Do you want to know if you are a transvestic fetishists?

[Lucy_Bella]

Some of you may already know what this is while others may care less.. I have been seeing several new post on the main MTF forum with members suggesting ( it's their words not mine) they have no/zero " gender identities" .. They simply do not feel like a girl..


Transvestic fetishists explained :

Having thoughts of transiting your sex opposite of what you was born as in a past phase is not excluded.. It is a normal thought for some Cross-Dresser but for different reasons ..The reason why a transvestic fetishists person but not all under the T,G, umbrella would have such thoughts would simply be because a transvestic fetishists can suffer from Anatomic autogynephilia: (arousal to the fantasy of having a normative woman's body, or parts of one..) Transitioning is a temporary feeling and is never acted upon..

Being a transvestic fetishists DOES NOT make you a " Trans-Gender ".(because it is considered to be a paraphilia rather than gender identification).. Even though Transvestite or the meaning of one can be attributed to the T.G. umbrella by this definition only " the wearing of clothing or behaviour of the opposite sex from natural birth.." It doesn't just separate the two meanings because I have to assume wearing clothing is a behaviour?

As a transvestic fetishists you do not have a "Gender Identity Disorder" you just dress for the fetish purpose .. Transvestic fetishists can also go through similar phases that T.S.'s and T.G.s go through with their dressing progression but can not be mistaken for the same reasons..Unlike some T.G.'s and *all* T.S's ( some T.G.s do find sexual gratification in cross-dressing at times )"Sexual gratification" is the drive that makes the progression for transvestic fetishists ..We may assume that sexual gratification has left us but in studies it has been proven that in time, sexual gratification decreases and becomes an antidote to anxiety or depression or contributes to a sense of peace and calm.. But it is still there sometimes through small un-noticed forms of arousal ..

The above were things I have learned through a combination of different outlets through the internet below this I will share studies done by Dr. Blanchard in 1991 on how he defined a fetishism relating to cross-dressing.

Fetishism As in Blanchard (1991), a patient was classified
as fetishistic if he responded positively to the single questionnaire item, ‘‘Do you think that certain inanimate objects
(velvet, silk, leather, rubber, shoes, female underwear, etc.)
have a stronger sexual attraction for you than for most other
people?’’

Unless asked asked a civil question for concerned people about this subject I will not respond to any arguments about the subject.. I only posted this thread for hopes that maybe some will have a better understanding ..I DO NOT feel that because I have called attention to this subject that falling under this subject makes me or others who do, any better or worse in anyway..

Thank you for reading..

[Beverley Sims]

I think this has been discussed before.
To answer the question.....

I don't think so.

[Lucy_Bella]

No this has not been discussed as long as I have been a member of this site.. But it has been argued as a false claim in other un related post..

I opened this thread for people who may have never tied their dressing to this such as myself to possibly get a better understanding of themselves.. This thread is an attempt for a real discussion not one for splitting hairs..:D

[Jackie7]

I have not re-read Blanchard lately but I do recall feeling a condescending judgement in his definition, as in "...merely a transvestic fetishist."
To me it is hair splitting and not helpful, because I do not feel the same way all the time. Sometimes I feel entirely content as a cross-dressing man and have no interest in transitioning, other times I feel the way others here report as the wrong gender in the wrong body. These various states of being shift and change. So it's all whatever, whatever. I do know that my personality softens when I dress and this softening carries over when I am entirely guy and not dressing at all.

[sandra-leigh]

That distinguishing question does not distinguish at all. "A stronger sexual attraction" doesn't mean much. If, for example, I had had a partner who sexually teased me using a feather, then I would have a stronger association between feathers and sexual attraction than "most other people", but that is a terribly long way from the standard of "fetish" which requires a strong association, especially one in which the item turns out to be necessary (or nearly so) for sexual performance. Furthermore, the question as phrased has no time connection -- so if I had made an association with (say) Bick Pens because the cute 2rd grade girl use to chew on them, and I did not get into crossdressing until I was (say) 16, then the question as phrased would flag me even though the Bick Pens association was quite unconnected.

I have no good information on how the "average person" feels about the sorts of items sold in "adult stores". If I were to guess that (say) 2/3 of adults wouldn't use such things and that 1/3 would, then should I say that the "average person" has no interest (since less than 50% do), or should I say that the "average person" is interested in 1/3 of an item (1 person in 3), or.. what?

[Erica2Sweet]

An interesting question along the same lines is: "How does one know he does or does not feel like a woman when he has not ever actually been a woman to know what being a woman actually feels like?"... ;)

We who play out this gender bending thing we do often act on assumptions and also often adhere to the idea that "the grass is greener on the other side" when processing our goals in terms of gender presentation and identity. The truth is that often the assumptions we act upon are totally without basis in reality. It's no one's fault really, we just often do the best we can with the tools we have.

[Ressie]

I've always had a sexual response to lingerie and other fem items. But I've also wished I had been born female at times. We're all unique aren't we?

[Lucy_Bella]

I have not re-read Blanchard lately but I do recall feeling a condescending judgement in his definition, as in "...merely a transvestic fetishist."

The report was revised in 2008..Dr. Blanchard coined the Phrase the condition has become better known and has grown quite popular on the net.


An interesting question along the same lines is: "How does one know he does or does not feel like a woman when he has not ever actually been a woman to know what being a woman actually feels like?"... ;) we just often do the best we can with the tools we have.

I guess that would be a great question to ask a T.G. someone who feels they have a gender disorder or better yet a T.S. someone who feels they was born the wrong sex..How do they know?

[Lorileah]

Dakota tribal wisdom says that when you discover you're riding a dead horse, the best strategy is to dismount. How many ways can the label argument be presented?

[Lucy_Bella]

Dakota tribal wisdom says that when you discover you're riding a dead horse, the best strategy is to dismount. How many ways can the label argument be presented?

Cherokee tribal wisdom says" drums beating isn't always the beat of war"...

[Asche]

I think some people here are labelistic fetishists.


Do you want to know if you are a transvestic fetishists?
Not particularly. Labelism isn't my kink.

[PaulaQ]

Some misconceptions in this thread:
1. Transvestic fertishism in Blamchard's work is with regards to MtF TS, not CDs
2. He posits that there is a difference between androphilic and gynephilic MtFs in terms of transvetic fetishism, although a recent NIH study found that both orientations had TF, but with different frequencies - TF is much more common in gynephilic MtFs
3. TF isn't a 'get out of being trans' card
4. TF gynephilic MtF TS are real TS, not dudes with some awful delusion.

Sorry if this ruffles feathers.

Best way to decide "i'm not trans" is to observe that you don't suffer debilitating gender dysphoria.

[Lucy_Bella]

I think some people here are labelistic fetishists.


Not particularly. Labelism isn't my kink.

Maybe and if so ..Be it.. But I am also a "realist"

I just happen to find real science fascinating I don't like hearing we are stuck with what we were dealt and if there was a slight chance for a cure,treatment or advancements in either ..I would love to know about it wouldn't you ? ..We don't have to settle ..

[NicoleScott]

I think some people here are labelistic fetishists.

Best post EVER, Asche.

Lucy_Bella, there was a time when "real science" used aversion therapy, lobotomy, or castration as a treatment or cure for crossdressing. When "real science" really gets a handle on crossdressing, including that driven by fetishes, I might be interested. I don't need treatment or a cure. And settle for what?
Finally, if you post something, you shouldn't be afraid to defend it.

[Lorileah]

But I am also a "realist" :lol: realist in quotes.


I just happen to find real science fascinating what makes it real science? Real science starts with a hypothesis...continues to theory...then works to proving that theory (since you cannot prove a negative, if the theory fails it would just go away). What you propose maybe a hypothesis, calling it a theory would be a stretch and how do you go about proving it?
I don't like hearing we are stuck with what we were dealt and if there was a slight chance for a cure,treatment or advancements in either ..I would love to know about it wouldn't you ? Cure? Treatment? So you assume or postulate that transgenderism is an illness? How would you go about showing that?

[Lucy_Bella]

:lol: realist in quotes.

what makes it real science? Cure? Treatment? So you assume or postulate that transgenderism is an illness? How would you go about showing that?

Yes! Because it isn't TransGender.. Its transvestic fetishists

http://www.minddisorders.com/Py-Z/Transvestic-fetishism.htm


lhttp://www.mentalhelp.net/poc/view_doc.php?type=advice&id=1128&at=2&cn=98&ad_2=1

http://www.allaboutcounseling.com/library/transvestic-fetishism/

http://www.123helpme.com/view.asp?id=39023

[reb.femme]

Dakota tribal wisdom says that when you discover you're riding a dead horse, the best strategy is to dismount. How many ways can the label argument be presented?

Thank you Lorileah,

I did have a titter at that one! :heehee:

Some people have a need to justify? or pigeon hole themselves. I can't and wouldn't offer to comment on what is probably worthy investigation, but I will not be reading it. Quite simply, this holds no significance in my life. I have no need to read into me any deeper than..............I am as I am.

Reb

[PaulaQ]

@Lucy - are you saying that crossdressing is your preferred or exclusive method of achieving sexual gratification? Because the definitions you link state this.

BTW, real science doesn't give a crap about cross dressing. It barely cares about transsexualism. It'll be a while before they figure out CD - probably that will be an afterthought.

What say you about Blanchard's transvestic fetishists who later become TS. This is what his theories cover? Would you not say that they are transgender? If not why not. If so, why wouldn't the transvestic fetishist be so in the first place?

BTW, what bothers you so much about the label "transgender"? Do you find it offensive or something? The name doesn't really change what something is...

[Lucy_Bella]

@Lucy - are you saying that crossdressing is your preferred or exclusive method of achieving sexual gratification? Because the definitions you link state this. No I am not saying that..I am saying it can happen in some people ..


BTW, real science doesn't give a crap about cross dressing. It barely cares about transsexualism. It'll be a while before they figure out CD - probably that will be an afterthought. I think they do..Two patients with paraphilias (one each with sexual masochism and transvestic fetishism) and depression were successfully treated with fluoxetine hydrochloride in a dose of '40 mg/d. Depression 1:50–52 (1993). © 1993 Wiley-Liss, Inc... I think if confussion would get out of the way there may be hope for some..


What say you about Blanchard's transvestic fetishists who later become TS. This is what his theories cover? Would you not say that they are transgender? If not why not. If so, why wouldn't the transvestic fetishist be so in the first place? I would never state that Dr Blanchards studies of T.S. would consider them T.G. although some T.S. go through a T.G. phase before transitioning there could have been flaws ( there was imo ) in the study.. Because being a T.S. in not a gender disorder" It's being born the wrong sex.. Very few transvestic fetishists ever go through a transition and those who do may have suffer from a form of extreme autogynephilia..


BTW, what bothers you so much about the label "transgender"? Do you find it offensive or something? The name doesn't really change what something is...

Nothing at all bothers me about the word..It just doesn't define me it defines people with GID..

[LilSissyStevie]

I don't understand the problem. Is is that you resent being associated with the "transgender umbrella?" If that's the problem then the solution is easy. Ignore it. The so called transgender umbrella is a political construct for activism based on the idea that we all have some sort of common cause. If you don't feel a part of it then... do nothing.

