Am I the only one around here who...

[Taylor Ray]

Okay. A warning first: this thread is about "spousal" and "GG" acceptance, but not in a "warm-hearted, compromise" type of way. It is an "alternative opinion", so traditionalists be warned! (I also want to state that this opinion does not in any way intend to take away from very real "family-issues" people may be experiencing, especially when children are involved.)

Question: why do so many CDs seem to be unabashedly beholden to the "rules" of their wives?

Are marriages so often on "shaky grounds" that expressions of individual creativity and gender-fluidity have to be "shoved under the carpet"?

Why are men so afraid to be themselves? What is this strange "illusory power" projected onto wives?

Isn't this idea of "having a choice to CD or not" just a big lie? There really is no choice.

This above all: To thine own self be true.

[pamela7]

times change in society - its getting easier, many places are distinctly redneck, many people could be betrayed by a rocky relationship, with fatal consequences.
My first marriage was to the wrong person for the wrong reasons, but that created lovely children who would not have been otherwise.
Now yes I'm in a relationship where all is open, but yes its easy for people to know they can't trust their spouse/SO.
If you could lose job, home, social standing, of course people are in fear - few have truly transcended these things with perfect open relations.

There is no choice, but then tell me who does not put on a mask at work?
Who is the self? We are everything and nothing, there is nothing i am not - my self is the all, including you ...

[Tanya+]

In my case, i love my wife. From my heart i made a promise to love her for life. So the rules are about finding a path of expressing myself without damaging her heart or my relationship with her. The rules arise out of my own priorities. My love is reciprocated by her gradual acceptance love and encouragement. I have a degree of choice in my dressing, and i choose when and how to express it. I am a Cross Dresser, but i am a husband/father/worker/friend/mentor, and i choose to take in to account the reactions, feelings and consequences of what i do. I have let go of a lot the fear through the love of my life, my choices now are pretty rational. Be true to yourself, but be true and kind to those around you too.

[Rachael Leigh]

Tanya that is very well said and we all have different circumstances that we deal with, even if this isn't a choice we can choose to dress or not at any given time

[Annaliese]

Taylor I agree totally, great points

[Taylor Ray]

Wow! Thanks Tanya and Pamela, for your very honest and powerful replies.

Duty to home and family is a very Real existential obligation.

And Tanya, "There is nothing I am not". Wow. You have blown my mind on a Tuesday evening. Thank you.

[Kandi Robbins]

Men are afraid to be themselves because that would show our true feeling and we are raised not to do that. Until recently, I was your typical male, didn't show my feelings, didn't really open up to anyone. Also, I would agree, once bitten by the CD bug so to speak, there is no choice. There is either acceptance or denial. Acceptance leads to how we then begin feeling about ourselves and how we manage this aspect of our lives. Denial leads us right back to where we started, suppressing our true feelings. Took me way to long to learn all of this, but am embracing who I really am now.

[sometimes_miss]

Question: why do so many CDs seem to be unabashedly beholden to the "rules" of their wives?

This is a trick question, right? Seeing as the chance of finding another woman who would even consider DATING a crossdresser, most of us realize that any woman who will stick with a guy who crossdresses is worth her weight in gold, and is VERY careful to not upset her in any way, as the results could be disastrous. If I could find a woman who truly was O.K. with me crossdressing and loved me anyway, I'd do just about anything she wanted, for as long as she wanted it, turn over my paycheck, rub her back/feet etc., daily, you name it, I'd do it. Such women probably don't realize how rare they are, or they'd probably insist on way more 'perks' than they have at the moment.

[Kate Simmons]

Most men want to please their wives at any cost. If Mamma ain't happy ain't nobody happy. Plus the couch gets kinda lonely after awhile.:battingeyelashes::)

[Samantha Clark]

Another way to look at this is that the relationship between any spouses (CD or not) is the inverse of a mutual assured destruction (MAD) relationship (not sure how to describe or label that better, perhaps obligatorily symbiotic?) or else it devolves into mutual assured destruction. I don't think that what appears to be "beholden to rules" is really an accurate description of the relationship. I feel the relationship with a spouse is an inter-dependent and mutually supporting, loving, caring relationship. That means I won't dress up in the bedroom because it turns my SO off.

If my SO was adamantly opposed to my dressing under any circumstances, then that would be a different matter and I would say that that marriage is on shaky grounds. Not because someone is beholden to rules but because it's not based on mutual respect and support. That kind of marriage is likely headed down the MAD path.

I think an obligatorily symbiotic relationship is much preferable and, while it may appear to some to be so, it does not involve being beholden to rules set down by either spouse.

[StephanieinSecret]

Most men want to please their wives at any cost. If Mamma ain't happy ain't nobody happy. Plus the couch gets kinda lonely after awhile.:battingeyelashes::)

So only that happiness of the wife matters?
I think both men and women feel good when they please their spouse, so dividing that along gender lines is pointless.

I can't imagine marrying someone that I can't be honest with, and to be fair, a lot of forum members create their own problems by keeping their CD secret way too long. However, this idea of "women and women first" inevitably leaves a lot of us feeling shortchanged.

[kimdl93]

I can only speak for myself. I have what I think is a very strong relationship and generally we communicate quite openly and effectively. Not perfect, but pretty well. And I know that she considers my feelings, my preferences and aspirations just as I try to do the same with her. Yes, I try to understand and accommodate these in my actions. Neither of us lives by the dictates of the other, but we do try to meet each other half way. In my estimation that willingness to empathize and compromise is at the core of any successful relationship and so lacking from many a failing marriage.

[Taylor Ray]

Another way to look at this is that the relationship between any spouses (CD or not) is the inverse of a mutual assured destruction (MAD) relationship (not sure how to describe or label that better, perhaps obligatorily symbiotic?) or else it devolves into mutual assured destruction. I don't think that what appears to be "beholden to rules" is really an accurate description of the relationship. I feel the relationship with a spouse is an inter-dependent and mutually supporting, loving, caring relationship. That means I won't dress up in the bedroom because it turns my SO off.

This level of analysis is very refreshing: both honest and intellectually sound, this expression moves me to open my heart, and be more open to aspects of "relationship" that my inherent egoism is quick to dismiss. Thank you for sharing.

[carahawkwind]

It's like anything where if you and your partner can't find common ground at some point it can end up being destructive to the relationship. My wife isn't restrictive with me at all, but there are times where she's been less than 100% comfortable with some aspect of my dressing, and I've backed off some because a distressed relationship isn't worth pushing it. I did however make sure I came out to wife well before we were engaged and fairly early in our relationship, I knew if I didn't get some level of acceptance, the relationship probably wouldn't be sustainable. I think a lot of the time, the more difficult arrangements come when you come out late in the game to point where you have too much to lose, if you suddenly find yourself in a "dressing or me" sort of situation.

[Nikkilovesdresses]

You're right- you're not being warm hearted and if you have a life without compromise, you are indeed the only one.

