they are, or at times in their mind become the opposite sex. But to say that something called "gender identity" has to be affected by such a triviality as what clothing we might sometimes wear is preposterous. For a community which for the most part dislikes labels, I find it strange that some of those members want to insist on using this label for its simplicity and all-inclusiveness, when by its nature it tends to create a very false picture of some members. The public does not see the variety that this term supposedly encompasses, it just sees the image that it conveys in the mainstream thinking. It does a disservice to many of us, and is linguistically incorrect.

Veronica

Pink Person

11-13-2011, 11:33 PM

Some people have a peculiarly selective understanding of sex and gender. Is your wife a train
or a woman? How do you know? Are you a man or a box of breakfast cereal? We will understand if you can't answer these questions.

Sex and gender are not linguistic concepts. They exist outside of language not inside of it or because of it. Deaf and dumb dodo birds understand this better than you do.

ReineD

11-14-2011, 12:52 AM

I was meandering though the web, reading an article from the UK Observer, "20 predictions for the next 25 years (http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2011/jan/02/25-predictions-25-years)". It's an interesting article and has nothing to do with gender or trans. In their prediction #12 for future fashions (scroll to mid page), the paragraph begins with:

Fashion is such an important part of the way in which we communicate our identity to others, and for a very long time it's meant dress: the textile garments on our body.

Even the reporters at The Guardian know that how we choose to present ourselves reflects who we feel we are. Veronica, what do you think informs our choices to present the way we do? Why do you make certain choices when you dress as a guy? Please take some time to think deeply about this.

It also might help if you stop thinking of your femme persona (the person who presents femme and whom you associate with the name Veronica), as an entity outside of your guy self.

But a person who "transcends gender roles" on occasion doesn necessarily self-identify as a woman, when dressed.

No one is saying that crossing gender boundaries means the person identifies as a woman. Please go back and read the posts. Also, gender identity is not "either/or", male or female. There is a VAST range in between the two polarities. I know this is a difficult concept to understand, but please try. If you are unwilling to understand this, that's fine. But please stop insisting that gender is binary. It just isn't.

... also Sara, there are other people posting in this thread, not just me. Just saying.

Veronica27

11-14-2011, 10:27 AM

Even the reporters at The Guardian know that how we choose to present ourselves reflects who we feel we are. Veronica, what do you think informs our choices to present the way we do? Why do you make certain choices when you dress as a guy? Please take some time to think deeply about this.

It also might help if you stop thinking of your femme persona (the person who presents femme and whom you associate with the name Veronica), as an entity outside of your guy self.

Those are very good questions, and are central to an understanding of this whole topic. Firstly, the gender of what we wear is but one aspect of the overall presentation of "who we are". Our overall personality and the attitudes we develop toward a great many external factors all come into play. The impact of any of those factors, is reflected by the extent to which we present whatever image we are showing, whether consciously or subconsciously. The necessity of any given situation is usually the primary determinant of dressing, but there is usually some flexibility as to how we present it, (i.e. well groomed, sloppy, mismatched colours etc.). But it is reflective of our personality and acquired attitudes. If one were to crossdress in a situation where the necessity as to presentation was strong, it would certainly be reflective of gender importance in our choices. Such individuals would most likely qualify as transgendered. However, in cases where crossdressing is occasional, mostly very private, seldom full presentation, and so on, then gender may be a very tiny aspect or even non-existent element of the dressing. Stress, or frustration of everyday life, as well as personality traits such as curiosity, risk taking, being adventuresome, and the attitudes we develop as a result of our experiences, which can include rebelliousness, sexual inhibitions etc. can all play a much larger part in determining the choices we make as to when and how we dress. The list of possibilities is endless, and the mistake that many in the community make, I believe, is attributing everything to what has come to be referred to as gender identification.

I do not think in terms of my crossdressed "persona" as being an entity outside of my guy self. The name Veronica is simply a screen name or user ID I chose for the sake of anonymity. I use it for internet posting and for e-mail for purposes of privacy, and it has become a handy and consistent identifier for the few occasions when I have attended a CD function. However I am dressed, I am still me, a guy, I do my normal guy things around the house, my wife calls me by my guy name and I always think of myself as being he. I don't believe I have ever posted about Veronica in the third person as some do nor have I referred to myself as becoming Veronica. I simply refer to being crossdressed or not. I have never maintained that how I feel or what I am is what everyone should or must be. I just offer it as my self observation and opinion. I enjoy reading other's opinions and viewpoints and over the years have learned much from them. I welcome any questions about my viewpoints. What I do reject is judgemental conclusions about me that are unsupported by any clear logic

I hope this answers your questions.