Is it that you resent that people on the internet don't respect the fact that your gender identity is male and that you are only turned on by wearing the clothes you associate with women or femininity? The solution is simple here, too. Keep calm, carry on. People on the internet disappear when you turn the computer off.

Is the problem that you're internally conflicted because your "fetish" doesn't jibe with you so called gender identity- an ego dystonic transvestic fetishist? There are two solutions for this: accept yourself as you are or change to what you want to be. I think the first solution is the easier one.

All sexual arousal is fetishistic. We are socialized to find certain things arousing but sometimes, to use a scientific term, "shit happens" and things go a little off the rails. This imprinting seems to happen when we are very young and doesn't appear to be easily altered later in life. So you might as well accept it as long as you aren't hurting anybody. Don't worry, be happy.:D

[Molly Wells]

Do you want to know if you are a transvestic fetishists?

No,
Molly

[Lucy_Bella]

My discussion was not to offend those who have posted here... It was in fact an effort that EVERYONE should at least look into for why I have stated many times before.

The APA ( american psychiatric association) has adopted T.F. as a dis-order ..They have with a swipe removed it from being a G.I.D. ( meaning a Gender Identity Disorder) That immensely changes the game for G.I.D. people on how they are treated.. This is a fact and it is currently happening ..

So for the sake of argument I do not understand why the T.G. community would want such a LABEL that has been grouped with harmful behaviors such as pedophilia?

Read more: http://www.care2.com/causes/being-transgender-will-no-longer-be-classified-as-a-disorder.html#ixzz2WbibkKJ4 under their umbrella.. Why would you have a disorder

[Deedee Skyblue]

I have no desire to have another label applied to me. I am I, and I am happy with being I.

Deedee

[Charlotte Haynes]

I'm a transvestic fetishist and I'm proud...ish. Sorry to see you've been given a bit of a grilling by some members over this post.
C

[Taylor Ray]

Michel Foucault wrote extensively on the unconscious control mechanisms utilized by the power/institutional matrix, especially psychiatry and any related paradigms. I tend to agree with Lorileah on this one, but an interesting question to ask might be:

does the label help me live a more full life?

Labels and definitions may be ultimately arbitrary, but if one can find a usefulness to a label than go for it.

Most often, labels are used to control other people by attempting to co-opt their entire being into a small, tiny box

[Lorileah]

The APA ( american psychiatric association) has adopted T.F. as a dis-order ..They have with a swipe removed it from being a G.I.D. ( meaning a Gender Identity Disorder) thanks to who you quote or are referring to here, Dr Blanchard who is not really getting support from the majority of therapists. And fetishists have a different reason to dress...normally not a problem until they start harming themselves or others. The fact that he has basically put bisexual and(if they have transitioned) homosexual TSs into a fetish group is abhorrent. He rejects the fact that a TS can be attracted to the same sex and NOT have a mental disorder. In his reasoning, homosexuals are fetishists.

So for the sake of argument I do not understand why the T.G. community would want such a LABEL that has been grouped with harmful behaviors such as pedophilia? And this is how you define yourself. In that group. Answer your own question. You want to be grouped with them? Paula made a point above, if crossdressing is the only way you can achieve sexual arousal and gratification, then you may want to explore moderating that but the vast majority here, even those who do get aroused dressing, do not need it. As with any fetish (and unless they have changed the definition...it means that you use whatever to achieve sexual gratification...) if it becomes the sole source or harms others, it can be a problem (ie your pedophilia example).

But you are describing a very small population (especially if you look at the members here). You also point out two "cures" with antidepressant medication. That just indicates that the subjects were depressed (out of how many patients that were treated BTW? Were there 4-so 50% or were there 100-2% which is not significant or 1000-.2% which would not even be noted in real science). You don't know they have quit thinking about or desiring to crossdress. They may have very well have told Dr Blanchard what they thought he wanted to hear (sort of like Ex-gay therapy).

Stevie summed it up. If you don't want to be in the group, OK, don't be. But don't try and marginalize others with your ideas.

[NicoleScott]

I'm pretty sure that whatever I was before the APA made their definition change, I still am. Oh wait, I didn't have a disorder then and now I do. I need HELP!!

Lucy_Bella, really, what's your point?

[27th Jennifer]

Is that in the DSM V?

[Lucy_Bella]

thanks to who you quote or are referring to here, Dr Blanchard who is not really getting support from the majority of therapists. And fetishists have a different reason to dress...normally not a problem until they start harming themselves or others. The fact that he has basically put bisexual and(if they have transitioned) homosexual TSs into a fetish group is abhorrent. He rejects the fact that a TS can be attracted to the same sex and NOT have a mental disorder. In his reasoning, homosexuals are fetishists.

As I stated so many times that I do not agree with Blanchard as a whole for many different reasons ..His research was very flawed due to learning the the variations of cross dressing and from other studies that have PLACE EVERYONE AS A WHOLE.. I do ,however give Dr. Blanchard credit for "blazing the trail " if you will..even tho his research had flaws it was a start and MANY Psychologist ( the licensed professionals ) agree with a majority of his research even tho some was flawed..It was a start



And this is how you define yourself. In that group. Answer your own question. You want to be grouped with them? Paula made a point above, if crossdressing is the only way you can achieve sexual arousal and gratification, then you may want to explore moderating that but the vast majority here, even those who do get aroused dressing, do not need it. As with any fetish (and unless they have changed the definition...it means that you use whatever to achieve sexual gratification...) if it becomes the sole source or harms others, it can be a problem (ie your pedophilia example).

No not true that this is the only "sexual gratification" a transvestic fetishsts has.. It wasn't even worth fully answering the question ..If you have read Dr. Blanchards work ,you would have known that statement was far from the truth..Talk about stereo typing..


But you are describing a very small population (especially if you look at the members here). You also point out two "cures" with antidepressant medication. That just indicates that the subjects were depressed (out of how many patients that were treated BTW? Were there 4-so 50% or were there 100-2% which is not significant or 1000-.2% which would not even be noted in real science). You don't know they have quit thinking about or desiring to crossdress. They may have very well have told Dr Blanchard what they thought he wanted to hear (sort of like Ex-gay therapy).. To be honest through research they do not know what percentage of the population has transvestic fetishsts from what I have read it could be a small percentage or it could even out number people with GID.. There is just no way of knowing because the disorder is harmless people with it never seek professional help..


Stevie summed it up. If you don't want to be in the group, OK, don't be. But don't try and marginalize others with your ideas. To be honest I believe I am the one being " marginalized" by other people and closed minded opinions..As this thread stated it was a discussion ..I do not jump into all those fantasy threads and tell them how silly they are..I simply pass them by no comment..:D

[sandra-leigh]

Autogynephelia is a postulate, a conjecture at best. There is no evidence for it and so it does not yet rise to the level of a hypothesis. To become a theory it would have to have evidence, and would have to pass all known tests as of the time it was formed; there are those who go further and say that if it does not offer testable predictions then it should not be considered a theory ("String Theory" falls into that category at present, whereas "The Standard Model" makes some predictions that scientists are hoping are not true!)

The fact that one transvestic fetishist was "treated" (not cured) with some particular drug does not offer any useful support for Autogynephilia. I fit Blanchard's diagnostic criteria (which many many TS fit), but my "condition" was not even slightly cured by taking cyproterone -- the main other use of which is as the "chemical castration" drug for sexual offenders (I think the drug you mentioned was the alternative drug for that purpose.) [Edit: Ah, possibly not. But it is used to treat obsessive compulsive disorder.)

[SharonDD]

For me at least it doesn't matter either I am or not. I get up, pull my panties up the same way, label or not. I choose NOT! I am different that way or any other way for that matter. I am uniquely me in every way.

[Lucy_Bella]

Autogynephelia is a postulate, a conjecture at best. There is no evidence for it and so it does not yet rise to the level of a hypothesis. To become a theory it would have to have evidence, and would have to pass all known tests as of the time it was formed; there are those who go further and say that if it does not offer testable predictions then it should not be considered a theory ("String Theory" falls into that category at present, whereas "The Standard Model" makes some predictions that scientists are hoping are not[I] true!)

Yes and I agree that Autogynephelia is a flawed theory.. But if you relate changing sex because you feel you should be that sex and always have been verses because you are in love with that sex (Autogynephelia there are four types BTW ).. That is were many T.S. find the flaw in the study because by definition T.S. is their term ..They own it !They do not want any other theory involved with it period...


The fact that one transvestic fetishist was "treated" (not cured) with some particular drug does not offer any useful support for Autogynephilia. I fit Blanchard's diagnostic criteria (which many many TS fit), but my "condition" was not even slightly cured by taking cyproterone -- the main other use of which is as the "chemical castration" drug for sexual offenders (I think the drug you mentioned was the alternative drug for that purpose.) [Edit: Ah, possibly not. But it [I]is used to treat obsessive compulsive disorder.)

Please do not misunderstand that treatment as the main source ..This was an example to answer other nay sayers that science lost interest..The main focus should be on treatment or how to treat it..If you would like to know more about treatments and the progress of treatment follow this link..http://www.searchmedica.com/search.html?q=Transvestic+fetishism&cq=s%3Acpr%5C.C9Q2J&c=ps&ss=defLink&p=Funnelback&ds=21

[Asche]

I just happen to find real science fascinating
Actual science, yes. Not quack "science," which is what this sounds like just from what you've written. The fact that it's popular on the net does not speak in its favor.


I don't like hearing we are stuck with what we were dealt and if there was a slight chance for a cure,treatment or advancements in either ..I would love to know about it wouldn't you ?
Even assuming I thought I was the one who needed curing, why would I subject myself to the very substantial risks of serious harm for the "slight chance for a cure"? The very idea reminds me of "gay conversion therapy," which has done so much harm (and had so little "success") they're trying to outlaw it in some states.

I'm hearing a lot of self-hatred here.

[Lucy_Bella]

Actual science, yes. Not quack "science," which is what this sounds like just from what you've written. The fact that it's popular on the net does not speak in its favor.

Now now.. Why would you say that? How do you know this? The American Psychiatric Association Quacks? hmmmm.. Okay I may live my life as a crossdresser and it sorta makes me a professional in my field of why I dress...Keep in mind it makes you one too right and our opinions of why tho are so far apart..



Even assuming I thought I was the one who needed curing, why would I subject myself to the very substantial risks of serious harm for the "slight chance for a cure"? The very idea reminds me of "gay conversion therapy," which has done so much harm (and had so little "success") they're trying to outlaw it in some states.
That does seem to be the favored opinion of this disorder verses those under the TG umbrella many do not seek help because they are happy with having it and it in most cases cause no harm and sexual preference has nothing to do with any of this, why compare?


I'm hearing a lot of self-hatred here.
I'm not placing misleading thoughts about what you post why are you diagnosing me for?

[Nicole Erin]

Doesn't matter what someone wants to call something. I mean are labels really that important?


I think some people here are labelistic fetishists.


I certainly am. I am still in the closet though. I only hope one day I can live full time as a trans-lableler.

[Taylor Ray]

the definition of diagnosis:

the process of determining by examination the nature and circumstances of a diseased condition.

the entire argument is based upon the premise that cross dressing is a diseased condition.

the entire argument and subsequent analysis is erroneous

[MarinaKirax]

I don't generally believe that labels are useful because they group people into artificial categories - BUT, what I have been amazed by, since I joined the forum, is the spectrum of 'crossdressers' here at crossdressers.com.