But you're right about one thing: to thine own self be true is an admirable maxim. Keep that thought in mind when the judge gives your ex the house you paid for and half your future earnings, won't you.

[PaulaQ]

Because of the social stigma associated with feminine behavior in straight men, most of you here feel a great deal of guilt and shame. You feel, internally, that what you do is wrong. You fear being alone - what woman could possibly love you?

In other words, many TG people internalize the stigma against us.

So if a spouse accepts at all, the CD has great incentive internally to try to make things work with their spouse.

There are some really wonderful women here who are worth it - who really love and accept their CD spouse. Most, unfortunately, simply aren't worth it. Sorry, but that's how I see it. The transphobia inherent in so many in society affects a high percentage of our spouses. It's just not worth staying with someone who HATES a fundamental part of you, in my opinion.

I'm sorry this is such a negative sounding post - but there are just an awful lot of women who are transphobic, selfish, and self-entitled. (There are plenty of men who match such a description as well, but only a relatively small number of CDs here are in relationships with men.)

But if you think that's all so awful, be glad you aren't transsexual, and accused of selfishness for seeking what is often life saving medical care.

[bridget thronton]

My wife's rules were centered around protecting our kids (now married adults). There no rules beyond not being out too publicly in our home town. Vacationing as a female is OK.

[pamela7]

You're right- you're not being warm hearted and if you have a life without compromise, you are indeed the only one.

But you're right about one thing: to thine own self be true is an admirable maxim. Keep that thought in mind when the judge gives your ex the house you paid for and half your future earnings, won't you.

Yeah been there, done that, first time around ... true to myself at a price worth paying. This time tho, marriage is for keeps!!!

[Lynn Marie]

I walked on eggshells for years trying to keep my ex happy. When I filed for divorce I found my cajones in a jar under the bed on her side. I took them with me and never looked back. I may be a classy old broad, but I don't have to get permission from anyone to live my life as I wish. I'll never give anyone the authority to "let" me do as I like. Sort of an onery old cuss, huh? Life has never been so good.

[Katey888]

Hmmm.... bit of a glum perspective to start the day with but I'll give it a go...

Marriages on shaky grounds - about half of all western marriages fail: completely. I'd take a stab and say a good percentage of the remainder (perhaps another half) are shaky but cling on with their fingernails through compromise and gritted teeth. Half of the rest probably just don't care (eg. golf widows) and perhaps one in ten or twenty are lucky enough to really latch on to their soul mate... :thinking:

And that's all just normal relationships - throw in the curve ball of CD and values and behaviours are modified again. Of course you'd want to roll out the red carpet for a GG that accepts you... and potentially lay down at the end as a welcome mat too.. :eek: Cynical - maybe; reality - probably...

Remember also, that a forum's tendency to opine is set by the demographic of it's members... and around two-thirds of the members who join here are ALREADY out to wives or SOs who accept, support or tolerate this part of them. To me, it's therefore not surprising that this forum holds the opinions it does, but that does NOT mean they are universally representative in the global population.

Speaking personally, I try to have a balanced relationship with my wife, but people are people - compromise is a judgment by individuals. I don't tell her about this because of what I would anticipate would be a deleterious impact on me, not necessarily just her, and so I make compromises.

And wives do have power - it's not illusory... :)

Katey x

[pamela7]

And wives do have power - it's not illusory... :)

Katey x

they do indeed :-)))

[Dianne S]

Keep that thought in mind when the judge gives your ex the house you paid for and half your future earnings, won't you.

Unlikely nowadays. It's more likely to be an even split; at least here in Canada, judges don't "punish" spouses for transgenderism. In fact, a highly-asymmetric asset split is most unlikely unless there has been egregious abuse on the part of one spouse.

Anyway, I'm going through a split right now. It's emotionally gruelling but as the joke asks:

Q: Why are divorces so expensive?
A: Because they're worth it.

[alwayshave]

In the U.S. it depends on the state. Some states, such as Virginia, its a 50/50 split with no alimony. In states like Massachusetts its about an 80/20 split in favor of the women, with punitive child support (twice the national average) and alimony.

[Erika Lyne]

Taylor Ray,

This is a very interesting question and as I've read many of the responses I've agreed with so many and I'd like to add a bit to it as well of my own personal views.

First off, it is in human nature to be selfish, it is a self preservation instinct. Gather things for yourself first. Secondly, community and family are taught and are closely related. We are taught how to treat others in our close circles and further taught how to act in society. We are taught what is right and wrong and how to care for others by being cared for ourselves. As we expand our experiences, further relationships and realize that what may make us happy may not make others happy. We learn compromise and how to share. Sure we'd like to eat the whole chocolate cake as a kid but at some point we say, "I'll be ok with one piece, if my friends and family can share in my joy."

Now, take these instincts and socially learned skills to the extreme and apply it to CDing. What makes us CDers happy is perceived in the general population as inappropriate behavior, unacceptable, laughable, a threat to femininity and masculinity, as well as just an insult to the basis of the pigeon hole practices of modern western civilization. We are frequently down on ourselves because we have not found a way to fit in the pigeon holes and we have not been able to just accept that the pigeon holes of society do not ever comfortably fit anyone. We may have found a SO/spouse who is accepting to a certain degree. We are allowed in private, limited outings or what ever restrictions are placed upon us by our accepting, however restrictive, spouse to express ourselves in a manner that goes against the grain of society. Subconsciously, we hold our SO in high reguard because it shows that they have an understanding for us that we are typically having a hard time coping with. Plus, the happiness that they have extended to us by allowing a certain amount of dressing freedoms by whatever limits are imposed is reciprocated by the CDer following her rules and limits. It is further honored by many showering her with whatever would make her happy in return: materialistic desires, spa days, gifts of clothing when we'd buy something for ourselves, etc. Our own selfish instincts to make our selves happy are overshadowed by our training to share in our own joy driven by the inherent need to feel accepted. Our SOs accept us, allow us to be selfish and in return we accept their selfish needs and accept their limits. It is a higher social standard than is witnessed in many relationships, these relationships are more symbiotic. Both parties benefit, emotionally and socially by allowing the other's selfish needs to be fulfilled even if that fulfillment has limits and restrictions.

With that all being said and reading many responses to several threads, I guess I tend to push her rules and limts a bit more than most. Personally, I want more acceptance from my spouse. I know I am guilty of this and it hurts our relationship at times but I commited myself to my spouse. I have given her everything that I can, materialistic and emotional. I have helped her reach her dreams and goals, many she never thought were possible. I've helped her achieve her "selfish" needs (I'm not being judgemental, just a lack of a better word and using a term already described here above.). I'm waiting for, hoping for, wishing for my turn. Yes, my spouse is very accepting compared to many. Yes, I am greatful for the amount of freedoms that she has extended me but I want the dream comparable to the dreams I've helped her achieve. Selfish? Yes. Unobtainable? Maybe but, I'll never know if I'm not allowed to try. Unreasonable? I don't think so. It is my turn. Does this all mean that I regret helping her reach her goals? By no means. I have been witness to her personal joy in achievements and goals reached. I wouldn't change that even if I could. I just want a turn.

