My thoughts on why

[GG Vanya]

it's totally acceptable for a woman to wear masculine clothing but not for a man to wear feminine clothing.

I'm struggling for the correct words to express this, so bear with me:

Though women have come a LONG way since the days of not being allowed to vote and the attitudes that a woman's place is "barefoot, pregnant and in the kitchen" we are *still* not viewed as *equal* by the majority.

Therefore, when a woman appears as masculine it's viewed as aspiring to climb that ladder of social equality, not actually to *be* a man, but to show the world they can do most anything a man can do.

On the other hand, when a man appears as feminine it's viewed as him taking a step back *down* that ladder of social equality.

As wrong as the concept has been proven to be, women are still viewed as the "weaker sex".

I do not in any way personally subscribe to, or agree with, these points of view, but I do feel it is a major reason for society's rejection of M2F crossdressers.

[Lauren B]

I completely agree. For as far as women have come in our society, they are still considered second-class citizens, and like you said, Vanya, "weak".

I don't think it's just our culture, either. Most societies around the world are patriarchal, and to be a man is to be "strong", and is desirable, and to be a woman is to be "weak". Many people, especially men, just can't wrap their minds around why someone who is in the "privileged" class would take a "step down" to the "second" class, and consider anyone who would want to do so as somehow defective and a failure.

Unfortunately, I think that for the most part this will be the reality as long as this paradigm is the reality. This can't even begin to be undone until women are recognized as men's equals, but men as a whole, like any other person/group who is dominant and powerful, have too much to lose by letting this happen.

[Jodie_Lynn]

I think you are mostly correct here Vanya, but I also think that many people also attribute a pervisity to CD-ing M2F.

The old saw about "dirty old men" springs to mind. The average citizen cannot seem to accept that there might not be a sexual angle to a person's CD-ing, hence the often asked question of "are you gay?" to those of us who have come out into the open.

[noname]

GG Vanya: Do you have any ideas why people seem creeped out by a guy wearing fem items?


completely agree. For as far as women have come in our society, they are still considered second-class citizens

Interesting, I feel as though I'm treated as a second class citizen as guy.

[GG Vanya]

GG Vanya: Do you have any ideas why people seem creeped out by a guy wearing fem items?



Interesting, I feel as though I'm treated as a second class citizen as guy.


Noname,

The point of my thread was an attempt to explain why "people seem creeped out by a guy wearing fem items".

I'm obviously not creeped out by it, I'm married to a crossdresser. :D I will admit to being "put off" by the CDs who dress years younger than their obvious age, and those who portray women as trollops/sex objects and go out in public dressed that way. If given one wish pertaining to this it would be "if you wish to emulate us, please do it with class, dignity and respect.

Pornography still portrays us as slabs of meat on an open market. We've fought long and hard trying to overcome that mentality. Please don't promote that image when you emulate us.

I posted a thread in the lounge once touching on this subject, and in it I remarked that possibly the negative reactions of women could be a feeling that a crossdresser is an "imposter" i.e. portraying himself to be something that he is not.

I also stated that, in my opinion, a "man in a dress" has a better chance of being accepted by society than the man who dresses to pass as a woman.

I still think the prevailing cause of non acceptance for M2F CDs is the original one I posted above. How many times have you heard a young male child called a "sissy" when he showed emotions or conducted himself in what was perceived to be a less than *macho* manner? :Angry3:

[Tina Dixon]

Sorry to say its been that way for ever Love, since the cave man wacked a female on the head with his club and draged her off to the cave for a night of loving, its a gender battle for sure and its why some of us are on both sides.

[Billijo49504]

Well, I've worked with several GG who were 2nd class workers. Working in skilled trades, one told me , she didn't want to do the job because she was afraid of breaking a nail. And there were more than a few that had that thought.I'm a girl, and I have to be here to keep the numbers right. But on the other hand, I've worked with some GG who would crawl into the presses and get in the grease with us guys, cuz it was part of the job. Those GG were respected, but the others were remembered. Does that make any sense, I hope so...BJ

[GG Vanya]

Y'all I didn't intend for this to become a GGs vs. CDs topic. Please don't take it in that direction.

My point was what I perceive to be the general society's take on men "acting like women" or "aspiring to be women".

[EricaCD]

Vanya - I think you give your gender too little credit. Women did not start out with the right to dress as men, and certainly not with the right to behave like men. Women fought a long, hard struggle to liberate themselves in terms of clothing. Women are still fighting to be able to act fully within a man's sphere and not be evaluated by their gender.

