The Animal Instinct in us all. THAT'S why "society" has...

[Wildaboutheels]

such "trouble" with us.

It certainly looks like things are looking up for all of us folks that sometimes [or as often as possible] wear the "wrong" clothing. And/or do all manner of other things to appear/present as the "other" sex from what we actually are. Doesn't it?

THIS ^^^^ I think is the major reason, [although I feel there are many other contributing factors] that CDing will NEVER be widely accepted. It sure seems from various threads that there are more and more of us "up and about" in the RW. Maybe it is simply because there are ever more folks in general out mixing in the RW?

As far as Animal Instinct? Nobody likes to be "fooled". Do they? Or have to "work" for anything if they don't have to. Or, are not accustomed to. Up until recently, it was always reasonably easy to determine a male FROM a female wasn't it? Even from a distance. Women were usually slimmer, had a more tapered waist and walked a bit differently, regardless of how tall they were. Of course, what they were WEARING, might make it more difficult to determine sex from a distance. Something loose, baggy or of a drab color for instance.

How many women when out in the RW today, normally dress that way on a regular basis?

Womens clothing is basically designed to be ABLE to enhance their shape/form/figure through textures, styles, cuts and design etc. Female clothing is designed that way for one main reason. Men are visual creatures by design. By Evolution. The easiest way for women to get "most men" to NOTICE them is to "present themselves" in an appealing visual fashion. Being "attractive" simply increases her chances of being noticed by more men. It's NOT being shallow. Even babies will turn their gazes to more attractive faces. Certainly, no one here will accuse babies of being shallow?

Look at all the "help" available today for anyone of either sex wanting to look more FEMALE. Breast forms, wigs, padding, makeup, corsets and I have no idea what all else. I am not even talking about clothing yet.

The anonymity of the Internet has allowed the "explosion" of sales of such items to your average Joe CDer has it not? How many of you, buy most of your stuff off/through the Internet?

Visually, most guys I have ever talked to like long shiny hair on a woman. Ever been fooled? By JUST hair - say sitting on a bus or in a booth in a resataraunt. All you can see are shoulders and long, glorious, beautiful hair and you wonder what HER face looks like. And then "she" gets up and turns around. OOOOPS! I am not saying of course that long shiny hair on a guy is wrong in any way, shape or form. But, didn't you feel just a wee bit fooled or foolish. Or disappointed in some manner? Hair/wigs is just ONE item that can be utilized to "fool" people.

There are always a number of women here who go ballistic, when the word JEALOUSY gets tossed into threads. Jealous of how HER man looks "dressed"? [I can only imagine, that might include any/most men?] Many don't bother to explain that THEY would never be jealous but rather give the inmpression that "no woman in her right mind" could possibly be jealous of any guy trying to look like a woman. Regardless of how many women [probably a very small minority] might be in any way be jealous of a CDer in public, Women, don't want to have to "work at it" to figure out another person's true sexual identity out in public. MOST people want it to be a simple black OR white issue.

Are you a male?

Or are you a female?

ALL animals on the planet, do everything they can to conserve energy. Means they have to spend LESS time eating/finding food. A big concern if you don't have access to grocery stores. Gives them more time for other stuff.

I believe Humans are no different in this respect.

1] They do not want to have to "work at" figuring out the sexual "identity" of other individuals. They want it to be simple. Like it has ALWAYS been.

2] Few people like to be "fooled" even if it is "only from a distance".

Just to be clear, this thread is in no way a judgement of ANY of the many reasons people have to CD.

Our various Animal Instincts, [and there are many] "control us" in more ways than most are willing to admit.

Sticking our heads in the sand and denying it won't change it.

Ok, have at it.

[kimdl93]

If you look at the animal world you'll find lots of CDing. There are critters that masquerade as females so that they can closer access to females for reproductive purposes...and avoid competing with males at the same time. Some even copulate with males to maintain the ruse.

there's more than conservation of energy in the social behavior of animals. Bighorn sheep and elk, two among many mamalian examples, beat each other silly for the opportunity to male. But there are plenty of non-sexual roles for non-alpha males in the animal world...such as non-dominant male wolves that care for the pups of the alpha couple, bees that feed and care for the offspring of their mother, the queen bee; and mole rates who pretty much emulate bee and ant behavior in their social structure.

Among humans, there are are societies that are patriarchal and others that are matriarchal. In some societies men have multiple wives, and in others - several in the Pacific Islands come to mind - women may have several husbands. And of course, when it gets to gender behavior, we have examples from Native American and (East Indian) cultures that not only tolerate but celebrate the genderbenders.