Waiting, hoping, wishing,

-E

PS: She is here on this site too and will probably see this post. To Purple Puppy GG: I do love you, I am not mad or regret where we are. I just would like a turn to smile and I want you to share in that joy.

[Marleena]

There are some really wonderful women here who are worth it - who really love and accept their CD spouse. Most, unfortunately, simply aren't worth it. Sorry, but that's how I see it. The transphobia inherent in so many in society affects a high percentage of our spouses. It's just not worth staying with someone who HATES a fundamental part of you, in my opinion.

I'm sorry this is such a negative sounding post - but there are just an awful lot of women who are transphobic, selfish, and self-entitled. (There are plenty of men who match such a description as well, but only a relatively small number of CDs here are in relationships with men.)

But if you think that's all so awful, be glad you aren't transsexual, and accused of selfishness for seeking what is often life saving medical care.

Paula I'm sorry your reveal went so badly but you really need to let the anger go. No woman can be expected to accept a TG spouse, especially when they feel blindsided far along into a marriage. In a perfect scenario they need to know early on in a relationship. Many of us think this will go away (TG/TS) but it just doesn't and that's the most important thing to know here. Most women get married to who they think are cismales or alphamales only to feel blindsided like I said. Nobody prepared them for this and it will take time to adjust if they ever can. Does it suck, you bet, but it's reality. Most cisgender people don't understand this because they see things as black & white, they see you as either male or female with no deviation from the norm. I'm looking at this objectively.

[SheriM]

Taylor, you raise a good point, however, my wife is a very big part of my life and I want her happy.

[MsVal]

I don't see this as strictly a crossdressing issue. It can apply to any activity where a spouse/SO believes it takes an unreasonable amount of resources (time, money, attention...) from the relationship. The parties naturally want to protect that relationship, and will make various accommodations or compromises for that reason.

When a party does not agree with another's priorities, that lack of agreement may be expressed as a request, through subtle gestures, or as an order. Wishing to come to an agreement, even when presented with an order does not always indicate that one is beholden to the rules.

Thanks for listening. <plink plink> There are my two cents.

Best wishes
MsVal

[PaulaQ]

Paula I'm sorry your reveal went so badly but you really need to let the anger go. No woman can be expected to accept a TG spouse, especially when they feel blindsided far along into a marriage.

Actually, I wasn't really talking about my ex-wife at all, although she didn't react well to my being trans. (Still doesn't.) The relationship was never going to work once the reveal happened, and as I've transitioned, it's become apparent to me that it could never really have worked out at all, even if her attitude had been totally different. My relationship ended, which was for the best.

There are a lot of relationships here - I have talked with many, many, many CDs - that are completely miserable because the spouse hates the transness of the CD. The CD feels like they are at fault for being the way they are, and for feeling like they had to hide it, even though that was done for survival. Yet they stay together, because the CD often feels like "it's the best I can do - I fear being alone."

I feel like our societal transphobia plays a significant role in these women's reactions, and the internalization of the same plays a role in many CDs reactions.

I feel that there are just many things worse that a person could reveal about themselves than "I'm trans." It's not like all of us, men or women either one, always fully disclose everything about ourselves or our past. Society disagrees though - this is about the worst thing you can tell someone. And that's the problem I'm trying to point out.

BTW, I'm not blaming someone who can't handle having a trans spouse, and wants to end the relationship. I'd hope they could manage to not be cruel about it - it's not like the trans person did something to them. I'm simply pointing out that a great many people seem to react very negatively, and never seem to really even try to make things work. The DADT strategy is a great example of this. Rather than trying to learn whether or not they can accept this new information about their spouse, the relationship just carries on, trying to pretend nothing changed. I think that is really messed up, and it only seems OK because "OMG, this is too horrible to deal with!"

Being trans is not that bad. Sure, it may mean two people aren't cut out to be together. But there are a lot of things people discover about their spouses over the years they are together that render them incompatible. I assert this is no worse than anything else.

[Lorileah]

How does the saying go? "Don't walk behind me; I may not lead. Don't walk in front of me; I may not follow. Just walk beside me and be my friend." Albert Camus. Marriage is a partnership. Or should be. But following the OP's logic, it doesn't surprise me that there are so many relationships here that end up in the dumpster.

Do you see "rules" as a violation of your personhood? I am sure if you look deep enough you have guidelines for your wife too. Maybe she doesn't push your buttons or she abides by unsaid rules because she knows you don't like something. But there are compromises in every relationship or the relationship ends. I am also always amazed that so many here push the limits then are surprised that they get caught.

Perspective, my wife had one rule. Don't do anything that would embarrass her. My have been a good rule because I didn't run around town looking like a cheap hooker. Maybe that's why people tell me I dress nicely. She could have made a lot of other rules but she was wise and knew what she could live with and what I could live with. In 30 years we had three fights. Go figure it out.

To thine own self be true? You make that line in the sand. You take the consequences. There are a lot of lonely people on these boards because they had to do it their way.

[JamieG]

Not to beat a dead horse, but the OP's original question could be spun as "Why not tell your spouse she must accept these (seemingly to her) new needs and desires right away or hit the highway?" When put this way, it sounds pretty selfish, doesn't it? I don't see myself as controlled by my wife, but I also don't control her. We are equals and (when we are at our best) we make decisions together with the good of the entire family in mind. By being willing to reign in my CDing in the early days of the reveal, I was able to learn how to balance it with the rest of my life, while also giving her time to come to terms with the new reality. Now we are in a good place, and are able to have discussions about CDing that are not all doom and gloom, and in fact have a little fun with it here and there.

[Sometimes Steffi]

Question: why do so many CDs seem to be unabashedly beholden to the "rules" of their wives?

I guess there are a number of reasons for me.
1. Keep the peace
2. Avoid divorce. Only the lawyers win.

Are marriages so often on "shaky grounds" that expressions of individual creativity and gender-fluidity have to be "shoved under the carpet"?

I think gender fluidity is the nuclear bomb in some marriages. Even worse than infidelity. I think it would rock even the strongest marriages.

Why are men so afraid to be themselves? What is this strange "illusory power" projected onto wives?

It's been said before, but here it is again, "Happy wife, happy life." Plus, the power to out you to friends, family and co-workers.

Isn't this idea of "having a choice to CD or not" just a big lie? There really is no choice.

No, there is a choice, but that choice may come with consequences that are too hard to bear.

[PaulaQ]

Do you see "rules" as a violation of your personhood? I am sure if you look deep enough you have guidelines for your wife too.

It depends on the severity of the rules, but yeah, in some instances I do. For example, I would definitely classify DADT as a violation of the CDs personhood.

Again, I'm not talking about the women here who are largely accepting, but want or need some boundaries. You ladies -- I'm not talking about you, you are awesome.