When I originally thought about my dressing, when I was mature enough to have some perspective, was just that the term 'crossdresser', or 'transvestite' fit me.(thank you Rocky Horror, and how did you know I love basques and garters?) But then, I did come across transvestic fetishism, and I wondered if that fit me better. I am aroused by dressing, and often ofter dressing, there is a (ahem) consummation of sorts. That made me think it was all about the clothing. Often I felt shame after dressing - certainly the desire to present as female utterly disappeared, for a short time. I felt silly. That didn't sound like someone who wanted to become a woman. I often thought how unhappy I'd be if I actually transitioned. But also disturbed by how attracted and blinded I could be by the idea......(but I dont want to transition).

So I began to think my attraction was to the clothes - but though I love my stilettos, the shoes don't make me aroused - its the vision of me wearing them that is arousing. Back to thinking about myself as a tranny, or (possibly) am I part of the transgendered 'quilt'? I don't want to be a woman, though - not really - I want to have long nails, high heels, long hair, makeup, breasts (sometimes), and wear lingerie, skirts, and appear as an attractive female. But I dont want to have periods, yeast infections or grow old as a woman. I dont want a husband, or a male lover.

Then I came across the term 'autogynephilia' and it clicked. I'm not fetishistic about the clothes as objects, and I don't want to transition. I am in love with the idea of myself as female, but the idea only. I love to put on the visage, stand in front of the mirror, and turn myself on. Sometimes the image I'm inlove with is me walking down the street and blending in as female, and so passing becomes important. I dont care about the labels, because so many of us here have so many different reasons they dress. I've tried to be honest about mine, and I'm interested in the exact causes of why I behave this way. Not because its wrong, but because it is undeniably unusual, and risky for me. Its also intrinsically illogical that I can be consumed by the pink fog and take terrible risks to dress, (in terms of being found out by those other than my wife) but after I dress, I feel ashamed, and I cant sometimes get the clothes off fast enough. So go figure. I'm the way I am, and I'm a happy person, gals, but I don't understand myself, so I'm interested in this.

[ReineD]

Lucy, this is a no-brainer. A person will know they are a transvestic fetishist if they need to get out of the clothes after release. They dress strictly for the thrills and release.

There is no dispute, everyone agrees that pure, sexual fetichists don't fall under the TG umbrella. As you say, a fetish is a fetish is a fetish, whether it is latex, leather, panties, stilettos, fuzzy sweaters, or sexy clothes, boobs, and a wig.

As a side note, the people at the other end of the spectrum who also do not fall under the TG umbrella are the transitioned TSs, since they are women now and no longer trans-anything except for their chromosomes. So, this leaves everyone else under the TG umbrella, no matter what they call themselves.

Getting back to the crossdressers, I have no idea what proportion of the total are fetishists. BUT, if you google "crossdresser dating porn sex", there will be about 19 million results centered around sexual websites. If you google "crossdresser support forum", the first few pages are support forums (many of the links are different pages of the same sites), followed by other forums where the girlfriends say, "Help, my bf is a CDer", and then start the sexual sites. So my guess is that the majority of men who enjoy wearing one or several items of women's clothing are fetishists and I agree, they do not have gender issues.

HOWEVER … most of the people who hang out here and in other support forums (you included perhaps?) are here for deeper reasons than sex. Don't you think? They have questions about the CDing. They wonder how to label themselves. They want to know how to get their wives to support them or how to find girlfriends who will accept them (surely this must mean it is more than sex to them?). They like to talk to other CDers and make friends with like-minded people. They like to write about the CDing. They like to fantasize about being their particular brand of ideal woman. They like to talk fashion, makeup, clothes. They like to support each other's looks in the Gallery. The crossdressing brings them comfort. It brings them peace. It brings them joy. They didn't start out that way, they did start out with sexual release but what was once sexual fun has been rewired into a need to express the softer side of femininity, even if sexual release is involved just occasionally. Most of these members already go out presenting fully as women, or if they don't, it is because their wives disagree or these CDers feel as if they would never pass.

So would you say that most members here are pure transvestic fetishists?

Fundamentally, if anyone engages in non-sexual cross-gender expression, wouldn't you say that through their actions they are crossing (trans) at least one aspect of gender and this is the gender expression?

[Badtranny]

Well I don't recall if Lucy and I have ever had a go, but I think I'm feelin' her on this one.

I've noticed a few things in my time on this forum. One of the things is there seems to be an inverse relationship with the people who post the most about how fem they are and the number of pics they put up. Another is the people that seem to have the strongest opinions about transgender people haven't actually met very many.

In regard to "TS" women who are self identified lesbians; Some are wonderful people but I've met some who straight up creep me out. I have NEVER met a TS girl who likes men that I thought was creepy, but I have met several who were all very vocal about being lesbians, and if I closed my eyes they were indistinguishable from dirty old men.

I need to clarify that not every "trans lesbian" is creepy. Some are delightful and deserve everything great that life has to offer, but too many are bad seeds that need to do some serious self examination.

PS, if you're a Facebook friend I'm not talking about you. ;-)

[ReineD]

Autogynephelia is a postulate, a conjecture at best. There is no evidence for it and so it does not yet rise to the level of a hypothesis. To become a theory it would have to have evidence, and would have to pass all known tests as of the time it was formed; there are those who go further and say that if it does not offer testable predictions then it should not be considered a theory ("String Theory" falls into that category at present, whereas "The Standard Model" makes some predictions that scientists are hoping are [I]not[I] true!)

That's because no one has surveyed the members here! How often have we read posts from CDers who say that AGP describes them, and that imagining themselves as women proves to be the most intense sexual release of all? And then we get the older folks who say that it is no longer sexual for them. Assuming that people of all ages and phases post here, don't you think it is logical that younger CDers for whom it is intensely sexual, migrate away from this and in time as their libido diminishes naturally with age, what's left is an intensely satisfying, non-sexual expression of femininity?

Did anyone ever say that AGP remains static and it doesn't morph into something else?

[TinaMc]

It's a bit like Eddie Izzard's comments on weirdo transvestites vs executive transvestites.

[Lucy_Bella]

Lucy, this is a no-brainer. A person will know they are a transvestic fetishist if they need to get out of the clothes after release. They dress strictly for the thrills and release. True Reine but as we get older and the "release" becomes a lesser part of the dressing so the dressing it's self becomes the erotic part of the experience.. Yes it starts by getting ones "Jollies" at first and in the earlier stages of a persons life who cded..But as a person ages this to grows from a 3-5 minute phase to a ???phase .. People shouldn't mistake how long the erotic part of the experience can last I.E. Erotic sexual denial, also known as orgasm denial.. Fetish dressers can under dress and be turned on by the experience all day everyday there really is no limit to how many times but there is some limit to how long and that varies to individually ..


HOWEVER … most of the people who hang out here and in other support forums (you included perhaps?) are here for deeper reasons than sex. Don't you think?

When I came here I didn't know why I cded being in a relationship with a disapproving wife ( still stuck in the first phases of dressing) .After separating and soon a divorce, I had a drive to further my dressing ..I wanted to find out why and learn more ( because I never could while I was in my marriage) . Yes my drive ( unlike most here) was to label myself and the degree of why I dress ?What is causing me to do this? Is this something I am stuck with and will I have to adjust my life around it? Can it or will it get out of control? I do not like the dressing after.I feel quilt and I find shame in doing it.. So I am here to learn.


So would you say that most members here are pure transvestic fetishists?

It's hard to say but from allot of the post I've read on here I will say people tend to have the signs of being one ( too hot to wear certain clothing or dressed to the nines or not at all).. These are tendencies of fetish dressers...But it could also be that they just like to wear certain things?:eek: I also see that people on here are comfortable with just expressing being/feeling feminine and it doesn't matter what they wear ( the key part "it doesn't matter what they wear" to feel feminine.... In other words they do not need the clothing to feel feminine ).. I also see when people post they reference to a" real GG" and maybe for the sake of argument or for that matter not having one they use that phrase .. But with respect of those being a GID person ( just as everyone likes to be called she) wouldn't you present as a "real GG" as well without needing to compare?( I understand it could be for clarity reasons).. I think it goes much deeper than people know and being a fetish dresser does or can grow into different realms of femininity as the feminine part becomes erotic ... I don't think people are aware of this because most really do not care or they do not want to know..


Fundamentally, if anyone engages in non-sexual cross-gender expression, wouldn't you say that through their actions they are crossing (trans) at least one aspect of gender and this is the gender expression?
With out a doubt and that's where the difference's lay.. "Gender Expression" ..You have feelings to be that of the opposite sex but for some people not all the time and you have found balance with the natural sex that you was born as ( GID).. Maybe if you were to look at fetish dressing in this way.. You have fetish dressers ( early stages of dressing ) certain items of female clothing as a start that you are aroused by.. Erotic dressers ( later stages of dressing) still has the same desires for certain items of female clothing and the material..( Keep in mind these are fetishes and it is important to know that when I say certain Items I mean what material the Item is made of ,what cut even color ..So it just can't be as an example "any pair of panties" it has to meet the criteria in order for the attraction to be effective)

But later stages have in time added more to the dressing to enhance the experience ( not all fetish dressers go this far for many reasons like married ,family etc..) .. We have seen people like this outside of cross-dressing people who actually have deformed their own bodies to look like Lizards or cats ( I just used this as an example I am not in anyway saying people do these things from sexual drives) Exotic dressers are more so in love with the object they see and feel and not so much with who they are..In other words attractions are not only visual they are or can include other senses like touch or feel so in an erotic stage you can say "I like the feeling of feminine" that's a sense ( feeling to feel) of the attraction ..You do not as much present but you do emulate.. Verses a GID stage "I like feeling feminine" that is only a expression you like expressing your feelings ( your inner self ego maybe) to be/feel feminine there is no attraction to that feeling .. GID is expressing who you are..



the definition of diagnosis:

the process of determining by examination the nature and circumstances of a diseased condition.

the entire argument is based upon the premise that cross dressing is a diseased condition.

the entire argument and subsequent analysis is erroneous

And I accept the diagnosis..

Imagine ( not suggesting this fits you ) you are a Trans Sexual...You life has been in shambles and filled with depression because your body does not fit your gender..Simple solution right? Transition ( SRS) right? Not really true it doesn't happen that way or that easy.. With insurance companies and legal identity changes among countless other obstacles in the way of your depression and transitioning to freedom, it's not that easy..

Did you know that Trans Sexuals only exist after transitioning and prior to that they are considered as part of the Trans Gender Umbrella? So lets make it harder for them transition by throwing in a newer disorder and one that is considered by professionals as a "Mental Disorder" under this TG umbrella.. Your depression is not cause by your "mental disorder" as a T.G. it is caused by your "Gender Disorder" and every level of the T.G. umbrella suffers from some degree of depression through gender identity.. It's just not as extreme or not enough for many to not transition .. ( please don't make me go through the depression levels if you are in denial any exist)..