Veronica

sara.s

11-15-2011, 09:51 PM

No one is saying that crossing gender boundaries means the person identifies as a woman. Please go back and read the posts. Also, gender identity is not "either/or", male or female. There is a VAST range in between the two polarities. I know this is a difficult concept to understand, but please try. If you are unwilling to understand this, that's fine. But please stop insisting that gender is binary. It just isn't.

Gender identity is not binary as per the definition, you are right.. But identifying a person's Gender identity is a prerogative of that person and it is not upto other's to judge based on that person's clothing. You can google for the definition of Gender Identity and everywhere you will only find that it is a personal or self-conception or so on. Even in the definition you posted, it says it is "Intrinsic". Will you be able to point me to one single definition, where it says that gender identity is subjective to some other person's opinion? So I am still not sure how you can so easily generalize every CD's gender identity.

What i am coming at is all CD's are not necessarily transgendered (but cisgendered). Better title for the topic would have been "Are CD's cisgendered?", so we would not have had to discuss the whole lot about the definition of Transgender. If you still think cisgender men never crossdress please go through this dissertation, by author with 10 years of experience in this field http://surface.syr.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1067&context=soc_etd

... also Sara, there are other people posting in this thread, not just me. Just saying.
My apoligies if you think i am behind you. But you are the only one i disagree with. I mostly agree to every one else, including April's comment about TG being used as an umbrella term, so CD's are also TG in that sense. There is one person who talks about Kentucky chickens and transmasculinity and I have no idea how they are even related to this topic.

ReineD

11-15-2011, 11:44 PM

However, in cases where crossdressing is occasional, mostly very private, seldom full presentation, and so on, then gender may be a very tiny aspect or even non-existent element of the dressing.

Are you describing yourself when you say there is no full presentation (no forms, makeup, wigs, etc)? So you do not attempt to present as a woman? Well, why didn't you say so! LOL. We've been arguing for pages, based on my assumption that you present all out femme like the CDs in the Gallery! If you present as a guy who simply wears women's clothing, then I agree you are not transgender, as I mentioned some pages back. Or, this can be debated by others if they wish, but not by me.

But ... just to yank your chain a bit, you write above, "then gender may be a very tiny aspect". I have a question. If a woman is 1 day pregnant, is she pregnant or not pregnant? :D

Even in the definition you posted, it says it is "Intrinsic". Will you be able to point me to one single definition, where it says that gender identity is subjective to some other person's opinion? So I am still not sure how you can so easily generalize every CD's gender identity.

It's not just me, Sara. It's almost the entire community, in and outside this forum. Besides, I'm not saying anything about you. I think I told you repeatedly that I believe you when you say you are not TG, since you only use the clothing as a costume. :)

Oh .. and your link points to a graduate dissertation by a transman. He is not published yet. Hi dissertation studies the gender identities of ciswomen who are in relationships with other transmen. Before being partnered, most of these women had affiliations with the LGBT community as lesbians. But once in their relationships with transmen, they changed their sexual preference identities to mostly queer, pansexual, or bisexual. These are sexual preferences and not gender identities. Anyway, this study has nothing to do with CDs who do not consider themselves transgender. But, thanks for the link. I wonder if hetero women married to TGs change their identities to lesbian or bi. :)

sara.s

11-16-2011, 12:34 AM

But ... just to yank your chain a bit, you write above, "then gender may be a very tiny aspect". I have a question. If a woman is 1 day pregnant, is she pregnant or not pregnant?

This is an unfair analogy... Try this: if you drop a bottle of poison into the ocean, is the ocean poisonous? :p

It's not just me, Sara. It's almost the entire community, in and outside this forum.

whoever you are talking about agree with CD'ers are Transgendered as in the umbrella term, but not as in the clinical definition from WPATH. It would be nice if such kind of generalization from you be accompanied from some reliable source. Also by not responding to my previous post on "Gender Identity", you seem to be agreeing with that. Don't you? ;)

One reason we do not like the Transgender term is because we find it offensive to be labelled as something whose definition, meaning, perception in public is so different and not clear.

Besides, I'm not saying anything about you. I think I told you repeatedly that I believe you when you say you are not TG, since you only use the clothing as a costume. :)

I still find it offensive to me when some one classifies all CD's as TG's.

ReineD

11-16-2011, 12:37 AM

Sara, as much as I like you, I'll just have to bow gracefully out of our conversation in this thread. You're entitled to your opinion, and I'm entitled to mine. :hugs:

Pink Person

11-16-2011, 04:14 AM

You can boil your gender soup down to your gender identity but that doesn't make one dish the same as the other.

For the record, crossdressing is an ingredient in some transgender soups. It is not an ingredient in any cisgender soups.