Let's talk about some comparable rules a husband might place on a wife. Suppose your wife loves to paint. But you can't stand it - it's messy, the oils smell funny to you, and you feel it takes time away from you. So you argue with her about it and do everything you can to suppress her hobby. Perhaps she only gets to paint when she goes away for a seminar, or takes a class - but never at home. She's an artist though, and she needs this - it is part of her.

Or maybe she was a stay at home mom. The kids are grown, and she wants more out of life. You don't really need the money, but she wants to work again, restarting a career she sacrificed for the sake of the family. Well, we just aren't going to have any of that! Real women stay home and make dinner - if she's at work sometimes, things will change! You won't feel secure as the breadwinner if she works - are you now less of a man?

So look, both of the examples above seem ridiculous, based on horrible gender stereotypes, an inflexible and sexist husband. Any guy who'd do that to his wife is a jerk, to put it mildly.

And these examples differ very little from the ways some women treat their CD spouse. Oh, I guess I left out one element "surprise hon! I want to paint." Or "Hey, the kids are grown, I'm going to go start the career I put off for the family!"

There, now we have symmetry - "Oh. My. God. She surprised me!" Anyone feel any sympathy for the rather restrictive men in these situations? No? Me either - they suck. Their attitudes are the worst types of sexism. And at one point in time, it was not uncommon for men to feel this way.

But it's totally OK for a woman to freak out, and refuse to acknowledge the reality that they married someone who presents to some degree in a feminine manner. Why? Because "Men don't do that! Well BS on that - the CDers here give lie to that. There are plenty of men who present in a feminine manner. But the sexism and transphobia of our society mean these folks feel they must hide, and they really can be mistreated, and nobody cares.

[Marcelle]

Hi Taylor,

Interesting post and I sentiment that I support within reason. All relationships are different and some CDers may make compromises for the sake of their family. Then again, that is what relationships are about . . . compromise, common ground. However these should be arrived at out of mutual agreement and not a position of demand by one party or the other. The CDer who stalks around the house the like a petulant child demanding his/her rights to dress as they please consequences be damned is no better than an SO who demands the CDer never dress, give it up. The "my way or the highway" approach in any relationship (CDing aside) never works and will always end in ruin IMHO. In a relationship it is about sharing . . . not one party having the balance of power. When you get to the point where one party holds all the decision making power to the detriment of the other party, well . . . seems kind of abusive IMHO.

If a CDer agrees to certain restrictions in order to appease the SO that is his/her call and if it is mutual and they can truly live with it . . . go forth and enjoy. I suspect the relationship will do quite well. However, if the CDer agrees to abide by whatever rules are laid out "sight unseen" I daresay that over time the inability to express what needs to be expressed and being forbidden to do so will most likely transcend into bitterness, resentment, anger and will most like end badly. This is why I always advise that when setting boundaries don't agree to something you know you will never be able to keep and always leave room for negotiation.

In the end if you cannot find common ground no matter how noble the intent may be, I truly believe in my heart of hearts that you will cause undue emotional stress in yours and your SO's life, bitterness and resentment in the relationship and while things may coast forward on auto pilot for years, it will eventually sputter and die. You may stay together but it won't be a caring relationship in the true sense of the word. It will just be two people sharing a common living space.

Hugs

Isha

[Amanda M]

Me? I'm not selfish! I'm just being true to myself!

[Lorileah]

Paula, your comparison is apples and oranges. Being and artist isn't something a normal marriage would break up over. Posing for an artist maybe. And the job thing? OK, so the husband takes one in his manhood on that but she KNEW going in he had the issue of what a wife is (was).

No, I see the point the SO has with the jump out of the closet CD (Not TS's that is a whole different zebra). She didn't know, the stereotype is set in her mind, she didn't have time to prepare and you just shot down every vision of the future she had.

We all make compromises in a relationship. You may not eat some food you love because she doesn't (but you can do it with your buddies). You may not get to go to a strip club anymore. She may not cook something you don't like. Compromise. Before the CDs get all hot and bothered about "It is what I do!" Stop and think. So many here cry "I am a MAN!" then put on fake airs of what they think a WOMAN should be (High heels, shorts skirts, loose morals) I can totally understand why most women don't accept it...CDs tend to go way beyond normal. Think about this. She knows what it is like to be a woman. Her CD husband does a parody of what he fantasizes. Heck, I would tell him he couldn't do it in front of me too.

We all have rules in our relationships. Maybe no smoking in the house. No sugary snacks. Pick up your underwear off the floor. It doesn't degrade you as a person. In fact it makes you a more advanced person not living just for yourself but being considerate of others. If the rules are too tight, there is always a door you can walk out of.

[CherylFlint]

“To thine ownself be true” works fine, on paper, but in the real world there’s a few restrictions.
If you want to be selfish, maybe so.
If you just think about yourself and no one else, okay.
If you think the world “owes” you something, fine.
But if you want to go through life as a mature adult, you give-and-take. It’s called “getting along”.
So, in order to get along with the wife, who in the heck cares what the restrictions are?
The most important things in life are the relationships we have with others, and for any of us, or anyone else, to turn their backs on love, or a darn good friend, is just shooting yourself in the foot.
Be happy for the things and the time you have.
And if your wife doesn’t quite get on board 100%, live with it. Learn to have fun with what you’ve got. Once you lighten-up a bit, maybe the other half will do likewise.
Give and take, got it?

[StarrOfDelite]

But you're right about one thing: to thine own self be true is an admirable maxim. Keep that thought in mind when the judge gives your ex the house you paid for and half your future earnings, won't you.

I don't mean to be bitchy, but unless a person lives in a community property state, e.g. California, judges haven't been permitted to do that kind of allocation of property for quite a while. In most states, e.g. Ohio and Pennsylvania where I am licensed spousal/alimony is usually only granted for a limited time and in cases where the wife hasn't worked for some time and has limited earning power.

If a couple has children, the allocation for child support is set up by a formula which considers the earning power of both parties.

Finally, in most places the domestic relations judge is required to consider the amount of money each party put towards the value of the marital home. If you own a home that was worth, say $100 K on the date when you married, and it is worth $200 K when you divorce, your spouse will get one-half of $100 K, the increase in value during the marriage.

Don't get me wrong, divorce is painful as hell for middle class people, because maintenance of two separate household is always going to be twice as expensive as one. But it is no longer heavily slanted in favor of the wife. And, it doesn't matter why the divorce is occurring since the advent of no-fault divorce laws. Women who seek divorces for adultery and homosexuality, and other husbandly behavior which may be embarrassing or shameful, should receive no better economic settlements than those who divorce because they want to be free to marry the pool boy.

If more men and women were less blinded by their hormone surge, and/or smarter, they'd realize that if they have significant pre-marital assets they should talk to a lawyer and get a pre-nup, too.

[Taylor Ray]

Wow, thanks for all the thoughtful replies! I appreciate all the honesty and insight. After reading through the thread I am left wanting to acknowledge a few points.