This is why I see it important to remove the being of a" transvestic fetishists" from the T.G. umbrella it doesn't fit! Lets just say you are a T.G. looking to get SRS done.. You just can not live another day being the sex you was born as.. You have to seek professional help, you just can't call your insurance company and say "Okay I am ready lets get it done" ..No you have to see a Psychologist that specializes in that field for this to happen.. What happens when the Psychologist for what ever reason diagnoses you with having transvestic fetishists instead of extreme G.I.D.? Your treatment will change from having a gender disorder to having a mental disorder .. You will not receive SRS and good luck getting the diagnostics reversed you will need to follow up on the treatment that directs you to the diagnostics..

[NicoleScott]

This is why I see it important to remove the being of a" transvestic fetishists" from the T.G. umbrella it doesn't fit!

You walk into a club and see several CDers sitting around a table, fully transformed and looking good. One of them gets aroused by crossdressing, but you don't know that because he's not masturbating under the table. He keeps his sexual activities private. They all enjoy the company and the conversation, and none of them has crossdressing-related issues that disrupt their normal life's activities, and have no need for counseling/therapy.

Since the pleasure dresser is crossdressed as the others are, why is it important to remove him from under the TG umbrella, except as an exercise in labeling?

[Lucy_Bella]

You walk into a club and see several CDers sitting around a table, fully transformed and looking good. One of them gets aroused by crossdressing, but you don't know that because he's not masturbating under the table. He keeps his sexual activities private. They all enjoy the company and the conversation, and none of them has crossdressing-related issues that disrupt their normal life's activities, and have no need for counseling/therapy.

Since the pleasure dresser is crossdressed as the others are, why is it important to remove him from under the TG umbrella, except as an exercise in labeling?
I thought I have explained that ..Most fetish dressers do not even go out for one dressed fully in femme ..2. You may see erotic dressers out and about and most people including fetish dressers keep their sexual activities private.. 3. It has zero reasons for co existing with other dressers and has every reason to do with the disorder it's self "mental" "gender".. I would hope that dressers of all types can fit under the terms of the umbrella "Cross-Dressers"..T.G.s and T.F.s.. I hung out at a gay bar with friends that happen to be gay while dressed..Does that make me gay? Should I join the gay umbrella( if there is one)?

Look at the bottom of post 42 there is a good example..

But your point brings up a good analogy.. A short time back a thread came out on the main forum about who would want to meet with fellow Cross-Dressers? It caught my attention because I have met with some before and I surprised myself with my own reactions to meeting them.. I know and un understand my reactions better now but at the time I didn't.. I was uncomfortable being around them and I couldn't understand why.. Now it could have been just my personality but I really don't think it was.. Looking back I now think it was because of the differences of why we dress.. They enjoy being a lady and presented as such.. I seen it at a bunch of guys who not only dressed as women but acting like them as well.. Don't get me wrong I am not a hateful person but we just didn't have anything in common other than we dressed like women.. I never went out since then and I don't think I ever will again or will never go out to meet-up as group again anyways..

[melanie206]

Read more: http://www.care2.com/causes/being-transgender-will-no-longer-be-classified-as-a-disorder.html#ixzz2WbibkKJ4 under their umbrella.. Why would you have a disorder

I haven't read every message posted on this thread but suggest people read the the above linked article that Lucy provides. We are all tired of labels but what the APA decides is an illness or not can have serious implications in the real world.

[Angela Campbell]

Did you know that Trans Sexuals only exist after transitioning and prior to that they are considered as part of the Trans Gender Umbrella?..

This is not true. According to WPATH and the SOC the diagnosis of transsexual is made prior to any HRT or surgeries. If you are a true transsexual you are from birth, through GRS and until death.

[Lucy_Bella]

This is not true. According to WPATH and the SOC the diagnosis of transsexual is made prior to any HRT or surgeries. If you are a true transsexual you are from birth, through GRS and until death.

In clinical terms no it's not because you are in what they call " transitioning " thank you for the correction .But in medical terms as I have read and some are conflicting say that you are not a full T.S. until you have transitioned.. There are various stages of "transitioning" like living your life as the sex you are transitioning to for an extended amount of time ( I believe but not sure it's a year) but all stages have T.S. tied to them..That doesn't mean they are medically and legally considered a Trans Sexual ..

Trans = Crossed and Sexual meaning "sex assigned at birth" So a full T.S. can technically be considered out from under the T.G. umbrella but the argument or the on going conflict for people is the "transitioning stages" is that they do not want to be considered T.G. . Dr.s think they may have proof that T.S. ( or people who are more likely to become T.S.) can be diagnosed at ages before "puberty" which is very important but still not solid enough to set in stone yet progress has been made tho.. So people who may become T.S. are still considered under the T.G. umbrella .. These are only things I have read as I was searching for my own "Label" ..This doesn't in anyway make me an expert or have any expert knowledge of T.S.'s or what they go through ..

[Krystalina]

My two cents...I personally hate labels. I live in a mundane world where everyone has to like the same things, like if you are a man, you have to like sports, like and have sex with women before you are 20, stupid stuff like that. This place, this forum, is awesome...a place where I don't have to fit in some narrow, tiny box. Why complicate an already outsider status?

Whether one is a fetishist or "pure" transgendered, at the end of the day, we have yet to be fully embraced by mainstream society...and honestly? Mainstream society is overrated, anyhow...I say that 99% of drug and violence problems come from people trying to fit under labels and repressing themselves...repressed homosexuals, repressed crossdressers, repressed transgendered...

I see myself as an individual...no label is worthy of me.

*Picks up soapbox and goes home*

[docrobbysherry]

Lucy, while I tend to agree with much of what u have posted, I believe both u and the clinical studies haven't gone on long enuff. In my personal experience, I've been traveling down a constantly evolving road. At first, I was sure I wanted to become a female. But, that went away after some years. Now, I consider myself a TF and AGP seems to describe my condition. As, I only dress all the way as that is what excites me. Have never felt like I have a fem side. Aa a bonus, never thot about trying on ladies things until I was 50! Yet despite my age, my CD journey has never been static. So, I expect there to be much more flux in younger trans and dressers.

First: I was as u accurately described, a TF. For nearly 10 years I dressed completely alone in private. Every time, I got turned on, finished, and couldn't get the clothes and fem gear off fast enuff.

Next: After 10 years of this, I began wondering if there were others like me? And, came out here and on other CD sites. I found amazing folks in the CD/Trans arena!

3rd step: After chatting with so many interesting folks here, I was ready to meet other dressers. After refusing to meet a few local CDs that offered. I was worried about their motives. Even tho they wanted to meet in crowded venues in drab. So, I attended an SCC about 5 years ago. Meeting other dressers and going out dressed for the first time. Nearly a week of dressing and not one thot of dressed sex entered my mind!

And, that dichotomy of dressing continues for me. As I continue to be aroused at the end of practically every private dressing session. And, I'm now going out fairly often with other dressers. Which does nothing for me sexually. And, going out dressed is not about feeling fem, an expression of who I am, or an adreneline rush for me. I find it simply fun at best, stressful at worst! Mostly, it's becoming routine. I only do it to be with other dressers.

It is my opinion that others in our community r actually constantly in flux also. Except the very many who cannot explore their dressing, fem, or trans sides fully because of outside pressures that restrict them. If we were all allowed to freely travel our own CD/trans roads, I think you'd see we are mostly a hodgepodge of varying urges and motivations that r in fact all over the psychological and statistical map!

[Alexis.j]

Doc; very well stated. We all get pre-categorised before we can even figure out what exactly we are...

[NicoleScott]

It may be important for the APA to throw the TF's out from under the TG umbrella (treatment, insurance...just guessing, I don't know), but why it's important to drive the point home here is baffling to me. I doubt that there are many (if any) purely transvestic fetishists here on the forum.....emphasis on purely.....those whose wearing is only about wearing it, getting off, and then getting it off. And doing it so frequently that it disrupts a normal life. This forum has little to support that (not a criticism, just the opposite). But there are lots of us here that get aroused by dressing, but as Sherry indicated, that doesn't mean that all CDing activity is sexual. It is possible for us to enjoy expressing a femme side occasionally and have a sexual fetish as well. They are not mutually exclusive, and so we won't fit into just one box. It seems that the more the discussion goes on, the more it is about labels (and I LIKE labels because they're useful!)...such as what defines a transitioned TS (a topic better suited for another forum), or whether TF's belong under the TG umbrella.

[Lucy_Bella]

It may be important for the APA to throw the TF's out from under the TG umbrella (treatment, insurance...just guessing, I don't know), but why it's important to drive the point home here is baffling to me. I doubt that there are many (if any) purely transvestic fetishists here on the forum.....emphasis on purely.....those whose wearing is only about wearing it, getting off, and then getting it off. And doing it so frequently that it disrupts a normal life. This forum has little to support that (not a criticism, just the opposite). But there are lots of us here that get aroused by dressing, but as Sherry indicated, that doesn't mean that all CDing activity is sexual. It is possible for us to enjoy expressing a femme side occasionally and have a sexual fetish as well. They are not mutually exclusive, and so we won't fit into just one box. It seems that the more the discussion goes on, the more it is about labels (and I LIKE labels because they're useful!)...such as what defines a transitioned TS (a topic better suited for another forum), or whether TF's belong under the TG umbrella.

Nicole,

This is what it say's for the intro of this particular "FORUM" ....

"Male to Female Crossdressing(102 Viewing)
This section is for those interested in discussing all areas of male to female crossdressing.
Moderators - Shelly Preston, Eryn and Lorileah"

Notice it say's " all areas of male to female cross-dressing" Where else was I suppose to post this? Also it seems as if you are policing why I even brought this up as I already made it clear from my" intro" that it was for a "discussion"..And as for what Sherry said.. Great !! I am glad that this thread might have worked for "some people" to get a better understanding of them selves now ,even tho it's years later ...better than never .. All I can say about this thread is for those of you who question and are angered ( for what ever reason) as to why I posted this.. The best way to get a thread to go away is to not feed it. Soon it will get buried behind the front page and forgotten .. If you are so anti about the subject why feed it?

[CherylFlint]

“Mirror, mirror, on the wall”.
And that about sums it up, at least for me.
I know who and what I am dressed or not, but THEY don’t know, so I wear a dress to let them know.
When I’m dressed and in an adult video store, the message is fairly clear.
But I must say, wearing the “appropriate” attire makes for a more enjoyable performance, I’m sure.
I’d rather be dressed than not. It has nothing to do with sex for sex’s sake, but it has everything to do with who, and what, I am, or should’ve been.
Think of it as on a perpetual birth control pill, without the cramps. Lucky is how I look at it.
Back to the mirror, I like what I see and I hope guys feel the same.

[ReineD]

You walk into a club and see several CDers sitting around a table, fully transformed and looking good. One of them gets aroused by crossdressing, but you don't know that because he's not masturbating under the table. He keeps his sexual activities private.

Then technically, Nicole, I don't think you can say that this person is strictly a transvestic fetishists. He enjoys dressing for other reasons than sex, since she is enjoying an outing with friends, and interacting with others while she is presenting as a woman. The CDing for her is more than dress/release/take-the-clothes-off. :p

Just because many CDers still enjoy being sexual in private, does not mean they are TF. Someone who is TF and nothing else, doesn't enjoy spending time as a woman if it doesn't involve sexual release. Also, things evolve. Early on it may be strictly transvestic fetichism for someone, then it migrates to mostly TF interspersed with some dressing sessions that don't culminate in orgasm (maybe a TG support group), and over time, as age sets in and libido naturally ebbs, it settles into mostly non-sexual with occasional sexual releases. In general. Don't you think?

