Just so there is NO confusion...

[Wildaboutheels]

...I will be blunt.

IF YOU had a partner or SO who was ALWAYS "ready, willing and able", [for "playtime"] is it at least possible that you would "dress" less? Possibly a LOT less. Or maybe no affect whatsoever because you are not that kind of girl?

The key word here is POSSIBLE. And I will just assume that no one who responds has any reason to lie, and can ONLY speak for themselves.

[sandra-leigh]

Yes, it is possible that I might have dressed less often or taken longer to get to where I am. Having that "male role" in my life might have provided an "anchor"; and as I did not have that anchor, the only "good reason" to not transition more was fear of my job.

However, when I was trying to decide whether to start HRT or not, I was keenly aware that starting it would pretty much nullify any possibility of me entering into a different relationship with a considerably younger woman (15-ish years younger or so it would have had to have been) who was wanting the kind of activity you allude to, and was wanting children. I decided to go ahead with HRT anyhow, as by then I was conflicted and depressed enough internally that I knew I wouldn't realistically have been able to manage a sexual relationship leading to being a parent even if somehow I was able to find an appropriate partner.

My male sexual pathways are a source of pleasure and I have very very few sources of pleasure in my life, so giving it up is not at all lightly done; none the less, I know and my dreams know that letting go of it is for the greater good in my life.

[Tess]

Absolutely. There are only so many ways to divide my urges and if one is required to be more dominate due to the needs of my partner, than other areas aren't going to get as much thought or attention.

[GaleWarning]

The sex was regular and spectacular when T and I were together. CDing was part of the mix.
Nowadays I seldom even get the urge to CD.
So I would say, in answer to your question, it would have made no difference.
The differences, from my point of view, are opportunity and drive.

[kellycan27]

Seems to me that if you had such a partner... You'd be dressed less of the time. Oh wait ... You meant cross dressed. :heehee:

[LilSissyStevie]

I have a partner that is always ready, willing and able. I'm the great disappointment here. Whether I "dress" for the occasion or not is up to her.

[AllieSF]

First, if I was in a good and lasting relationship and doing the things that I like to do in a relationship, including sexual activities and all the others, I would be active enough with the relationship that my mind would not become the devil's playground so to speak. MtF CD's and TG's are still males and most have what would be considered a normal sex drive, i.e. it is an important aspect and need, at least periodically and on a somewhat regular basis. Having sex satisfies that need, which does not need to be thought about so much except when you are not getting any. However, dressing is not a sexual activity for me, so I am not substituting one for the other. I can see that for others it may make a big difference.

Secondly, I do believe that the intensity of one's dressing may be correlated with ones ability to dress when they want and what other activities make up their priority of things to do that are fun, which may be similar to what those who get some type of sexual satisfaction from dressing as related to getting more from the SO. In my case, in a way I think that I am substituting going out dressed with friends on an almost weekly basis for that lack of having a loving partner in my life with whom I would be doing most of the things I am doing now when out dressed. There is an important void there in my life and I am currently filling it with my dressing activities.

That being said and since I am a very late starter with this TG side of me, and I am enjoying it so much, I have just added a very large complication to my ability to find someone to love and occupy my time and thoughts. I don't think that I could ever put the genie back in the bottle, I could never live under a don't ask - don't tell situation, and my SO would have to accept this part of me as just that, part of me. She would have to also enjoy going out with me dressed and let me interact with others more or less as I do now. That is really asking a lot from the type of woman I am attracted to.

[Jodie_Lynn]

Of course it is "at least possible." Anything is possible really, but it is kind of a fruitless exercise to wonder 'what might be' if conditions were 'perfect' for any given situation.

And given that we are each a separate being with drives and history unique to each, although similar to many, it is impossible to say with certainty what any one "might have done" differently.

[docrobbysherry]

Sex is a regular part of my dressing. So, I would say, absolutely, Wild!

[heatherdress]

No difference.

CDing has increased our intimacy in many ways.

[Leona]

No difference here, either. She even requests that I dress for the occasion and picks the outfit. :) Of course, I get more dominant when I'm dressed, and she loves that...

[Marleena]

I'm not that kind of girl!:D

[Brenda456]

In my case, it may have made a difference. It would not impact me desire to CD, but it may have impacted actually doing so.

[suchacutie]

For me this a nonsequitor. What's the relationship here? It's dressing or sex? Am I misinterpreting the question?

Tina doesn't hinder our marriage. Is this really s part of the equation fot us?

[Jodi]

I didn't know that there was such a thing as an SO who was always able, willing and ready. I thought they all came equipped with a headache.