I am really grateful that PaulaQ emphasized the 'trans' issue of gender expressions, not just the idea of "compromise in a relationship". Specifically, I am curious about how normal definitions and stereotypes of masculinity get projected onto men who are expressing their femininity. In my experience, most women feel that "men wearing lingerie" or "women's clothing" are gross and disgusting. These types of negative expressions can create harmful emotions and thoughts in men struggling with this aspect of themselves.

Also, I appreciate Katey mentioning the fact that there is a demographic aspect to the forum members. I can fully understand the huge conflict arising in a marriage when the woman knew nothing about this before getting married. Perhaps this is a high percentage of spousal difficulties. Perhaps it would have been wiser to use the word "girlfriend" or "partner". At least in examining non-marital relationships, some of the legal and family consequences could be (temporarily) removed from our investigation into the topic. I have never been married and do not believe in marriage for myself, and I do not have children. This limits me in discussing certain aspects of the question, but it also has allowed me to (unfortunately!) been on the receiving end of negative responses to my expressions of femininity through clothing and behavior even in casual relationships.

The harsh truth of adopting this lifestyle seems to be, for me at least, a great reduction in the potential "partners" I could ever imagine having. As a bisexual, I do have the option of trying to find a boyfriend. But this can be equally as challenging, as many men are "turned off" by the idea of cross-dressing.

[PaulaQ]

And the job thing? OK, so the husband takes one in his manhood on that but she KNEW going in he had the issue of what a wife is (was).

I'm very disappointed with this response. I can't even begin to tell you how sad this makes me, Lori. :(

Is not a very common complaint about spouses of CDs that they feel their role in the relationship is somehow compromised by the feminine behavior of their spouse? I've certainly heard this complaint from any number of cis women here.

So we have to protect the women - they can't be expected to feel threatened in their roles as women, but men - meh - they can just take it in the chops. How patronizing to women.

BTW, there is no way in general that a woman can expect to know her husband's views on her restarting her career 20 years in the future, when they first marry. That type of foresight is just rarely possible - for one thing, people change. For another, people are rarely that honest with one another. And - she could change her mind about what she might have agreed to early in the relationship. People change.

The difference between these two situations I've described is about 50 years. Back then, there were men who would've freaked the hell out if their wife went back to work. Women didn't do that. The social order had to be protected. People - especially men - freaked the hell out.

Now? It's no big deal, and people have, in general, chilled the hell out about it.

But if a straight man expresses a feminine behavior - many women, indeed many people, simply completely go out of their minds about this. At best this is sexism, at worst, it's transphobia.

Most of the women who benefitted from the women's movement in the 70's+ had zero interest in differing gender expressions. Although some of the leaders of the feminist movement most certainly did - indeed it was a point of philosophy to allow women to express in a more masculine fashion, with the idea that eventually we'd have this androgynous genderless society. Sadly, the differences between men and women aren't entirely social, so these ideas are quite unlikely to ever work in the real world. But anyway, women can ditch makeup, wear what were traditionally masculine clothes, and generally enjoy the otherwise limited gains they've made. (They have made gains though.) Almost no one throws a young girl out of the family for wearing pants anymore.

The same social changes haven't happened for men. And indeed, the inherent transphobia is quite disturbing - and affects all of us, whether we are CD or TS. A lot of us who are TS attempt suicide because overcoming these attitudes seems impossible! (BTW, a lot of CDs also attempt suicide >20%.) A lot of these attitudes are internalized by members here. Many of us here feel like we are messed up - that there is something profoundly wrong with us.

There isn't though. We are what we are. We didn't ask for this. Society just hasn't caught up. And some women are just horrible about this stuff. The reason a CDing spouse seems so much worse isn't the surprise factor of it. Oh no. It's the CDing - the idea that their manly, manly, man is *gasp* less of a man now!!!

That's just plain wrong. Sure, some cis women "live" with it - but rather few of you seem to really accept and tolerate your partner, loving them for who they are. Again, I salute the cis women here who are able to love the person they are with, in spite of their gender variance. You are rare, and special women, indeed.

[flatlander_48]

I few years ago, I completed a 6 year expatriate assignment in Taiwan. While it was a great experience in many ways, it taught me a lot about human nature. Much of what I did was managing the negotiations between our contractor (general and subs) and the people installing our process machinery. Typicallly, you can't allow one to have everything his way because nothing will get finished. So, somehow you have too strike a reasonable medium so that the work moves forward on all fronts. The thing is, you will never be able to make everyone happy at ANY point in time. However, if everyone has a little something to grumble about, that's the best of all possible worlds. You've managed to even out the pain a bit.

The thing is, a situation will never work in the long run if one party feels that they are continually on the short end. Those deals often end up in the court system...


DeeAnn

[Taylor Ray]

Typicallly, you can't allow one to have everything his way because nothing will get finished. So, somehow you have too strike a reasonable medium so that the work moves forward on all fronts. The thing is, you will never be able to make everyone happy at ANY point in time.

I understand your point within this context, but it kind of misses the entire issue of this being a "trans issue". This is an aspect of my person-hood. It is not like wanting to install a 70 inch TV in a man-cave when household expenses are tight, or demanding that my partner always want to do the same activities as I do.

How, in the world, is this still being talked about as "selfish", even on this forum?

Doesn't this indicate the unconscious Zeitgeist we are all infected with, which PaulaQ has labeled "trans-phobia"?

As long as the word "selfish" is attached to this issue, there will continue to be feelings of isolation and pain by trans people who need to express this aspect of their personality.

The same applies to the word "fetish". Society imagines that all trans people just want to get off with some knickers.

[Katey888]

Taylor - can I offer the perspective that the degree to which this is part of ones 'personhood' as you put it (I like that.. :)) seems to vary significantly depending on the individual and whether or not the individual identifies as TG, trans* or 'just' a CD. I think we have many folk here (and more elsewhere) for whom CDing is something that can be purely fetish, or a fantasy role or cosplay-type experience. Some of those people do have a choice about what they do and how often they indulge their needs, and if there is a choice then that could be considered selfish quite fairly. I agree wholeheartedly that for the other part of the spectrum - TG and/or trans* - AND where this aspect of their nature is known to their partners because it is too strong to be repressed, then it would not be fair for their expression of this part of them to be considered selfish - it is simply too much a part of them.

The difficulty comes where someone discovers that they are trans* in a relationship, perhaps similarly to those that discover they are not heterosexual? It's a significant change for a partner to attempt to absorb, and because 'fairness' anyway in this context is entirely subjective, perception is reality and both partners and the CDer may continue to feel that it's selfish and continue to be apologists for something that is so much a part of their being.