Women have been shunned, mocked, damned, ostracized, abused and killed in the name of their pursuit of these rights and freedoms. Women are entitled to wear men's clothes because they compelled society's acceptance, and at a cost that was infinitely greater than would be demanded of the crossdressing male community to gain its own acceptance.

Erica

[StephanieCD]

I never thought that. Wow... hmmmmmmmm...

[Joanie]

Vanya - I think you give your gender too little credit. Women did not start out with the right to dress as men, and certainly not with the right to behave like men. Women fought a long, hard struggle to liberate themselves in terms of clothing. Women are still fighting to be able to act fully within a man's sphere and not be evaluated by their gender.

Women have been shunned, mocked, damned, ostracized, abused and killed in the name of their pursuit of these rights and freedoms. Women are entitled to wear men's clothes because they compelled society's acceptance, and at a cost that was infinitely greater than would be demanded of the crossdressing male community to gain its own acceptance.

Erica

Yes, women have been put down and stomped on for wanting the right to vote, etc. but how was the current trend that has now come to fruition of women wearing pants, other male attire opposed? I don't think there was the same stigma attached to women when they started wearing pants as there would be for a man walking around in a dress. This probably began with women wearing pants for horseback riding, shorts for tennis, etc. and evolved from there. I remember in the mid-1960 a great aunt of mine finding it very amusing that a young female cousin, then in her teens, was wearing blue jeans, she couldnt' get over that, but best I can remember she just thought it was funny in a non-threatening way.

P.S.--On my recent visits to Lane Bryant, I was struck by how many cropped pants, capris, long pants, gouchos, etc. there were vs. skirts and dresses. Cropped pants/capris are the new skirts for the women; i.e, the standard attire.

[sparks]

So what's wrong with Barefoot and Pregnant anyways?!?:D

I think you've got part of the basis correct anyway. The rest of the equation is mixed up in sexual stereotyping. That's my opinion anyway. to much of the general public we are percieved as homosexual. Which there is nothing wrong with being gay or lesbean but as far ways of life and acceptance the gayl lifestyle still has a way to go in the eyes od exceptance. the lifestyle has moved forward in leaps and bounds but it is still largely frowned upon.
There is also huge foreign thought towards being something your not. Really as being a CD I often find it hard to wrap my head around some of this stuff. Now from an outsiders point of view with no education on the subject we might as well be from another planet. A creepy planet at that.

But hey these are just my own little thoughts.:happy:

[DeeInGeorgia]

And then there are us men that percieve women as the more powerful sex. I came from and grew up in a family where my father, while the major income earner and fairly independant, my mother was the recognized leader of the family in all other matters. My father's mother was of a similar type. So I was a second generation believer of the power of the female.

My family also did not show physical affection. So as the oldest child, but at a young age of 4 or so, I think I took notice that my younger sister would get affection (mother holding baby) that I did not receive. I would then do things to garner favor from my mother to obtain whatever little bit of affection I could like trying to sew and cook.

There is much more I could say, but will cut it short. Let me just say that it took years to find a women that appreciated a man that was not a Strong Male Figure that many women look for in a husband and the years looking for female affection took theit toll and I think increased my need to crossdress later in life.

Dee

[Rachel Morley]

This is almost exactly what I said in post back in May. I totally agree...obviously.

http://www.crossdressers.com/forums/showthread.php?p=444928#post444928

[Sarah Smile]

Vanya, you may be right, but I think there is much more to it than that. I believe it has more to do with the idea that it would be "unmanly" to admit that there is anything wrong with manliness in culture and society today. Wanting to change the way things are is tantamount to admitting that there is a problem, something that men "just don't do". As we have seen in many threads here, though most of us refuse to take it to heart (myself included), most of the problems with men wanting equality of dress, self expression, etc is all in their (our) heads. Most are willing to give us this equality if we just ask for it. This holds true even for other men. More men will be ready to allow change when they see enough other men allowing it.

[Snookums]

when I lived in Florida I had a gay friend who worked at a Dennys,his name was Tom,he passed away from aids.
One night Tom and some of his friends came in the Dennys dressed to the nines,they looked like 4 very tall women,very beautiful,I made a comment that it's a shame when a man can dress like that and look better than a women,GG.
the manager kicked me out and would never let me back,just for complimenting Tom and his friends.
when Tom I and a couple other regulars from the coffee clatch visited him in the hospital,what a shame someone with such a good heart had to die so horribly.
I am proud to say he was my friend.