I personally rather like muscular, toned women that some men might consider a tad masculine. I remember one woman I really liked that was a comptetitive body builder. When she was pumped up, the shoulders and arms looked decidedly masculine, but wow...all I can say ;) Now, the Olympics are coming up and I'd venture that you'll see some pretty pronounced musculature on the track and elsewhere. Then of course, there's was the East German women's swim team.

[Nikki A.]

I understand your point, but as "intellegent" creatures should this be a reason why we are not accepted by society. Attitudes and reactions can be changed as what is considered "abnormal" becomes more mainstream.
Those that do go out and about and show themselves to "society" are blazing a trail for the rest of us and hopefully the next generation. I think I see more of an acceptance among the younger generation. Will it ever be common, I doubt it, but then again we aren't ever common are we haha.

[Kate Simmons]

I also understand what you are saying Hon but I've been told by men, knowing I'm a CDer that I'm beautiful and that they want to be with me. Animal (and mating) instincts notwithstanding, I think sometimes it's also about the person and not just the biology. Just my experience.:battingeyelashes::)

[Julogden]

We are intelligent animals, and that allows us to control those negative, less-evolved animal instincts that sometimes force their way to the surface. We can't live our lives letting those animalistic relict impulses overrule our intelligence.

Things are improving for us, people have become much more tolerant over the course of my life, I've seen it. I tend to be optimistic regarding society getting used to us, and I feel very strongly that it is primarily a matter of getting people used to seeing us around in everyday situations if we want to increase our acceptance. Increased visibility will result in more and more people realizing that we're really not much different other than the way we present ourselves.

Carol

[Lorileah]

All that is just theory. It really wasn't even considered until humans had so much time to kill (they didn't have to work on survival as you say). The ease of ordering things on the net may be part of the ability to present but also the ability to make such things at a reasonable (ha!) cost has as much to do with it. Just think 50 years ago most women had two maybe three dresses in the closet. They wore pinafores or aprons to protect those so they would not have to wash as often(which is another whole part of this). 300 years ago the males wore the attractive clothing. The "fine" cloth like silk and velvet were as much male and female. It was more attractive to the female because it displayed wealth which in turn promised a life of more leisure. In the animal kingdom the male is often the more embellished. So argument is weak at best.

All the sociologists and anthropologists will debate the strong vs weak idea. Intelligence can often be as attractive as strength. The male who could grow more or capture more with less work would in fact be a more desirable mate as far as life expectancy and have more time to be with his wife and family (and thus breed). You would have to go back millenia to really substantiate what you describe (even the ancient Egyptians favored pretty males).

The whole dressing down thing is relatively new and was probably more function than anything. A male in red would be a great target to any enemy (or predator). A male that smelled like roses would be more noticeable. Add to this the predominate puritan attitude of the settlers in the US where they were denied the ability to be attractive (as it was in their mind an affront to God). So nature vs nurture in this case it is nurture. They were told to dress down.

So on the surface the theory looks good but it has some major flaws. In general the objections to males wearing "finery" (skirts, fine cloth, jewelry, wigs, pumps (look it up they were men's shoes with heels originally), perfumes, make up) is social in nature and is a relatively new phenomenon

[KellyJameson]

When I travel to certain cities I'm more cautious because I believe the risk to my safety is greater.

Seattle is not a city I usually feel the need to do that in but not long ago we had one of those random acts of insantity where someone decided to express all the rage in them with a gun against innocent people before killing himself.

To be able to function we must deceive ourselves to some degree that we our safe otherwise we would never step outside the door.

There are many ways to find the courage to live and one is by thinking our world is predictable so we expect to be able understand and make meaning out of what is happening and what will happen in the next moment.

This makes us vulnerable to shock when we have experiences that do not make sense of how we thought the world works. A stranger shooting you for no reason is very shocking.

Shock becomes an emotional scale we experience constantly between the way the world is and the way we expect it to be.

For many, encountering a crossdresser can be a shocking experience depending on their world view based on their world experience.

The more people that publicly bend gender the less others will be shocked by it and so we expand their world as well as our own.

The LBGT spectrum is becoming accepted for this reason, it is becoming "normal" in that it is not shocking people to the degree it did when it was hidden.

If all men wore a dress eventually it would become shocking to see them in pants.

Adding sex to the mixture increases the shock value so a mini skirt and five inch heels is reacted to differently than sandals and shorts because it suggests intent
to cause affect.

Making it sexual invites scrutiny because sex is first a social experience that than becomes private. (usually)

We swim in a social sea of sex and it is this sea that makes crossdressing difficult but it is also the catalyst for much of it also.

If we were not sexual creatures crossdressing would not be objected to because there would be no such thing as crossdressing.