I think I can demonstrate the grey in this: I can pretty much choose how and when I CD - I just don't seem to have a choice that I need to do this at all, or that I could stop - so I believe that puts me just into the TG camp. I have no doubt that others may see my behaviour as selfish because I don't involve my wife - don't even tell her about this part of me - so she can't be involved in how I express this part of me because I choose to keep it secret. I admit I have selfish reasons for doing that, but some of them are also to protect her from the knowledge. Some may think that patronising but I don't: I know my wife - and I think I know the way she would respond. Selfishness is not necessarily always a bad trait and it's also a very human one - I'm afraid religion, literature and the media conspire to make us think that sacrifice, altruism and selflessness are always something we should aspire to - but life generally isn't like that, and we must be somewhat selfish to be recognised as individuals. It's part of the human condition. :)

Most of the great philanthropists of the world were generally very selfish people before they discovered they had the wherewithal to be generous... :thinking:

Katey x

[CarlaWestin]

With the X and with my loving wife, I heard the same line shortly after reveal.
"I married a man! Not a woman!"

My loving wife now truly sees that she is married to Me. The person that loves her madly that also likes to play dress up.

[Erika Lyne]

I've been thinking about this post for a while now. Some new things have come to mind. While pondering how to express them, others have touched upon some of my thoughts.



The social order had to be protected...

But if a straight man expresses a feminine behavior - many women, indeed many people, simply completely go out of their minds about this. At best this is sexism, at worst, it's transphobia.

(I am taking a little liberty to dissect some of Paula Q's reply because she may have shed light on much of this discourse. I am giving her full credit for her original words and I am not implying these were her intentions. This is just my observation.)
Hmmm... Maybe you've just unconsiously qualified exactly what non accepting wives/SOs are thinking. Are these people (our non accepting wives and SOs) phobic of us not "maintaining social order?" Are they putting DADT restrictions or worse, ending the relationships as a way to "throw" us out of the house because we are NOT "wearing pants," as the women before Women's Lib of the '70s risked being treated if they DID wear pants? If they are, isn't it curious how they have taken a "female chauvinistic" stance in response to this challenge to the current social norm?(Towards the phobic masses. The shoe is on the other foot now, don't like it so much do ya!--Sorry, I digress...)



A lot of these attitudes are internalized by members here. Many of us here feel like we are messed up - that there is something profoundly wrong with us.

To be perfectly clean, I am nonsuicidal but I sure do internalize these discomforts. I regularly express to my wife that my CDing knowingly hurts our relationship. "I'm sorry that I'm broken." I say to her. This is usually followed with an eyeroll from her or a,"Knock it off!" but it is how I feel.



...I salute the cis women here who are able to love the person they are with, in spite of their gender variance. You are rare, and special women, indeed.

Indeed. I agree with this last statement but this "salute" seems like the possible start of a surrender of power. (Uh-oh! Did I just rock the boat again?)

Directed to Paula Q. I thank you for so regularly being a bridge to the trans-view. It is sometimes similar to a CD view (in comparison to "straight" GG and GM views) but often a totally seporate viewpoint that many of have not seen. As we all know, the views here are a varied spectrum and it is difficult to get us to agree on much. As a comparative to the Women's Lib of the '70s, looking back, there were many common views. After a bit of organization, the goals were set, plans made and many positive things came from it. For us, it seems like herding cats. There are too many wishes and wants, little commonality and we fight with eachother so often it is unsettling.

Great thread,
-E

[Krisi]

I'm not sure I get the point of your post, but it seems to be something about wives "controlling" husbands. Perhaps in some cases they do, but in reality, a committed relationship requires understanding, respect and compromise. I suspect that you are not married and have never been in a committed relationship with anyone.

So if you really want to go "gallivanting around the neighborhood" in pink tights and a tutu, but you know it would hurt your wife or family, you don't do it. If your desire to crossdress is so strong that you can't respect your wife's feelings, it's time for a divorce. You can do what you want but you'll be living alone.

As for "gender-fluidity" (which I believe is BS), your wife probably expected she was marrying a man, not a woman or someone who thinks he's somewhere in-between. Again, it's probably time for a divorce so you can be whatever you think you are.

[Marleena]

I think the worst thing we TG/TS can do is alienate GG's further if they don't accept us as partners, or our lifestyle, by shaming them. Like I said earlier they expect to be getting into a relationship with a cisgender male unless we let them know different. You can't force them to like it or accept it. Again many of us expect this being TG to go away but it doesn't and the reveal later on is not always intentional. Luckily we are beginning to change perceptions through education and the media and here on this board too, I hope.

[ReineD]

Isn't this idea of "having a choice to CD or not" just a big lie? There really is no choice.


Being a CDer is not a choice, but the degree of flexibility with expression is huge. Some people only underdress. Others are happy going out once or twice per week (or once per month), and don't bother to dress at home … dressing to just stay home offers no satisfaction. Others still feel compelled to wear articles of female clothing every day, even if they present as male and passers-by don't realize their clothing was purchased in a womens' store. In terms of outings, some prefer the mainstream and depending on where they live they don't mind going out alone, while others thrive on outings with "the girls" to fun TG clubs where there is dancing, etc. And there is everything in between.

I think that people subconsciously taylor their preferences based on their life priorities. If they love their wives (who may not be OK with the idea of being "out and proud" and they also prioritize their marriages, they will become OK with either dressing at home or going out just occasionally to the next town over. If the wives draw a line in the sand against any type of CDing and the marriage isn't that strong, then I think this will exacerbate the desire to dress. It's not that the desire is strong enough to live full-time, but the rebellion is against the lack of personal freedom which would be the case no matter the preferred activity.

So yes, I think there are a great many choices open to a CDer that are not options for transsexuals who obviously need to live 24/7 in their target gender with legal name changes, etc.

[Isabella Ross]

My experience is similar to Jamie's, just above me. I play by the rules that my wife and I have both decided works within our marriage, and it's going great. I didn't acquiesce to her every demand, just as she would never accept my reveal if it was framed in this way: "I'm crossdressing, and that's all there is to it." I absolutely agree; be true to thine self. But there are ways to do just that, while maintaining the health of a valued relationship.

[Sandra]

If we hadn't had some rules when we hit a bad patch then we might not be were we are today, which is nearly 28 years married. Just because some don't think it's right doesn't mean people shouldn't give it try, it might just work and give you what you wish for.

[PaulaQ]

Hmmm... Maybe you've just unconsiously qualified exactly what non accepting wives/SOs are thinking. Are these people (our non accepting wives and SOs) phobic of us not "maintaining social order?" Are they putting DADT restrictions or worse, ending the relationships as a way to "throw" us out of the house because we are NOT "wearing pants," as the women before Women's Lib of the '70s risked being treated if they DID wear pants? If they are, isn't it curious how they have taken a "female chauvinistic" stance in response to this challenge to the current social norm?(Towards the phobic masses. The shoe is on the other foot now, don't like it so much do ya!--Sorry, I digress...)

I don't mean to imply that this is simply an issue on the part of cis women. (I won't use the term GG anymore - genetics don't prove anything either.) Our society is quite transphobic. Both women and men react to this, albeit differently, and sometimes for different reasons:
1. Homophobia - if you are attracted to a person who you discover is gender variant, you may question your own sexual orientation. A surprising number of straight people seem to be insecure about this.