Jodi

[Leona]

Sorry Jodi, I'm not loaning you my wife. :)

[MysticLady]

I thought they all came equipped with a headache.
Jodi

:heehee:.....or very tired.:doh:

[Kate Simmons]

The movie "Three in the Attic" comes to mind. Poor Paxton Quigley had a sample of this and every man's dream or did he? Poor guy couldn't even walk, he was so tired. :heehee::)

[docrobbysherry]

:heehee:.....or very tired.:doh:
I thot it was usually, "Not in the mood"?

[GBJoker]

I might say "yes, in theory I might dress less."

But I honestly don't know. I simply do not possess enough information to give an adequate answer.

[Leona]

:heehee:.....or very tired.:doh:

That's usually my excuse. Or sometimes it's not an excuse, it is a fact. Like last night.... (don't worry, she found out that "really tired" really does mean she won't get the ending she wanted, even though she got a satisfying ending)

[Polka Dot]

This wouldn't change my dressing habits at all. The two things are completely separate for me. I dress to relax, not get turned on. Years ago, when I was single I used dressing as a sexual outlet, but in the last few years I don't seem to get that "zing" from dressing any more.

[Taylor Ray]

My second to last girlfriend was ready, willing, and able on a regular basis, but I still wore my panties like a good girl. It has only been the last 3 years where I have graduated to dresses and wigs. I'm not sure I will ever find a SO comfortable with my dressing at this point.

[MissTee]

It wouldn't change me. Fortunately for me, the dressing has been an integral part of our bedroom time since we were married.

[flatlander_48]

The short answer would be No. I don't think that there is a significant relationship between the 2 ideas.

[Tina B.]

I'm confused, this wife that is always ready willing and able, what type batteries does she take? Or do I have to move to Stepford, to find her. And ready for what, I ask you, Sex, Playtime meaning dress up, or ready to go out partying. And if you are talking about sex, do I have to be ready will and able all the time, not sure I could keep my end of that deal.
I think I'll go fix my make up jump back in bed, and take this question up with the wife, wonder who will holler Uncle first, or is that holler Aunt.

[sometimes_miss]

There have been threads about this before; and as I've mentioned before, when in a stable loving relationship, I rarely felt the desire to crossdress. During my engagement and early years of marriage, crossdressing wasn't part of my life, and I truly felt that I had 'beaten' it. Unfortunately, it was simply a case where, without much stress of other kinds in my life, I was able to suppress the crossdressing desire easily enough. Right now, I'm indulging in something similar. Low stress lifestyle, needs for affection dealt with and not put off. It's working, sort of, I haven't crossdressed since early May. The need for physical affection is filled mostly by visits to lapdancers when I don't have anyone to date. Expensive, but it's currently working. Well, that (cuddling up with an affectionate girl for a few hours, and a little alcohol) seems to hold me for a while.

[NicoleScott]

Yes, if "compliant" was added to "ready, willing, and able".

[Janet77]

Without divulging too much personal info, cross-dressing is just one of (too) many fetishes I have, so if I am getting one or more of the others satisfied, then I would surely dress less often. Also, if by "ready, willing and able" you mean ready to lie there motionless like a corpse while the man does everything, I think a lot of SO's are ready, willing and able...

[BLUE ORCHID]

Hi WAH, When a hobby becomes a job the fun goes out of it fast.

[anneob2002]

Yes. I would dress less. I don't think it would eliminate it, but it would be significantly less.

hey, I'm a guy - Many times dressing is just about taking care of the business at hand and if someone else was up to the job more often I would be less motivated to do what it takes to reach the promised land.

hehehe.... we seem to dance around the obvious so much here. So much so, that I though I was in the wrong place but I think it is just that the forum likes it to be less of a direct topic - not that theres anything wrong with that (jerry sienfeld reference) I know for some it is not the prime motivation for the activity we all share.



...I will be blunt.

IF YOU had a partner or SO who was ALWAYS "ready, willing and able", [for "playtime"] is it at least possible that you would "dress" less? Possibly a LOT less. Or maybe no affect whatsoever because you are not that kind of girl?

The key word here is POSSIBLE. And I will just assume that no one who responds has any reason to lie, and can ONLY speak for themselves.

[sandra-leigh]

I know for some it is not the prime motivation for the activity we all share.

I wrote above that Yes, I might have dressed less. But that was not intended to indicate that dressing was a substitute sexuality for me, just that the hypothetical sexuality would probably have confused me even more; such as "How can I be female if I enjoy this kind of sex?!?" There is a difference between what you want and what you can survive on for a time, and the hypothetical situation would possibly have extended the "survive on" time... but might have led to a sharper "collapse" rather than the more gradual transition I went through.

[Beverley Sims]

I would probably dress less as the forbidden fruit is now non existent.
I feel I have answered this thread before?
Sort of deja vu. :)