[STACY B]

LoriLeah is rite ,,,Hell just look back just a few years ago in the 80s when all the Rock Stars were dressing an had makeup an girls clothes an long hair an Men an Woman almost looked the same . An all the girls were chasing an freaking out about all the fine ass men that were on Mtv ,,, Just go to youtube an check out the Ol Rat , White Snake ,, Journey ,, Videos ,,, An that was just to name a few ,, They all look like girls an everbody friggen loved them ,,Twisted Sister ,,, Most of this crap just started . Back in the ol dayz they all wore stockings an dresses an wigs in Europe an over here . Just look at our early forfathers ?

[busker]

I'm beginning to think that all men have been CDing for a long time and didn't even know it. Some days I look around and I see so many women who do not match the dress style preferred by most CDs. Here where I live in Calif. most women dress in casual or less style, a lot like the men do. A few days ago, I decided to see how the women were dressing and I wasn't surprised--they usually has black pants, some form fitting, some not, a t-shirt or tank top, sandals or flats, hair just brushed, and in most respects they didn't look very different from the men. I also have seen couples that except for a woman's breasts, they were dressed identically. so are men cross dressing? or are women dressing down and blending in or "passing"? Is there a self-preservation thing going on? Sure it is easier to just put on jeans, shoes and a shirt, but is that really the reason--women don't have time to dress? Few women I see "dress" up except those who are employed in jobs requiring them to dress, even the banks are now "liberal" or in uniforms.

[Wildaboutheels]

Um....no.

People in the past, no matter what they were wearing, were not trying to appear as the OPPOSITE sex. Our forefathers did not wear corsets and bras and heels and mini skirtsand what have you.

Did they?

Nor Rock stars that I am aware of, although I am sure there were probably some.

Our Animal Instinct also controls our mate selection to a large degree, no matter how smart we think we are. At least it used to. Not so much anymore these days.

Chemistry - pheromones - used to have a major impact on often picking the wrong mates. Yes, great matches genetically speaking, but often very poor matches Compatibility wise. How many folks here made bad picks in the past based on nothing more than pheromones? Most I imagine. And might still be making the same bad choices over and over again.

[Lorileah]

Um....no.

People in the past, no matter what they were wearing, were not trying to appear as the OPPOSITE sex. Our forefathers did not wear corsets and bras and heels and mini skirtsand what have you.

Did they?


Welcome to history 101. The ancient Roman Empire. Today's lesson, men who appeared in public as women. Next we will move on to the Beardache, or two spirited people of the Americas, men who dressed and functioned as women. Next we will discuss Shakespearean theater where men presented as women on stage. Even if these examples are not in your reasonable idea of crossdressing in history, we can say that gender bending has been a strong force.

It is society who decides what is male and female clothing, not nature. Clothing is not an evolutionary thing. It is an adaptability thing. It is a functional thing.

Pheromones are another thing that is very difficult to prove. Since there is really no solid evidence that pheromones have any effect on "evolved" humans I don't see that as a reason people choose the wrong mates. In fact I will suggest that the bad choices, again, are more based on society and what we are told we want. How many cheerleaders in High School chased Bill Gates? Probably none even though a few may have thought he was attractive. No they chased the BMOC Football captain. They are divorced now and Bill Gates is looking good to her because in her maturity she sees that it isn't society's ideal but her feeling that is more important (and the money)

[Mythic]

I understand what you're saying. And even though I'm a pesamistic I think it's possible for wide spread acceptance. Just probablt not in my life time. And regarding the matter of long hair. When I was a freshman in high school my hair was at it's longest (shoulder length) and all too often girls would touch my hair from behind thinking I was a girl.

[Mythic]

Welcome to history 101. The ancient Roman Empire. Today's lesson, men who appeared in public as women. Next we will move on to the Beardache, or two spirited people of the Americas, men who dressed and functioned as women. Next we will discuss Shakespearean theater where men presented as women on stage. Even if these examples are not in your reasonable idea of crossdressing in history, we can say that gender bending has been a strong force.

It is society who decides what is male and female clothing, not nature. Clothing is not an evolutionary thing. It is an adaptability thing. It is a functional thing.

Pheromones are another thing that is very difficult to prove. Since there is really no solid evidence that pheromones have any effect on "evolved" humans I don't see that as a reason people choose the wrong mates. In fact I will suggest that the bad choices, again, are more based on society and what we are told we want. How many cheerleaders in High School chased Bill Gates? Probably none even though a few may have thought he was attractive. No they chased the BMOC Football captain. They are divorced now and Bill Gates is looking good to her because in her maturity she sees that it isn't society's ideal but her feeling that is more important (and the money)

Interesting... I will have to search this history which I have been unaware of...