2. Our society likes a binary. Male / Female. Republican / Democrat. Good / Evil. We are uncomfortable when we encounter someone who is an outlier, who doesn't fit into the mental framework we have established.

3. Most people are cisgender. Most is an understatement - like 99% or so. For most cis people, particularly straight ones, gender, sexual orientation, social role are more or less implicit. They never really think about this stuff. It just works for them, and the world they build is built for them, not us. We challenge that order - and worse, we challenge it in a way they can barely understand.

4. Religious rationalizations. People will use religion to rationalize anything they don't like. The religious groups that hate gays, lesbians, bisexuals and trans people are very little different than the ones who hated racial minorities.

5. People fear things that are different and unknown - especially people who seem very different from them. There is very little difference between hating someone for their race, hating them for being gay, or hating them for being trans. (And indeed, when two or more of those conditions apply to the same person, some people react violently enough to commit murder.)

There is just a lot of stigma associated with being trans. (I am including you CDers in the label "trans". Sorry - you are gender variant, you just get to don your man-suit to avoid some of the really nasty bits. Lucky you.) Some woman fear having the stigma of your transness be applied to them. ("OMG - I can't believe she stayed with him!") Some women have such rigid ideas about this stuff that they are unwilling to really consider the person they married and presumably love, vs. their idealized image of their ideal partner. (I was not exactly a man's man. My wife complained about this a lot at times. But she married me, and I believe loved me. I had other qualities she liked. When I came out, really the only thing that mattered was that I wasn't John Wayne.)

BTW, I'm not even saying that I blame women who do not want a trans spouse. The social stigma is very real, and I can understand someone who doesn't want to deal with it. I can also understand someone who really wants a very masculine man - and being a CD certainly challenges that notion for some.

What I do have a problem with is that we are blamed for this. We are often treated with great cruelty and contempt. And really, many women never accept us for who we are. It's as if the person they loved simply no longer exists because they dress differently sometimes - because they have this other side to them.

And I'm just going to call that reaction what it is - it's transphobia. I've experienced it now from my ex, all but one of my old friends, some co-workers. Yeah, I get the full brunt of it because I transitioned. But y'all get (sometimes) milder versions of it, as CDs.


Directed to Paula Q. I thank you for so regularly being a bridge to the trans-view. It is sometimes similar to a CD view (in comparison to "straight" GG and GM views) but often a totally seporate viewpoint that many of have not seen.

Actually, as I said, I include every gender variant on this forum under the umbrella term "transgender." (BTW, I don't care that you don't like this - so don't bother arguing with me about it.) I imply nothing from that term, other than your gender expression or identity do not match your primary and secondary biological sex characteristics. You may identify as a CD, or gender fluid, or gender queer, or in any number of other ways, including transsexual.

Although I'm transsexual, I see many of the issues faced between various people in the trans spectrum as being the same - other people's reaction to us.

And I always try to consider CDs, because I identified that way, and because while the vast majority of you will never transition - a not insignificant number of you will. And that alone is enough to make me take your problems very seriously indeed.

[flatlander_48]

I understand your point within this context, but it kind of misses the entire issue of this being a "trans issue". This is an aspect of my person-hood. It is not like wanting to install a 70 inch TV in a man-cave when household expenses are tight, or demanding that my partner always want to do the same activities as I do.

The point is that demands, by either party, are not the best. My guess is that in many cases, we (crossdressers) don't do a very good job of explaining how all this sits for us. Note that this is NOT attempting to explain the WHY behind what we do. It is possible that the shame and guilt that we sometimes feel, to say nothing of denial, may prevent us from being candid about this activity that we do. Fear of potential outcomes can also drive us to be less than candid.

The other point is that, transgender issues aside, we're talking about human relationships. Often we have some very rigid ideas around how those relationships should be structured and where the lines are. It's obvious that learning your partner is into an activity that can have far-reaching consequences for the lives of all concerned is often an upsetting experience. But, acceptance shouldn't be automatic; and neither should rejection.

I think the statement "I married a man, not a woman." is a bit lame. If you broaden that out, did any of us set out to marry a cancer patient, a schizophrenic, a stroke victim, etc.? Most often, no. If those things happen usually we try to deal with them as best we can. For a few, those kinds of circumstances can overwhelm a relationship. But, in part, a major difference is that we can see the result of having those medical issues. While you can see the external veneer the we crossdressers put forth, much of the actual shift happens internally. That is probably very disconcerting for our partners.

[Taylor Ray]

Actually, as I said, I include every gender variant on this forum under the umbrella term "transgender." (BTW, I don't care that you don't like this - so don't bother arguing with me about it.) I imply nothing from that term, other than your gender expression or identity do not match your primary and secondary biological sex characteristics. You may identify as a CD, or gender fluid, or gender queer, or in any number of other ways, including transsexual.



This might be the clearest and best expressed argument I have heard that points towards including cross-dressers under the "transgender spectrum". It is really interesting when we examine our own journeys through this process. Perhaps we all have been guilty of judging different "types" of gender-variation expressions at some point in our life, no doubt while searching to define ourselves.

For instance, we could say "Well, he is just a degenerate sex-addict that uses women's clothing to get off."

We could also say: "Well, he is a really messed up freak that wants to mutilate his biological body and force others to call him a new name."

Perhaps when we impose a "binary system" onto trans people...i.e. "Well, he is either "just" a CD, OR a "true" transsexual, we are doing a disservice. It's like saying:

"Well, he is "just" a cross-dresser, so it is something we can "talk about" and "compromise" about. Doesn't this invalidate and undermine the variant gender expression?

It almost seems to revolve around the issues of "masculinity" and "femininity". Why are some women "threatened" by men who want to CD? In one of my graduate psychology classes, a women stated:

"Well, I want to be the one that wears the panties."

Not surprisingly, she was very critical of "patriarchy" and "chauvinism" as well, and wanted to put an end to "male dominance" in the culture.

[ReineD]

It almost seems to revolve around the issues of "masculinity" and "femininity". Why are some women "threatened" by men who want to CD? In one of my graduate psychology classes, a women stated:

"Well, I want to be the one that wears the panties."

Not surprisingly, she was very critical of "patriarchy" and "chauvinism" as well, and wanted to put an end to "male dominance" in the culture.

I can't speak for all women, of course, but my sense is that we don't feel threatened, if you mean that a CDer takes away our identity as a woman (if you don't mean this, then what do you mean?).

But, generally hetero women simply are not turned on by femininity (hence the term hetero), which poses a problem when they began a relationship with a person who presented masculine at the beginning. Had the CD been out and proud, this very same woman might have been friends but simply moved on to someone else for a romantic relationship, not because she thinks the CDer is freakish or degenerate (your words), but because there is no basis for romantic attraction.

Also, when a woman says she wants to wear the panties, it means that she wants to be the female partner in an opposite-sex relationship, which makes sense if she is hetero. You mention patriarchy and chauvinism, but please remember that seeking equality legally and in the workforce has nothing to do with sexual attraction between romantic partners in the bedroom.