[NicoleScott]

Yes, Reine, I agree with everything you said. I was making the point that having a sexual aspect to CDing doesn't make you a TF. And, I doubt that there are many (if any) true TF's here. If psychological experts want to remove TF's from the TG group, OK with me. But doesn't it all (here we go again) depend on what is considered TG? Here on the forum, some think TG means having some level of internal feminine identity and crossdresses to express that identity, while others adhere to the broad definition which puts crossdressers under the umbrella (since they wear women's clothes thus crossing traditional gender norms).

Lucy_Bella, I'm not angry and I'm not the forum police. I didn't say TS issues aren't allowed here, I said TS issues are better suited to that forum.

[ReineD]

I was making the point that having a sexual aspect to CDing doesn't make you a TF.

Exactly! :) I seriously doubt that no one on this site ever experiences any release when dressed.


And, I doubt that there are many (if any) true TF's here.

I brought that up earlier when mentioning the sheer amounts of dating/porn/fantasy CD sites out there. I tend to think that the vast majority of men who like to put on one or several items of clothing do it strictly for fetish and the stuff comes off as soon as they're done. Obviously these men would not be members here. And who knows? Maybe the reason we have so many members who have joined, compared to active members, is because the fetish CDers decided after joining that this forum wasn't for them. I agree with you though, that true TFs are on the rare side here, if there are any. It wouldn't be fun for them because they wouldn't have anything to talk about other than sexual fantasies.

[Lucy_Bella]

Exactly! :) I seriously doubt that no one on this site ever experiences any release when dressed.



I tend to think that the vast majority of men who like to put on one or several items of clothing do it strictly for fetish and the stuff comes off as soon as they're done. Obviously these men would not be members here. And who knows? Maybe the reason we have so many members who have joined, compared to active members, is because the fetish CDers decided after joining that this forum wasn't for them. I agree with you though, that true TFs are on the rare side here, if there are any. It wouldn't be fun for them because they wouldn't have anything to talk about other than sexual fantasies.

Reine,
I think you are right on to what a Fetish cder is ( and here it comes) except......
Take the "release" part and broaden it.. Sexual Fetishes ( can/may/usually) start from the "release" time ( puberty for most ) but that isn't the end of the "fetish" it becomes a "mental issue".. I use myself as an example my dressing has to fit my fetish ( style of certain clothing,material it's made from and color) or it just doesn't happen..I do not bother..

Starting this fetish was long before the internet and in time has become embedded into me ..Finding this site and trying to learn more about myself ( because I was not aware I had a fetish issue until recently) is why I am here and you are correct I can not related to just about every thread they have here..So in time I will fade away again unless I can get more "like minded" threads such as this one going on now..

Yes that makes me some sorta freak .. Here anyways :heehee: I never knew why before ( Guess I am just stupid up there sometimes) but it all makes sense to me now..




Lucy_Bella, I'm not angry and I'm not the forum police. I didn't say TS issues aren't allowed here, I said TS issues are better suited to that forum.

Nicole, I know you are not angry and this does become a problem when a small percentage ( to this page) of people like me invade this page.. You have every right to defend, if you will, your turf.. All I wanted to do was have an open discussion maybe we can all learn from each other.. No hard feelings here I think you do very well at explaining yourself and I love getting the input and knowledge you offer to me and other folks at this site..

[docrobbysherry]

Reine,
I think you are right on to what a Fetish cder is ( and here it comes) except......
Take the "release" part and broaden it.. Sexual Fetishes ( can/may/usually) start from the "release" time ( puberty for most ) but that isn't the end of the "fetish" it becomes a "mental issue".. I use myself as an example my dressing has to fit my fetish ( style of certain clothing,material it's made from and color) or it just doesn't happen..I do not bother..

Starting this fetish was long before the internet and in time has become embedded into me .------------
Yes that makes me some sorta freak ..--------------------------------


I don't think your "situation" is as rare or freaky as u may think, Lucy. I'm kind of an odd duck here, too. Yet I've received many PMs over the years from supporters on both sides of the CD/TS fence. And, from others who have similar dressing paraphilia or fetishes, for lack of better words!

[NicoleScott]

Lucy_Bella, I agree with Sherry, you are not some sorta freak. There seems to be an endless list of "things" that have the power to arouse. Pantyhose fetishes are pretty common, but I once chatted online with a guy who had a fetish for bare legs. I have heard (here on the forum) from a few others with particular attractions to fabric materials and colors. I have always had a curiosity as to when and how fetishes happen. I'm not distressed by mine, and prefer to think of them as "enhancements" rather than "disorders".

[mary something]

In regard to "TS" women who are self identified lesbians; Some are wonderful people but I've met some who straight up creep me out. I have NEVER met a TS girl who likes men that I thought was creepy, but I have met several who were all very vocal about being lesbians, and if I closed my eyes they were indistinguishable from dirty old men.


I've noticed this too. Watch this video and you'll see where I think this misconception comes from

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/05/27/real-lesbians-react-to-lesbian-porn-davey-wavey_n_3342071.html


and as far as fetishes go, technically it's not a fetish if it's an arousal enhancer. Fetishes are defined by the inability to orgasm or enjoy sexual activity WITHOUT the object, not by the fact that it makes the activity more enjoyable. I know a LOT of girls who wouldn't typically have sex unless they've shaved their arm pits and legs and are looking good, but that doesn't make this a fetish for them because they are capable of having an orgasm still.

[Lucy_Bella]

I don't think your "situation" is as rare or freaky as u may think, Lucy. I'm kind of an odd duck here, too.

Thanks Doc, we have been here for just about the same amount of time that I can recall from another post.. I knew something was wrong ,mostly from reading all of the average threads on this site.. So just being honest here, I tried to fit in because I actually thought I was T.G... ( not that there is any thing wrong with that)..

I really did my best trying to be a girl, it just wasn't fitting and deep down before I started I knew this.. I just didn't know why, why do I have this urges to dress? I never threw in the thought of a fetish seriously before ( though has past my mind before)..

So I did some deep internet searching and allot of what I have learned has also came from what I have learned from here..Reading about how other people express their dressing and knowing that's not how I expressed mine was enough for me to find out why.. So going off of what I did know and finding this information out that I didn't know inspired me to think..I wonder if anyone else would like to know instead of having to go through countless hours of searching..I didn't mean to offend anyone that wasn't my goal at all..

Thanks Doc appreciate the input..

[Matia]

Maybe and if so ..Be it.. But I am also a "realist"

I just happen to find real science fascinating I don't like hearing we are stuck with what we were dealt and if there was a slight chance for a cure,treatment or advancements in either ..I would love to know about it wouldn't you ? ..We don't have to settle ..

real science ? when it comes to sociology/sexuology etc and other similar sciences I would question the word "real"

- personally I found the biggest comfort in seeing myself as a bigender person, I am happy with both my feminine and masculine sides, but to be honest, my sexuality opens mainly in my feminine side, as a man i am almost a-sexual. I think that transevestite fetishism label is too narrow, I think that it's little offensive, and when it comes to these things, it can be hardly measured, even if i try to be as honest to myself as possible to describe how i feel, or if i try to describe what my "condition" is, i find out that in time it's deeper than i originally thought

in perfect world, i would be happiest if i could freely switch bodies and be a man or a woman at will, and it doesn't have to be sexual, i would like to be in position when world just sees me as a girl and be left alone

[Trishpdxcd2]

Well just goes to show we are all different. For me it certainly started out as a fetish of sorts and there is still a strong sexual component but it has morphed into more of a pure pleasure when I get to enjoy my feminine side. Though there is something vaguely sexual about it, I rarely get off when dressed.

[Lucy_Bella]

I've noticed this too. Watch this video and you'll see where I think this misconception comes from

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/05/27/real-lesbians-react-to-lesbian-porn-davey-wavey_n_3342071.html


and as far as fetishes go, technically it's not a fetish if it's an arousal enhancer. Fetishes are defined by the inability to orgasm or enjoy sexual activity WITHOUT the object, not by the fact that it makes the activity more enjoyable. I know a LOT of girls who wouldn't typically have sex unless they've shaved their arms and legs and are looking good, but that doesn't make this a fetish for them because they are capable of having an orgasm still.

From websters..c : an object or bodily part whose real or fantasied presence is psychologically necessary for sexual gratification and that is an object of fixation to the extent that it may interfere with complete sexual expression

[mary something]

I think we're agreeing Lucy. That's why I used the term arousal enhancer instead of fetish. If someone is capable of achieving orgasm while naked for example then they do not have a fetish for crossdressing, it just makes it better in some way.

[Lucy_Bella]

I think we're agreeing Lucy. That's why I used the term arousal enhancer instead of fetish. If someone is capable of achieving orgasm while naked for example then they do not have a fetish for crossdressing, it just makes it better in some way.

I think we are agreeing to disagree here is what the meaning states "real" or fantasied and yes they actually do have a fetish for cding on record today at the APA ..Most here will not agree and for good reasons you are not into x-dressing for the fetish purpose..I am curious have you read any of the older post that have lead us up to this point? I do appreciate your input and I do understand where you are coming from :) thanks..

[NicoleScott]

Other sources say "may become necessary" rather than "is necessary". The way I see it is that if an object causes arousal, it's a fetish, but if arousal isn't possible without the object, it's an extreme fetish, especially if it disrupts a person's normal life.
I wonder when, since the APA regards TF as a disorder, we will hear about claims of disability caused by the disorder. "I can't function normally at work because all I can think about is wearing ___________." I have read about people who do the fetish "activity" a dozen times a day or more. That seems pretty disruptive to a normal life.

[Lucy_Bella]

I wonder when, since the APA regards TF as a disorder, we will hear about claims of disability caused by the disorder. "I can't function normally at work because all I can think about is wearing ___________." I have read about people who do the fetish "activity" a dozen times a day or more. That seems pretty disruptive to a normal life.
Nicole, imagine the energy it takes for a dozen times a day:eek:

I've also read that the APA will not diagnose you with having T.F. unless it does turn into a disorder like interfering with daily life with work ,marriages, being unsocial /lonely etc.. The way they look at it is unless it disrupts your life in a semi major or major way it's , harmless activity.. They do not want to take something they consider harmless and make it worse because it can cause depression sometimes serious when the fetish dressing stops..

[NicoleScott]

Nicole, imagine the energy it takes for a dozen times a day:eek:

Yeah, they must REALLY like wearing___________.

[Ressie]

If I'm not a transvestic festishist I'm not too far from it. I'm also a slow reader so I haven't read every post in this thread.

Yes I always change out of my women's clothes after an orgasm.
No, I don't need female clothing to achieve orgasm.

The first time I heard of men crossdressing because it relaxes them I didn't understand it.:eek: It's always made me nervous because of the fear of getting caught. Getting caught masturbating while crossdressed would be very stressful. :strugglin

Also let me repeat that when I was 17 I really felt that I should have been born a GG. :battingeyelashes: I wanted to be girl, but not to the point that I felt I was born in the wrong body. :confused: And the need to fit in as a male seemed more important. But I always got a thrill out of women's clothing. :happy:

[Lucy_Bella]

Wikipedia explaind how the APA diagnose's T.F.....