P.S. Anonymous crossdressing men with anonymous girl's names are only anonymous to themselves when it comes to their gender characteristics.

Veronica27

11-16-2011, 05:05 PM

Are you describing yourself when you say there is no full presentation (no forms, makeup, wigs, etc)? So you do not attempt to present as a woman? Well, why didn't you say so! LOL. We've been arguing for pages, based on my assumption that you present all out femme like the CDs in the Gallery! If you present as a guy who simply wears women's clothing, then I agree you are not transgender, as I mentioned some pages back. Or, this can be debated by others if they wish, but not by me.

But ... just to yank your chain a bit, you write above, "then gender may be a very tiny aspect". I have a question. If a woman is 1 day pregnant, is she pregnant or not pregnant? :D

I did not say "no" full presentation.:eek: The exact quote was:

"However, in cases where crossdressing is occasional, mostly very private, seldom full presentation, and so on, then gender may be a very tiny aspect or even non-existent element of the dressing." I used "occasional", "mostly private" and "seldom full". While I was speaking in generalities, the descriptions are pretty close to my situation. (I often use forms, but seldom use makeup or a wig. My own hair is long and kept in a man's style ponytail). I have attended a handfull of CD events, and for those I do try to dress as fully as possible given my limitations, but I am not attempting to convey to anyone that I am a woman, but simply a man attending a crossdressing function. The expression "present as a woman" is open to a lot of different interpretations. It covers everything from a disguise, to living full time as a woman, including costumes, playing "let's pretend", various forms of crossdressing and transgender activity.

Equating gender to pregnancy is like comparing apples and oranges. Oh wait, they are both fruits.:straightface: Perhaps apples and shoes would be more appropriate. Gender is highly subjective for both society and the individual, while pregnancy is an absolute condition.:battingeyelashes:

Veronica

ReineD

11-16-2011, 05:15 PM

Equating gender to pregnancy is like comparing apples and oranges. Oh wait, they are both fruits.:straightface: Perhaps apples and shoes would be more appropriate. Gender is highly subjective for both society and the individual, while pregnancy is an absolute condition.:battingeyelashes:

I was trying to make light of the situation. :)

But, it is clear that you are very comfortable with your choice of identification, and I feel I have :chatterbox: enough, so at this point I will send you :hugs: and :wave: goodbye until we meet in another thread, hopefully not about whether CDs are TGs or not. :)

sara.s

11-16-2011, 08:07 PM

Sara, as much as I like you, I'll just have to bow gracefully out of our conversation in this thread. You're entitled to your opinion, and I'm entitled to mine. :hugs:

No love lost.. well, at least we agreed on one thing i.e. to disagree:straightface:

DebbieL

11-16-2011, 09:26 PM

Short answer, it is possible to be a CD without being a TS. Absolutely.

But the definition of transgender is ANY behavior traditionally associated exclusively to the opposite sex. It's a spectrum, much like Kinsey's scale, from 1 to 6, with 1's being 100% gender conformant at all times. Wearing women's underwear, because they are women's underwear, would at least make you a 2.

If your wore spandex men's briefs or your satin men's boxers, you would be "normal", a 1, but if you wore spandex women's briefs you would fit the definition of being transgendered. If that's ALL you wore, that would be a fetish.

However, there are some who cross-dress for professional reasons. Drag Queens and Female Impersonators dress up and sing or lip-sync for money, usually tips, to entertain others. But as soon as the show is over, they rush to the dressing room to get back into their boy-clothes. Even many of these run the range from just putting on a show to pre-op transsexuals.

So if you're one of those who got cast as Charley in Charley's Aunt, or Grandma Burnsides in Mame, then you're just an entertainer, unless, like me, you campaigned for the roles, hoping you would get them, and got upset when you didn't get it. Ironically, I didn't get it because I was too believable as a woman.

If you see a beautiful woman in a beautiful dress and
1 - you want to see what she looks like without the dress, then your "All man".
2 - You wander what the dress would feel like, but don't care if it fits or if you look good, you have a fetish.
3 - You want to wear the dress look at yourself in a mirror - your a casual cross-dresser.
4 - You want to wear the dress, in your size and pass in public - your a cross dresser and somewhat transgendered..
5 - If you want to wear the dress and look as beautiful in it as she does, you're transgendered.
6 - If you want to BE that woman, in the dress, then you're transsexual.

funkybunny

11-22-2011, 10:14 AM

im a gg & is my biggest fear how do u know?

eluuzion

11-22-2011, 01:04 PM

I think I can...but

"I am the lizard king...I can do anything."

but I could be wrong...:drink:

:hugs:

:love:

Peta92

11-22-2011, 03:23 PM