Last, although there may still be a chunk of people on the religious right who believe that the CDing is degenerate and freakish (your words), there are an increasing number of people who understand that alternate preferences are perfectly OK, even if they're not into it themselves.

[Taylor Ray]

You raise some really great points Reine, but I will off some counter-points for the sake of discussion.

First of all, in my experience "transphobia" is not just limited to a "chunk of people" on the religious right. It is actually very pervasive and quite common in our culture, especially when you are able to gain insight into "how people really think", by talking to all types of people and having multiple experiential encounters.

I agree (as I stated above) that a large percentage of CDs may already be in a relationship when they attempt to reveal this aspect of themselves, and I fully agree that this is unfair to the other partner. In my experience, however, I have expressed this aspect of myself early on in relationships, and the negative responses have been far more encompassing than just "I am not romantically interested or turned on by this". Quite the contrary, the response is usually along the lines of: "There might be something wrong with you and you might need help."

In terms of "who is the female partner in a relationship", I have had similar experiences in intimate relationships with men. Although I was in the "female-passive" role, there was still negative projections towards me when I expressed a desire to CD. Also, why can't a man be in the "Male role" while dressed in women's clothing in a hetero-relationship?

In terms of the experience I had with the woman who stated "I want to be the one who wears the panties", she was not talking about just a role. Our discussion was actually about men who wear panties, and she was stating, more or less, that "the item of clothing called panties is for the woman."

In terms of a woman being threatened by men who CD, I did not mean to imply anything about the woman's own "identity", at least in terms of femininity. But your raise a great question that I am definitely interested in exploring further.

[Jennifer_Ph]

I have wondered the same thing for years. I guess the, "Happy wife, happy life" thing has been ingrained in us. It doesn't matter if the man is happy in the marriage, all that matters is that the woman is. Most sit-coms back that theory up... along with the fact that all men are stupid bumbling idiots who wouldn't remember to breathe if it weren't for their wives.

[PaulaQ]

First of all, in my experience "transphobia" is not just limited to a "chunk of people" on the religious right. It is actually very pervasive and quite common in our culture, especially when you are able to gain insight into "how people really think", by talking to all types of people and having multiple experiential encounters.

I agree. Actually, it's quite common here. Quite a lot of the women who are dealing with the horror of having a trans spouse are suffering from this to one degree or another. The notion that having a trans spouse is "a horror" is good evidence of this. Actually a good number of the CDs here are also, ironically enough, transphobic in their own ways - either with internalized guilt and shame over who they are and their gender expression, or having quite negative attitudes about transsexuals. (Sometimes those are sort of deserved - there have been a number of trans women here on this forum over the years who've been, in my opinion, extremely demeaning to crossdresser identified trans people.)


In terms of the experience I had with the woman who stated "I want to be the one who wears the panties", she was not talking about just a role. Our discussion was actually about men who wear panties, and she was stating, more or less, that "the item of clothing called panties is for the woman."

Funny story - a lot of feminists hate trans people - especially second wave feminists in the 70's. Here's some examples. (Trigger warning - these links contain a lot of transphobic hate.)

http://janiceraymond.com/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Transsexual_Empire
http://genderidentitywatch.com/
http://theterfs.com/ <- this is a site about TERFs

Google the term "TERF". (It stands for "Trans Exclusionary Radical Feminist.") There are a number of these women alive and well today, doing cheerful, helpful little things like finding stealth trans women in colleges and universities, and outing them, openly harassing trans women in social media, and other really constructive (sarcasm) activities.


In terms of a woman being threatened by men who CD, I did not mean to imply anything about the woman's own "identity", at least in terms of femininity. But your raise a great question that I am definitely interested in exploring further.

There are good reasons for a woman in a relationship with a CD to be insecure about their identity. Many women today, in my opinion, don't really have very strong identities of their own. They have lived under a social structure that is designed to all but eradicate their sense of self. (BTW, there is a fair amount of this that happens to men as well - our society can be very cruel.) Some examples of messages that really hurt women's identities:
- Women can be anything they want to be! Mothers, high power executives, astronauts, anything! So let's put pressure on them to be all of those things, so that surely they will fail.
- But let's make sure that if they do choose a career path, we reduce their pay because of the chance they may one day choose to have a child. Because nothing promotes self-esteem like getting lower pay for the same job as a man gets!
- Let's tell girls "any type of body you have is beautiful", and then spend hundreds of millions of dollars advertising fashions that will never look good on them!
- Let's set standards of beauty for women such that even the most genetically gifted women on earth require plastic surgery, and photo shop tweaking before they are presented to the public as an image of femininity.
- Let's allow some women to be really successful - real role models for young women. And then make sure the only thing young women really get to hear about is Katy Perry.
- Let's encourage women to completely lose their identities in their roles as wives and mothers. Oh - and let's make sure they feel bad for not working, or for not having a super high power career.
- Let's tell women who have high power careers that their families are suffering because of their labors, or let's criticize them for not having a marriage / family at all.

Women get a lot of really awful mixed messages. This crap permeates our culture. It's really sad, and it really does a lot of damage. I think it would be a lot better if women got different messages:
"All women are beautiful."
"All women matter and are important. YOU, as a woman, have a contribution to make."
"Be who you are, not who they tell you that you should be. You know better than they do."
"Learn from women who came before you - but don't let that control you. Choose your own way.

[Mink]

Also, why can't a man be in the "Male role" while dressed in women's clothing in a hetero-relationship?

In terms of the experience I had with the woman who stated "I want to be the one who wears the panties", she was not talking about just a role. Our discussion was actually about men who wear panties, and she was stating, more or less, that "the item of clothing called panties is for the woman.".

I find stuff like this problematic too...

this idea of "i married a man not a woman!" but combined with "you're not a woman you are just a man in a dress!" ... so ... then why CAN'T he just be a dude in a dress?

wearing pink lacy panties doesn't mean you are suddenly not a man or masculine as all heck... in the way you act and look!

just like wearing boring old baggy boxers doesn't make some cute girly girl all that masculine!

picture you this:

a man is so turned on by his GF in her lingerie... but then she says ... hold on... and switches into a pair of boxers (his OR hers!)...

would the man suddenly say ... jeez! now THAT is a turn off! I'm so not attracted to you right now... you look so mannish! I married a WOMAN not a man! you look so dang masculine right now and i'm only attracted to feminine woman..

???

that'd be unheard of

while a guy would probably be MORE digging his lady in lingerie or a sexy dress rather than boxer shorts or a lumberjack look...

I don't think many a guy would turn down the very femme lady when she's donning boyclothes / a "masculine" look

because to me a woman is STILL feminine in manly clothing ... even if she drew on a fake moustache ... even if she had super short hair...

you know?

so why can't women realize that a man is still a man and maybe even a MANLY man ... even in panties or a dress... ? it's so dang weird

cuz lord knows how many women I've read say they thought tim curry was ... even in fishnets / corset / makeup / wig... and while he was very campy and over the top you can't deny he was still a very mannish man!