Transvestic fetishism refers specifically to cross-dressing; sexual arousal in response to individual garments is fetishism.[2] A person who is diagnosed with Gender Identity Disorder should not receive a diagnosis of Tranvestic Fetishism,[2] although sometimes those with this diagnosis do go on to develop gender dysphoria, and then meet the criteria for a diagnosis of Gender Identity Disorder.[2] Most men who have transvestic fetishism do not have a problem with their assigned sex.
Some male transvestic fetishists collect women's clothing, e.g. nightgowns, babydolls, bridal gowns, slips, brassieres, and other types of nightwear, lingerie, stockings, pantyhose, shoes, and boots, items of a distinct feminine look and feel. They may dress in these feminine garments and take photographs of themselves while living out their fantasies. According to the DSM-IV, this fetishism has been described only in heterosexual men.
There are two key criteria before a psychiatric diagnosis of "transvestic fetishism" is made:[2]
Recurrent, intense sexually arousing fantasies, urges, or behaviour, involving cross-dressing.
This causes clinically significant distress or impairment, whether socially, at work, or elsewhere.
Thus, transvestic fetishism is not diagnosed unless it causes significant problems for the person concerned.

[ReluctantDebutant]

I believe the root cause of my cross-dressing is Autogynephilia. If I was asked why I cross-dress about 5 or 10 years ago the idea that it was some sort of fetish would not have crossed my mind. I would've said "I just liked it", "it makes me feel happy", or"it relieves stress". I felt cross-dressing was something special that exhilarated me that made me feel good. To say that it was for sexual purposes would've been out of the question. I thought of myself as a decent person whose motivations for doing things were pure and honorable and not because of some lowly base indecent reasons such as mere sexual pleasure. No I was cross-dressing to express the more sensitive, peaceful side of myself. But despite me "knowing" this is what it was for us to couldn't help but wonder why I did it. So I kept searching.

I came across the term Autogynephilia on the web along with Blanchard's theory. Though I wasn't convinced of everything he had to say basic premise of his theory opened my mind. And for the first time in my cross-dressing life the answers to the question why became so apparent to me. I could not fool myself anymore and a good or pleasurable feelings I had while dressing were from sexual arousal. I may never have done any sexual acts while enfeme I couldn't deny the intense exhilaration I got from the clothes. The truth had always been there I don't know whether it was willful blindness or naïveté that kept me from seeing it. The revelation of Autogynephilia has helping out a lot in dealing with my cross-dressing. I find knowing the why of it all immensely helpful I only wish I had learned of this when I was lot younger.

[LilSissyStevie]

Lucy, you seem to put a lot of stock in the APA and their DSM. So this interview (http://motherboard.vice.com/blog/heres-how-the-guy-who-wrote-the-manual-on-sex-talks-about-sex) with Dr. Blanchard should be revealing. What it reveals to me is 1) he is an ultra-reactionary ideologue with regards to sex and gender. He believes that the only legitimate reason for sexual activity is procreation - anything else is a fetish. Blanchard is the master at ginning up new paraphilias (fetishes). Even my Southern Baptists kin don't believe that crap anymore. He believes that homosexuality is a paraphilia. 2) he's unprincipled. Note that he proposed autoandrophilia for inclusion to the DSM-5 when he doesn't even believe it exists - probably because he doesn't believe women have true sexual feelings. He just wanted to make sure that "feminists" didn't get on his back.

This comes from a guy that believes there are two types of transsexuals: homosexual men that transition in order to trick straight men in to having sex with them and non-homosexual men that transition in order to have sex with themselves. And if they dispute this, the're lying.

This isn't science, it's ideology. The whole of the DSM is ideology. If people experience "clinically significant distress or impairment, whether socially, at work, or elsewhere" because of their sexual interests, it's because of people like Dr. Blanchard being in a position to stigmatize it.

[Lucy_Bella]

Lucy, you seem to put a lot of stock in the APA and their DSM.
L.S.S.
I don't know if you have read all my post but I did leave a link in one of them that directs you to recent and old studies of the DMS5 work ..The work has been revised several times because much of the original work was flawed.. Really now all I give Blanchard credit for is some of the studies ( not all ) and coining the name.. Much of his work has been defined from other professional studies..

There has been a push from the T.G. communities to have the APA remove transvestic fetishists from the T.G. umbrella but even with strong opposition from them the APA kept the disorder as a mental disorder in early spring of this year.. I think you had until 06/15/13 to sign a petition to have the APA remove "transvestic disorder" but here is the link to that.. http://www.bilerico.com/2011/05/transvestic_disorder_the_overlooked_anti-trans_dia_1.php

Here is another link ...In this link they use the clinical name Trans sexual often just so you know I guess everyone who is male and wears female clothing are T.S.....This is from the opposition ..http://gendertrender.wordpress.com/2012/11/21/what-many-transgender-activists-dont-want-you-to-know-and-why-you-should-know-it-anyway/




I find knowing the why of it all immensely helpful I only wish I had learned of this when I was lot younger.

Reluctant..You pretty much summed me to a "T".. Since reading and placing everything I have learned that best fits me ..I feel better and more secure and I don't know if this is a temporary feeling or not ( most likely ) but most of my urges to dress have all left..

[mary something]

L.S.S.
I feel better and more secure and I don't know if this is a temporary feeling or not ( most likely ) but most of my urges to dress have all left..

have you ever experienced the urge lessening before and then getting stronger?

[NicoleScott]

There are two key criteria before a psychiatric diagnosis of "transvestic fetishism" is made:[2]
Recurrent, intense sexually arousing fantasies, urges, or behaviour, involving cross-dressing.
This causes clinically significant distress or impairment, whether socially, at work, or elsewhere.
Thus, transvestic fetishism is not diagnosed unless it causes significant problems for the person concerned.

Not to argue the point, but this sounds strange to me. If crossdressing, completely transforming or wearing only "favored" items, causes arousal on a recurring basis, I would call this transvestic fetishism. Lots of guys do this and have good control of it. But the APA won't call it this unless it "causes significant problems".
It sounds more logical to call it what it is, but don't consider it a disorder unless it "causes significant problrms". But I guess I'm not seeing it from the APA point of view. I guess if it's not a problem it doesn't exist.
To me, it's like stealing money is not stealing unless it's for a certain amount, or it's not eating if it doesn't cause me to gain weight.

[Lucy_Bella]

have you ever experienced the urge lessening before and then getting stronger?

Yes many times as it progressed and as I said only time will tell, but I am sure stopping is not in my future or trying to stop alone . But then again do I want to go in and see a "specialist" to help me stop? No, it's not really interfering enough with my life at this time in fact it's probably one of the most entertaining part of my life right now besides things that are closet to me.. But if it causes major problems with what are closest to me is when I will look into solutions.



To me, it's like stealing money is not stealing unless it's for a certain amount, or it's not eating if it doesn't cause me to gain weight.

Great analogy Nicole and in a way you answered it yourself ..You can eat without gaining weight but stealing is stealing period. How much and who from would stealing fit the crime. You stole a nickle from a friend or you stole a few million from the bank..

[mary something]

But then again do I want to go in and see a "specialist" to help me stop?

Any specialist who would promise to help you stop should be avoided. I was only going to mention that if it has waxed and waned before then most likely you will feel that way again if you don't now. A therapist who is acting ethically would never have any certain goal in mind for you other than to understand yourself better.

The word fetish by definition implies an impairment of the individual. To be diagnosed one has to suffer distress, most commonly from the inability to experience intimacy without an artifical object present. Sometimes things are called fetishes when what we mean are that they are arousal triggers. I make this distinction because it is very important for self understanding.

[ReluctantDebutant]

From Dictionary.com

fet·ish
[fet-ish, fee-tish] Show IPA
noun
1. an object regarded with awe as being the embodiment or habitation of a potent spirit or as having magical potency.

2. any object, idea, etc., eliciting unquestioning reverence, respect, or devotion: to make a fetish of high grades.

3. Psychology . any object or nongenital part of the body that causes a habitual erotic response or fixation.

Why does the word fetish have to imply an impairment?

[NicoleScott]

Why does the word fetish have to imply an impairment?

So the psychiatric pros can justify treatment?

[ReineD]

Why does the word fetish have to imply an impairment?

It's an impairment when it gets to the point of having a negative impact on a person's life.

Some people take it so far as to not be able to concentrate enough to work if for example they can't stop thinking about how they'd look wearing certain clothes, or if they can't stop imagining having sex with a man and they have frequent urges to masturbate. Or, if it ruins relationships. I've read blogs by people who became so dependent on masturbating to their fantasies that it severely impacted their relationships with their wives. Another negative impact: if the obsession and fantasies begin to isolate a person to the point where they no longer enjoy spending time with friends or engaging in any other activity or hobby that was once of interest to them. Their worlds become severely constricted, and these people are no longer able to reach their full human potential. Also, if the obsession causes financial strain due to the sheer volume of purchased clothing, jewelry, accessories, shoes, etc, or even if there develops a hoarding mentality to the point where the items way exceed the ability to wear them (and the purchases continue), making it difficult to know where to store it all ... and the person still can't get rid of some of the items to make it all manageable.

It is an impairment to the quality of a person's life when there is no longer any balance between the crossdressing and the activities associated with it, and the rest of the person's life.

[mary something]

Lucy I'm surprised at your response. I don't think I've expressed a negative opinion nor been an asshole. If I sounded judgemental then accept my apology, I don't think there is anyone who doesn't contribute here for av reason. What specifically did I say that bothered you?

[Lucy_Bella]

Lucy I'm surprised at your response. I don't think I've expressed a negative opinion nor been an asshole. If I sounded judgemental then accept my apology, I don't think there is anyone who doesn't contribute here for av reason. What specifically did I say that bothered you?

Sorry Mary ,

I just re read it my self and it comes across as that but that is far from what I meant.. What I meant wasn't directed at you personally..

People ( especially here ) tend to have blinders on ( meaning no negative thoughts about Cding allowed) and if you( meaning me ) bring up anything they feel is negative ( T.F. ) it makes you ( meaning me ) a big A- hole ( or so it seems).. I say this because there has been a big push to have this removed from the "APA" as a "Mental Disorder" The push made some success in removing "Gender Identity Disorder " and "Dual Gender " as mental disorders ( basically all the "APA" did was change the names)..

So where do you go from here ? If you need help or therapy and they diagnose you with having mild T.F. which is now considers T.F.D. I don't think that I would ever get to the point of needing professional help because my T.F.D. is pretty mild and the "APA" knows that it's rare that very many male cross-dresser will ever be diagnosed extreme .. People say labels are not important in here anyways but in the "real world " they very much are important, even in the T.G. community.. I would also like to thank the powers that may be for this site to allow this discussion to continue I really don't think that many people who are here understand .. We are being labeled by professionals and if we do nothing about being labeled( or take part) we may find how we are being labeled as unacceptable and completely wrong..


I am sorry how the original post came out no offense was intended ..In fact I will go and delete it :)

[Leona]

I have to admit not having read the whole thread (only skimming), but I haven't seen this mentioned.