[DeAnna Elaine]

Thinking critically requires more effort than many people wish to expend. I believe most people are perfectly comfortable labeling people by category. How sad... the human condition is much more complex than that.

[noname]

I will admit to being "put off" by the CDs who dress years younger than their obvious age, and those who portray women as trollops/sex objects and go out in public dressed that way. If given one wish pertaining to this it would be "if you wish to emulate us, please do it with class, dignity and respect.

I assume you mean somone well into adulthood dressing like they are in the teens. I admit I like younger clothes, although I'm in my early 30's. Of course I've always been that way, quicksilver and surf wear. But I so agree with class and dignity. Let's not go out looking rediculous.


Pornography still portrays us as slabs of meat on an open market. We've fought long and hard trying to overcome that mentality. Please don't promote that image when you emulate us.

I'm confused. What does porn have to do clothing? I an only assume, don't dress like a hooker.


I also stated that, in my opinion, a "man in a dress" has a better chance of being accepted by society than the man who dresses to pass as a woman.

I agree with that as well. The times I have worn a skirt, ( I have one denim one ) I have not been given any trouble. A couple stares and few second glances.


I still think the prevailing cause of non acceptance for M2F CDs is the original one I posted above. How many times have you heard a young male child called a "sissy" when he showed emotions or conducted himself in what was perceived to be a less than *macho* manner?

Too many times. Kind of like when adults tell a young boy who scraped his knee, 'don't cry, big boys don't cry' My mom used to tell me, are you a man or a mouse? lol

You do have some good theories imo.


Vanya - I think you give your gender too little credit. Women did not start out with the right to dress as men, and certainly not with the right to behave like men. Women fought a long, hard struggle to liberate themselves in terms of clothing. Women are still fighting to be able to act fully within a man's sphere and not be evaluated by their gender.

Women have been shunned, mocked, damned, ostracized, abused and killed in the name of their pursuit of these rights and freedoms. Women are entitled to wear men's clothes because they compelled society's acceptance, and at a cost that was infinitely greater than would be demanded of the crossdressing male community to gain its own acceptance.

I think that is only partially true. Like I've said before, no women younger than 40 knows any different and grew up with pants. If they fought so h ard, why are they supportive of my rights to wear what I like? No not even the old timers who wear pants support our rights.

I think what really kicked off women wear pants was women working in the factories during WWII. Who else was going to work at the factories with all the men out fighting? So I've heard, I'm not old enough to know.


Yes, women have been put down and stomped on for wanting the right to vote, etc.

Actually, men fought for the right to vote to. Origonally it was only rich land owning white males that could vote.


P.S.--On my recent visits to Lane Bryant, I was struck by how many cropped pants, capris, long pants, gouchos, etc. there were vs. skirts and dresses. Cropped pants/capris are the new skirts for the women; i.e, the standard attire.

I notice that to. I told my wife pants are for men, ( as in, that is what we are expected to wear ) and I am not going to sit idle and let women take over all possible pants style. I could really rant on that. Complete BS :Angry3: :Angry3: :Angry3: I refuse to lay down and only accept a very basic boring cut. Sorry it just won't happen. I am very artistic person, and I'm gunna let it show. I should start wearing them everywhere, even to church, screw everyone, this is bs. Ok, I'll stop now.


Thinking critically requires more effort than many people wish to expend. I believe most people are perfectly comfortable labeling people by category. How sad... the human condition is much more complex than that.

So true, so true.

I would like to add that part of the 'creepiness' if you will, comes from it being unexpected. They are not thinking of what we like in regard to style, they are thinking of what they expect, and when someone is not what they expect it throws them off balance if you will.

I find it a shame that people feel someones sexual organs dictate what styles they might like, of course I'm preaching to the choir.

ps. wow this is a long post - sorry

[Kate Simmons]

Hi Vanya, How about a M T F such as myself with an "attitude"? The trend has gotta change sometime. I think we just let "society" walk all over us in a manner of speaking. This is the same society that cannot see how a man can be a "sub" to a female "dom" but in everday life, he is the husband and the head of the house. (Actually, I've always felt marriage was supposed to be an equal partnership and not one be the "head" over the other.)My purpose for being an "adventuress" is to show that I can be feminine and decisive at the same time. I don't let others set the "bar" for me. I set it for myself. Plus, I don't ask for "permission" to be me or seek approval from anyone.Maybe I'm alone in this, but like I said, you gotta start somewhere plus I just gotta be me. If others can't see I'm my own person, it's their problem, not mine. :happy: Ericka

[Nigella]

it's totally acceptable for a woman to wear masculine clothing but not for a man to wear feminine clothing.