[Wildaboutheels]

Ok, so if I am understanding this correctly, CDing goes [at least] as far back as the Roman Empire?

Basically 2 thousand years ago. "Seems" to sound like it was MORE accepted back THEN?

And then we have today, where, through the miracle of "modern technology" it is much easier for men to dress and present as a female.

It just not seem to me that much progress has occurred in 2,000 years as far as Societal acceptance.

Then again, only in the last 50 years have "we" figured out that Blacks are Humans too who SHOULD have all the rights of White people. Of course there are Whites today that still think Blacks belong in the back of the bus. Or people that feel Women have no business in the Military. Or plenty of other places.

[bobbimo]

Sooooooo... what would happen if we all became Nudist's??
Then the wearing of clothes would have a real function, not just to identify the sexes.
For example. A bra would be worn to keep those breasts from swinging loose and getting hurt.
Pants or panties would keep you stuff from getting sat on or stuck to something.
Then Fashion is pretty much gone nad everyone can be what they want??
Confusing.. It didnt seem that way when I started this, but now I've confused my self... Its going to be a blonde day today

[Lorileah]

First I have to correct a spelling error it is Berdache not Beardache, and was very common in many Native American societies and called other names.


Ok, so if I am understanding this correctly, CDing goes [at least] as far back as the Roman Empire? At least and more. The ancient Egyptians had males who presented as females also. And since history before that is often more legend than fact we could assume there were others (maybe even the story of Sodom and Gomorrah?). I would be confident that even before civilization there were males who followed the function of the females in the "tribe" and elicited attention from the higher males. Unfortunately cave paintings are incomplete (maybe they were checked out and not returned on time so the fine is going to be HUGE!). We know in Roman society, males who dressed as females filled at least two niches, prostitutes and priestesses. Not unlike today's Madonna and wh*re ideal that men have for women. It is also known that "marriage" between crossdressing (maybe more likely transsexual) males and genetic males occurred (it was easier to have children then with your slave or concubine).


Basically 2 thousand years ago. "Seems" to sound like it was MORE accepted back THEN? It has been alternately accepted and banned throughout history. Different civilizations have embraced it. In Eastern countries you may find one region where it is revered and the next region where it is outlawed and punishable by death. Since Western civilization has been based on a Judea-Christian ethic the idea that things are "sins" are more prominent. Some of these things had reason 2000-3000 years ago. They considered the Romans as pagan or heathen. Thus many things taht the Romans did was banned by the up and coming Jews and Christians (and later the Muslims). This is when society took a stand against crossdressing. So yes it was more accepted then than now because the ones in power felt it was something that would weaken their power (and this morphed (Evolved?) over the next 500 years as the church rewrote laws and reinterpreted writings to maintain the control they had gained). The societal rules now were written to keep patriarchy in power and more specifically the religious leaders (followed now by government) in power. As with many things it was the fear of the unknown that drove them and by controlling the masses they could control the unknown (well except their unknowns like evil and the devil). As an aside, most religions believe that that those who don't follow their religion are evil. On the other hand those that are considered evil by others often believe that the others are just as evil.




It just not seem to me that much progress has occurred in 2,000 years as far as Societal acceptance.
true in Western ideology. Until recent history when people started to question authority. Maybe the most in the 60's when it was "cool" to be different. But look around now, the ones who preached peace love and tolerance are now the ones who are in power and have different ideas. The ones who shunned ownership or physical property now drive BMW's and have two houses. Why? Because they found out it felt good to own things.


Then again, only in the last 50 years have "we" figured out that Blacks are Humans too who SHOULD have all the rights of White people. Of course there are Whites today that still think Blacks belong in the back of the bus. Or people that feel Women have no business in the Military. Or plenty of other places.

Sort of true but even back when they were drafting the Constitution there were those who believed that slaves should be equal (and free). However once again the people who had power (read money) did not want things to change so they fought to maintain the status quo. Hey you don't mind someone's ox being gored as long as it isn't YOUR ox. It is easier to instill good habits than it is to break old ones. In other words it is hard to unlearn things. When you grow up being told that something is just so, you cannot easily see that it isn't. Society, in general, has changed and adapted (evolved would require generations of change) to fit a new course. It is a tenuous course that can be changed at anytime by a person or people in power (recent history 1932-1945). This can be a good thing if, as now, we seem to be enforcing a more tolerant society or it can be bad (as noted above). Right now we can enjoy the idea that the majority either accept "us" or at least ignore us. We can see that that can change in a heartbeat when a new power takes over ( see women's rights and healthcare recently).

Bobbimo....if you weren't confused before you are now :)