Why is it either fetish or identity? Is there room to want to experience sex while dressed up? It's almost a kind of roleplay, but not really because it's part of identity.

[Taylor186]

There are two key criteria before a psychiatric diagnosis of "transvestic fetishism" is made:
1) Recurrent, intense sexually arousing fantasies, urges, or behaviour, involving cross-dressing.
2) This causes clinically significant distress or impairment, whether socially, at work, or elsewhere.
Thus, transvestic fetishism is not diagnosed unless it causes significant problems for the person concerned.


Not to argue the point, but this sounds strange to me. If crossdressing, completely transforming or wearing only "favored" items, causes arousal on a recurring basis, I would call this transvestic fetishism. Lots of guys do this and have good control of it. But the APA won't call it this unless it "causes significant problems".
It sounds more logical to call it what it is, but don't consider it a disorder unless it "causes significant problems". But I guess I'm not seeing it from the APA point of view.

Personally, I think that the APA is right to suggest that you do not have a "transvestic fetish disorder" unless "clinically significant distress or impairment, whether socially, at work, or elsewhere" is observed "for the person concerned."

Yes you may have a fetish for wearing woman's clothing but it is does not rise to the level of a clinical disorder unless it causes significant distress or impairment, as defined above, to the person concerned.

If you have your fetish under control and you are fine with it but your wife or partner has a problem with it, that alone does not suggest that you have a disorder. The partner can have all the issues they want including wanting a divorce but that still does not create a clinical disorder in you.

That's the way I see what's being said.

[JadeEmber]

Sorry, had to skip many replies. Not enough time in the day!

I'm not really concerned. I'm pretty sure I fall outside the category actually, but if it were shown otherwise it would just be a point of interest. I don't think it changes or affects anything.

One thing about this is people on all sides are wrapped up with their societal baggage. People talk about disorders, treatment, etc., and that in turn makes people annoyed as it suggests they're broken. People also want out of the category -- so people who have fully transitioned now say they are no longer transgender, because that the term transgender still feels like a perjorative. They're now fully valid women or men, right? Or people say that they were never transgender in the first place, etc., in the case of cross dressers.

So this is a volatile topic. I've certainly been in the middle of it as well before :).

As has been mentioned, transgender itself is often used as an umbrella term so keep people together, just as LGBT (or more specifically LGBTQIA) is used. Nevertheless, it's far from uncommon to see people belonging to one of those letters throw fellow members of the same letter under the bus ;), much less people belonging to other letters (see, for example, the issues many have with the HRC). Unfortunately, transgender has also been used as a non-umbrella term, which is why people still react against it.

I find it interesting to consider the specific diagnostics. While it offends some people, I'll make comments in that regard, albeit not with the intention of shackling or offending them. In the end, though, the whole notion of gender is kind of silly. There's no fundamental male or female particle, just what biology and culture have made of us, and what you and I are now is also what biology and culture have made of us. Regardless of how we might be diagnosed, who truly believes that we are just the sum of these diagnoses? Once we have increased our understanding of our genetics and biology, everyone will become transgender, or at least agendered, possibly. And if that's a completely realistic end state to our understanding our ourselves and science -- that we could, for instance, change and create dysphoric states at will, then what does it matter except as an idle discussion? Eventually, we'll all be past this, and view out time as just another dark age.

Of course, any diagnostic association with conditions that cause harm is unacceptable (associations with pedophilia or violence). Historically, we -- as humans -- have difficulty differentiating those who aren't "typical" from those who are harmful (and are sometimes "typical" in all other ways).

So, there's been some hostility in reaction to this thread, and some outright rejection, and some agreement. A lot of it is a microcosm of the greater change we as a species are undergoing at large.

[docrobbysherry]

So, I can't call myself a TF because dressing by itself isn't the only thing that arouses me. And, my life is not messed up by a combination of dressing and sex.

I'm not a fetishist because I don't have any fantasies about particular things, other than adult women, that excite me.

So, what should I call myself here? Sex is an important part of my dressing. If I refer to myself as a "fetish dresser", I think people know what I mean. Even tho I'm not one.

Can anyone think of another way to describe myself if I dress, sometimes get turned on by it and respond, but am not a TF? I know there r a lot of us here. If u can think of another term, I'd like to hear it!

[Lucy_Bella]

So, I can't call myself a TF because dressing by itself isn't the only thing that arouses me. And, my life is not messed up by a combination of dressing and sex.

I'm not a fetishist because I don't have any fantasies about particular things, other than adult women, that excite me.

Sherry ,

Yes you can call yourself this if it fits you ..You would be ..T.F. mild form of transvestic fetishists... If your life has become impairment from being a T.F. then you would be this T.F.D. transvestic fetishist disorder..

[Leona]

So, I can't call myself a TF because dressing by itself isn't the only thing that arouses me. And, my life is not messed up by a combination of dressing and sex.

I'm not a fetishist because I don't have any fantasies about particular things, other than adult women, that excite me.

So, what should I call myself here? Sex is an important part of my dressing. If I refer to myself as a "fetish dresser", I think people know what I mean. Even tho I'm not one.

Can anyone think of another way to describe myself if I dress, sometimes get turned on by it and respond, but am not a TF? I know there r a lot of us here. If u can think of another term, I'd like to hear it!

I don't think you have to. I think it's self-evident that a person experiencing any gender wants to also experience that gender sexually. It's pretty basic. Especially if your primary attraction is to women and you see yourself as an attractive woman, then when it dawns on you that can sleep with yourself, it's pretty logical to do that. For those of us who have SOs that are involved with it, it's logical to want to have sex with them, too.

On a side note, if I don't want to get hit on while dressed up, but try to pick myself up, would that be considered sexual harassment?

[NathalieX66]

I think every transgender person I ever met wants to/needs to experience the feelings of the other gender rather than their birth gender. There's a bit of me in that.

I have fetishes too, but I feel like those fetishes are more like the video/song Lotion by the Greenskeepers http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jm86I_kezVY, featured in the film Silence of the Lambs with Jodie Foster & Anthony Hopkins. They don't make me feel like a girl the way I need to feel like a girl.

When I want to be a girl, it's because I want to feel what girls be, and do......just like that famous quote in the movie When Harry met Sally "I'l have what she's having".

[NicoleScott]

Sherry ,
Yes you can call yourself this if it fits you ..You would be ..T.F. mild form of transvestic fetishists... If your life has become impairment from being a T.F. then you would be this T.F.D. transvestic fetishist disorder..

The idea that you can be a TF (mild, not impairing) is new to the discussion. Previously, it wasn't considered TF unless it was impairing. Now, it's TF with or without the disorder.
ReluctantDebutant's question "why does the word fetish have to imply an impairment?" hasn't been answered. Reine explained all sorts of ways a fetish can be disruptive to a normal life, but not why it can't be called a fetish unless it is impairing. It may be nit-picking, but I would think the distinctions are a lot more important to the psychology disorder diagnosis and treatment folks than for us.
A lot of this boils down to words and their definitions. Is there really a difference between "fetish for dressing" and "transvestic fetishism" (except to those in the psychology biz)?

[Lucy_Bella]

The idea that you can be a TF (mild, not impairing) is new to the discussion. Previously, it wasn't considered TF unless it was impairing. Now, it's TF with or without the disorder.
ReluctantDebutant's question "why does the word fetish have to imply an impairment?" hasn't been answered. Reine explained all sorts of ways a fetish can be disruptive to a normal life, but not why it can't be called a fetish unless it is impairing. It may be nit-picking, but I would think the distinctions are a lot more important to the psychology disorder diagnosis and treatment folks than for us.
A lot of this boils down to words and their definitions. Is there really a difference between "fetish for dressing" and "transvestic fetishism" (except to those in the psychology biz)?

It's not a " disorder" is the difference ..Hope this helps in explaining it..

FETISHISM
Fetishism is use of an inanimate object (the fetish) as the preferred method of producing sexual excitement. However, in common parlance, the word is often used to describe particular sexual interests, such as sexual role-playing, preference for certain physical characteristics, and preferred sexual activities.

Common fetishes include aprons, shoes, leather or latex items, and women's underclothing. The fetish may replace typical sexual activity with a partner or may be integrated into sexual activity with a willing partner. Minor fetishistic behavior as an adjunct to consensual sexual behavior is not considered a disorder because distress, disability, and significant dysfunction are absent. More intense, obligatory fetishistic arousal patterns may cause problems in a relationship or become all-consuming and destructive in a person's life.

Transvestic fetishism: Heterosexual males who dress in women's clothing typically begin such behavior in late childhood (see Sexuality and Sexual Disorders: Gender Identity Disorder and Transsexualism). A more common term for transvestite is cross-dresser. This behavior is associated, at least initially, with sexual arousal.

Cross-dressing per se is not a disorder because this behavior does not always cause distress or impairment. Personality profiles of cross-dressing men are generally similar to age- and race-matched norms. When their partner is cooperative, these men have intercourse in partial or full feminine attire. When their partner is not cooperative, they may feel anxiety, depression, guilt, and shame associated with the desire to cross-dress.

Most transvestites do not present for treatment. Those who do are usually brought in by an unhappy spouse, referred by courts, or self-referred out of concern about experiencing negative social and employment consequences. Some transvestites present for treatment of comorbid gender dysphoria, substance abuse, or depression. Social and support groups for transvestites are usually very helpful. No drugs are reliably effective; psychotherapy is aimed at self-acceptance and modulating risky behaviors.

[NicoleScott]

Thanks for telling me things I've known for decades. It's no longer a discussion when you copy from others' work. So I'm done with it.

[Lucy_Bella]

Thanks for telling me things I've known for decades. It's no longer a discussion when you copy from others' work. So I'm done with it.

You asked I provided...Normally if I was to post ( which I have several times) in my own words people then ask for proof ..So I just did us all a favor and btw discussions are usually based from other peoples work or experience) ,it's how we learn.. So I am very sorry the reply upset you

[mary something]

Is there really a difference between "fetish for dressing" and "transvestic fetishism" (except to those in the psychology biz)?

I'm not a psychologist, but my opinion is yes. If someone has a fetish for dressing (as the word is commonly used here) then I would think that behavior is performed in order to express some part of feminine gender that is inside that person. It might be to express feminine gender sexually or in other ways.

A fetishist isn't trying to express something inside them, they are substituting an inanimate object for a real person as the focus of their desire. They have a problem with forming a bond with someone on an emotional level.

That is why I think it's important to understand the difference in terms of being able to understand ourselves better. It's fine to call yourself whatever you want to, but we need to remember the distinction especially if you ever wish to work with a gender therapist it will save you some $ in sessions to discover this.

[Taylor186]

A fetishist isn't trying to express something inside them, they are substituting an inanimate object for a real person as the focus of their desire. They have a problem with forming a bond with someone on an emotional level.

Sorry, the many fetish definitions I've come across say nothing about the ability to form an emotional bond. It's all about sex.

[Lucy_Bella]

I'm not a psychologist, but my opinion is yes. If someone has a fetish for dressing (as the word is commonly used here) then I would think that behavior is performed in order to express some part of feminine gender that is inside that person. It might be to express feminine gender sexually or in other ways.

A fetishist isn't trying to express something inside them, they are substituting an inanimate object for a real person as the focus of their desire. They have a problem with forming a bond with someone on an emotional level. .