I'm struggling for the correct words to express this, so bear with me:

Though women have come a LONG way since the days of not being allowed to vote and the attitudes that a woman's place is "barefoot, pregnant and in the kitchen" we are *still* not viewed as *equal* by the majority.

Therefore, when a woman appears as masculine it's viewed as aspiring to climb that ladder of social equality, not actually to *be* a man, but to show the world they can do most anything a man can do.

On the other hand, when a man appears as feminine it's viewed as him taking a step back *down* that ladder of social equality.

As wrong as the concept has been proven to be, women are still viewed as the "weaker sex".

I do not in any way personally subscribe to, or agree with, these points of view, but I do feel it is a major reason for society's rejection of M2F crossdressers.
Yes I agree, but it is one of many reasons, some accepted by the TG community and some rejected

[Lisa Golightly]

On the other hand, when a man appears as feminine it's viewed as him taking a step back *down* that ladder of social equality.

As wrong as the concept has been proven to be, women are still viewed as the "weaker sex".

The trappings of a patriachal society. Female adoption of male clothes is viewed as a victory on their part. The adoption of female clothes by males is viewed as capitulation.

[Satrana]

I remember in the mid-1960 a great aunt of mine finding it very amusing that a young female cousin, then in her teens, was wearing blue jeans, she couldnt' get over that, but best I can remember she just thought it was funny in a non-threatening way.



Yup I have always wondered what it was like back in the 1960s when the first women started to wear jeans. Obvioulsy they were bucking the trend and would have been stared at as well, but I have never heard of any cases of physical attacks etc. Clearly the husbands and boyfriends of these women did not forbid them from wearing jeans in public either otherwise they would have been closeted just as we are today.

You hit the nail on the head Joanie, by saying a woman in jeans is non-threatening. That is the key. It is the old double standard that woman are not sexual beings and thus when they wear masculine clothes it cannot be for sexual reasons.

On the otherhand nobody believes that if a man wears feminine clothing it can be anything else but for sexual reasons i.e. he is a pervert, deviant, homosexual, child molester etc. Anything negative or "evil" is always attributed to men when we deviate from the macho script we are all supposed to religiously follow while women are thought of as saints and thus their reasons for deviating from their script such as crossdressing is never considered threatening.

So women are allowed to crossdress because nobody is offended as women's reasons must be innocent - i.e. it is only done for comfort etc. Nobody wants to think that maybe some women crossdress because they want to, because they like the masculine look, because it allows them to access masculine behaviour and feelings, because it makes it easier to compete against men, because they feel empowered in masculine clothes while they feel vulnerable in femining clothes etc. In fact, there are lots of reasons why women crossdress just as there are lots of reasons why men crossdress.

[Lauren B]

Thinking critically requires more effort than many people wish to expend. I believe most people are perfectly comfortable labeling people by category. How sad... the human condition is much more complex than that.

That too.

[Lawren]

If given one wish pertaining to this it would be "if you wish to emulate us, please do it with class, dignity and respect.

Pornography still portrays us as slabs of meat on an open market. We've fought long and hard trying to overcome that mentality. Please don't promote that image when you emulate us.


I also stated that, in my opinion, a "man in a dress" has a better chance of being accepted by society than the man who dresses to pass as a woman.



Very eloquenly spoken! I agree totally.

[Kate Simmons]

BTW, I don't try to emulate anyone other than myself.:happy: Ericka

[Penny]

Well, here's a twist. I disagree with about everything you have said. Here is why. First of all, it's not just about the clothing; it's about gender roles and what we were taught (how we were brainwashed). Men are the strong and women are the pretty. Consider this, men and women in the military wear the same work uniform. Women are permitted to enhance their appreance with makeup (in good taste) or in other words, look pretty. A male who would come to work with makeup would be discharged. In this enviornment,
women do not have to aspire to be macho, they die right along with their male counterpart in a combat situation. In most all of the mach jobs, women
still may wear male clothing but can enhance their appearance to look pretty.
Men cannot!

Most CDs want to be recognized as being pretty yet fear being identified as
the male who is or is attempting to be pretty. For a male, pretty is a no-no.
That is the bottom line. The need to be and feel pretty fosters deception, embarrasement . guilt and shame. It is at the heart of the conflict between how ,as Cd's, we feel and how we were taught along with everyone else.