With all due respect and not in anyway saying that your opinion is wrong because you are probably right... But only if you have a "gender disorder" will that opinion be correct which I know for a fact I do not have..Also real people are or can be the "Object" of or with fetishisms ..

[mary something]

Sorry, the many fetish definitions I've come across say nothing about the ability to form an emotional bond. It's all about sex.

There is a prevalent theory about fetishes that it is actually linked to obsessive complusive disorder. If someone has a shoe fetish for example and they are being intimate with another person then they won't be able to do so unless they can actually see the object of their obsession. Of course that is evidence that they are not bonding with their partner in a typical way.

It is specifically the fact that it can get out of hand to the point that it can affect someone's work, friendships, and intimate relationships that it by definition has a detrimental effect on that persons bonding with others.

[Lucy_Bella]

There is a prevalent theory about fetishes that it is actually linked to obsessive complusive disorder. If someone has a shoe fetish for example and they are being intimate with another person then they won't be able to do so unless they can actually see the object of their obsession. Of course that is evidence that they are not bonding with their partner in a typical way.


This may be due to you looking up "fetish" instead of "Fetishism"

Fetishism is a Psychiatry condition .. Also this link here will provide some info on the subject ..http://www.rightdiagnosis.com/t/transvestic_fetishism/intro.htm

[mary something]

But only if you have a "gender disorder" will that opinion be correct which I know for a fact I do not have

I'm not saying that I think everyone who is a crossdresser has a gender disorder. Carl Jung referred to this as the animus and the anima, yin and yang is another example. Gender is not completely binary, men are capable of empathy, women are capable of logic. Some women like to butch it up, some men like to wear a dress and look nice. All humans like to have the opportunity to express themselves occasionally.

I agree that real people can be the object of a fetish also, an example would be pedophilia. The pedophile is actually autoerotic, he or she doesn't bond with who the child is but what they represent to that person in the same manner an object would have value to a person.

[Lucy_Bella]

I'm not saying that I think everyone who is a crossdresser has a gender disorder. Carl Jung referred to this as the animus and the anima, yin and yang is another example. .

You are absolutely correct..But from what I have read... You can have T.F.D. and also have a G.I.D. so no body is excluded ..

[mary something]

I agree that someone could probably have gender identity disorder and also be classified as tfd. This would be an example of the behaviors being similar but the reasons behind the behavior being very different than someone with tfd that doesn't experience gid.

I don't think one is necessarily worse or better than the other, both are just labels, but it is helpful for personal understanding to know why we do what we do.

[Lucy_Bella]

I don't think one is necessarily worse or better than the other, both are just labels, but it is helpful for personal understanding to know why we do what we do.

Mary I am right there with you as I feel it should be us having the best understanding and knowledge of what we do ..Or even of what we may not do as long as we are all joined under a umbrella.. It's best we do understand our own behaviors before the "Professionals " and they do their own damage labeling us .. Any person here on this site who may or may not have T.F.D. that has decided to get professional help for whatever reason ( their own or spouse or family members) could have a un-favored diagnose..

People could be pushed/ pressured into treatments because of hope or false hope given to you a wife or a family member.. Every site I hit with T.F.D. claims some hope to cure or treatment..We know that cure is rarely the answer because of the spectrum in all Cross-Dressers vary so much and can co exist with multiple labels.. I am in my late forties and I have been doing this most all my life a cure for me would be a miracle ...

[Barbara Dugan]

Very good thread Lucy, Honestly too many labels ,studies and diagnoses make me dizzy...deep down you know who you are.. the key here is live life to the fullest without hurting yourself or others

[mary something]

I am in my late forties and I have been doing this most all my life a cure for me would be a miracle ...

The only cure for crossdressing is to allow yourself to not feel bad about doing it because it doesn't hurt anyone. Women crossdress all the time, of course it has become socially acceptable over the last hundred years or so and people have forgotten that it was ever any other way. Women don't have as much testosterone, and their libido typically isn't nearly as strong nor as visually focused so their gender expression in clothes isn't as sexualized.

Society reinforces this concept that men should be ashamed of having a feminine side but that is just a bunch of bs. Having a well developed feminine side is an addition to the masculinity that is already there in a man who crossdresses. It is a gender gift. A crossdresser who accepts themselves and their nature can potentially have the strength of the female AND the male.

[Lucy_Bella]

Very good thread Lucy, Honestly too many labels ,studies and diagnoses make me dizzy...

Thank you so much..:).. Yes Labels are stupid only thing worse than being under a label is being under the wrong one! We're all human in the end..



The only cure for crossdressing is to allow yourself to not feel bad about doing it because it doesn't hurt anyone..

I really wished that was true and we did live in such a perfect society that doing what we do was indifferent ...But we don't and people we hurt do not understand that this is not done intentionally.. Many people we hurt personally grab their own wrong label and pin it to us to were most of the time it sticks.. Many feel betrayed and lied to there are so many reasons from the opposition as to why we hurt them..Trust me I've heard most of them..

Ever wonder why some people acquire quilt after Cross-Dressing and were it may come from besides a society issue? .. A "T.F." can progress to the act of fantasizing in being a female ..That doesn't mean having a G.I.D. the quilt comes from the fantasizing, you have become your own sexual object.. Shame soon follows..

[Taylor186]

There is a prevalent theory about fetishes that it is actually linked to obsessive complusive disorder. If someone has a shoe fetish for example and they are being intimate with another person then they won't be able to do so unless they can actually see the object of their obsession. Of course that is evidence that they are not bonding with their partner in a typical way.

It is specifically the fact that it can get out of hand to the point that it can affect someone's work, friendships, and intimate relationships that it by definition has a detrimental effect on that persons bonding with others.

If "has a ... fetish" to you means "has a fetish disorder" and if "being intimate" to you means "having sex" and if "not bonding ... in a typical way" to you means "not capable of sexual arousal in a typical way" then I can agree with your 2nd & 3rd sentences, mostly.

As has been said several times in posts above, a person with a fetish (TF) can also be (or have a) TFD. But the link is not an automatic as your 1st paragraph implies. Just as a person can have a drink and not be an alcoholic, a person can have a TF (I like Doc's term "dressing fetish") but not have a disorder. Your 2nd paragraph suggests you understand this but your 1st, not so much.

It might also be linked to OCD but, after a basic search, I cannot find this theory. I find a lot of people asking the question, but no one supporting it. Do you have a link? (sorry Lucy )


It's best we do understand our own behaviors before the "Professionals " and they do their own damage labeling us .. Any person here on this site who may or may not have T.F.D. that has decided to get professional help for whatever reason ( their own or spouse or family members) could have a un-favored diagnose.

Agree completely. Forwarned is forarmed.

[giuseppina]

I haven't read all the posts, but I don't think this fits me. I dress primarily for escapism. Sex has little or nothing to do with it.

I noticed in some of the posts that a Dr. Blanchard was mentioned. If this individual is the same Dr. Blanchard who worked at the Canadian Institute for Mental Health, his work is not well thought of. I don't consider him an authority of any repute for transgender issues. Once a researcher has had their theories debunked, they tend to lose all credibility.

[mary something]

It might also be linked to OCD but, after a basic search, I cannot find this theory. I find a lot of people asking the question, but no one supporting it. Do you have a link? (sorry Lucy )
just a quick search but here is an article written by a phd describing the link
http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-literary-mind/200903/fetishes-and-clean-pencil-tips

[ossian]

This might have been answered elsewhere in this post.

The term "Transvestic Fetishism" comes from the American Physiological Association DSM-5 manual. This manual I think just got published and is used to help Psychologists link mental health issues with insurance providers.

Here is a pretty good link how this changed from DSM-4.

http://www.ifge.org/?q=DSM-5/302.3_Transvestic_Fetishism

Disclaimer: I'm not a psychologist, and no my cross dressing is not a problem.

[PaulaQ]

Ever wonder why some people acquire quilt after Cross-Dressing and were it may come from besides a society issue? .. A "T.F." can progress to the act of fantasizing in being a female ..That doesn't mean having a G.I.D. the quilt comes from the fantasizing, you have become your own sexual object.. Shame soon follows..

I mean no offense Lucy, nor am I trying to beat a dead horse, or stir up trouble.

But, this is why I think that Dr. Blanchard, and his "Autogynephilia" theory are basically just as wrong headed as it is possible to be. The idea that there is a theory that makes one feel guilty for a condition that they didn't ask for, and didn't cause.

My personal belief is that many of us on this forum suffer from a form of childhood illness / birth defect that affects us to varying degrees. That blame for this condition, for which we did not ask, is placed back on the individual who suffers from this malady is one of the cruelest things in the modern world. This, and modern medicine's overall abdication of it's responsibility to diagnose and treat us properly will, someday, be viewed as a SHAME on the practice of medicine in our age.

[Lucy_Bella]

My personal belief is that many of us on this forum suffer from a form of childhood illness / birth defect that affects us to varying degrees. That blame for this condition, for which we did not ask, is placed back on the individual who suffers from this malady is one of the cruelest things in the modern world. This, and modern medicine's overall abdication of it's responsibility to diagnose and treat us properly will, someday, be viewed as a SHAME on the practice of medicine in our age.

Paula ,

For sure and I am 100 percent behind you on that theory.. But keep in mind that theory is for " gender identity dysphoria" very similar with T.F.( both transvestites) and was recently taken out of the " APA " as a mental disorder when it was called " gender identity disorder"..That was the reason of this thread because T.F. is not gender driven it is sexually driven and there lays the difference between the two..

No dead horse here..

[Taylor186]

just a quick search but here is an article written by a phd describing the link
http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-literary-mind/200903/fetishes-and-clean-pencil-tips

OK, well she says "connection" but she goes on in the details to describe them as "similar." Two different meanings to me and I'm guessing confusing to many. I put more faith in the analysis of the last commenter who said:

"It is a shame that you are misleading a large group of people. There are too many forms and levels of OCD to be able to create such a simplistic answer for a very complex disorder. OCD is not a coping disorder, it is biological. It is sad that many people will see you 3 second analogy as actual scientific thought on the subject."

[mary something]

I'm not trying to argue but isn't everything we do biological? OCD is of course rooted in biology, but it can also be considered a coping disorder (if it causes distress or impairment in that persons life)

I'm not placing a value judgement on the why's of TF.

connection and similar have different meanings of course, but I didn't feel that her usage of the words as she did was confusing to me. I will reread the article and the comments section to understand your point better.

I'm not trying to discredit you in any way, but I feel I'm not understanding the point you're trying to make regarding this.

[Taylor186]

Mary, maybe it's my science based education but I enjoy discussions like this where I might learn something to expand my knowledge on this crazy life journey. Someone raising an idea and others injecting their opinion or knowledge is totally natural to me. I follow several science writers and blogs where they call each other out all the time. I mean nothing personally, really.

I guess my prime point in this thread is that we all (and I mean everyone) have fetishes and compulsions. It is only when they become a problem that they are a problem. Llana Simons fluff piece conflates three possibly similiar issues as being connected, and her sloppy terminology misses "is it a problem?" and it's complexity completely. I sense the last poster was calling her on those omissions.

And no not everything we do is biologically driven. Our culture drives many of our behaviors.