Women can be strong but men can't be pretty because it makes him look weak. Women can be plain but men can't be pretty. Men are only permitted to be dapper while woman are permitted to be both.
Women and men may be or acheive equality with but not to each other!

[Wendy me]

it's totally acceptable for a woman to wear masculine clothing but not for a man to wear feminine clothing.

I'm struggling for the correct words to express this, so bear with me:

Though women have come a LONG way since the days of not being allowed to vote and the attitudes that a woman's place is "barefoot, pregnant and in the kitchen" we are *still* not viewed as *equal* by the majority.

Therefore, when a woman appears as masculine it's viewed as aspiring to climb that ladder of social equality, not actually to *be* a man, but to show the world they can do most anything a man can do.

On the other hand, when a man appears as feminine it's viewed as him taking a step back *down* that ladder of social equality.

As wrong as the concept has been proven to be, women are still viewed as the "weaker sex".

I do not in any way personally subscribe to, or agree with, these points of view, but I do feel it is a major reason for society's rejection of M2F crossdressers.




very interesting and what a step out there... and i was misunderstood in that we as as a society had come our scenes that women were and are people that can and do add value to our every day lives ... and that society had woke up and have evolved ....


when a woman appears as masculine... it's style fashion or simply the way thy want to be seen or viewed at that moment .... or could it be that thy just feel like wearing what thy are wearing???



On the other hand, when a man appears as feminine it's viewed as him taking a step back *down* that ladder of social equality.... wow could you possibly entertain that thought?? and coming from a gg at that .... look silly feminine as apposed to masculine a step back or down?? that would put woman on a lower scale of worth than men ... and in my eyes we being women and men are simply people and in no way would i think one group was above the outher......

why men dressing in woman's clothing not as accepted??? simple silly we as people simply have not evolved to were we stop judging people for what gender or what clothing a person might chose ...

disclaimer views might not be just what others might view as accepted ... and appear closer in the mirror than that are....

[Maggie Kay]

There is a major difference in the behaviors of men vs women. That is in the area of aggression and ultimately, violence. Men are suspect for their use of their inherent physical strength. Men are not expected to be gentle and feminine. It is assumed that they are "up to something" and something wrong. Western society bred a nation of potential soldiers after WWII and even though some baby boomers became hippies and flower children, they were imprinted with the values of the militaristic male. That male is supposed to be tough and aggressive, capable of enduring physical hardship and if neccessary, to kill. Just look at the movies and TV series of the past thirty years, with the popularity of violent images. Violence is more popular than sexual content and certainly much more permissible in media. I think that it is CD threatens this view of who a male is expected to be. It is changing but it will take many years to transition from a militaristic, aggressive, society to a peaceful, non-violent one. Until then male CDing will always be viewed as wrong. Perhaps, CDing is in some way a force for that change. Sort of a way of saying "hell no, I won't go".

[Robin Leigh]

Therefore, when a woman appears as masculine it's viewed as aspiring to climb that ladder of social equality, not actually to *be* a man, but to show the world they can do most anything a man can do.

On the other hand, when a man appears as feminine it's viewed as him taking a step back *down* that ladder of social equality.


I think this is definitely a major factor contributing to society's negative attitude towards MTF CDs. Leslie Feinberg covers this theory in great detail in the excellent book Transgender Warriors (http://www.transgenderwarrior.org/writings/tgw/tgwhome.htm). The social inequity is ultimately biologically based, so it won't go away in a hurry. Testosterone is powerful stuff...

Robin

[noname]

This is no offense to the closet CD people here. But I would like to say, nothing will change until we take the same route the gay community did. They started comming out and being bold about it. They have done much of the groud work for us, with being gay becoming acceptable. They have definately worked hard for it as well.

[Roberta Lynn]

On the other hand, when a man appears as feminine it's viewed as him taking a step back *down* that ladder of social equality.
As wrong as the concept has been proven to be, women are still viewed as the "weaker sex".
I do not in any way personally subscribe to, or agree with, these points of view, but I do feel it is a major reason for society's rejection of M2F crossdressers.

:iagree: Hit the nail on the head Vanya



Pornography still portrays us as slabs of meat on an open market. I also stated that, in my opinion, a "man in a dress" has a better chance of being accepted by society than the man who dresses to pass as a woman.


It's not only pornography but commercials, videos and just about anything else that's trying to get a mans attention.
In my opinion most of society stills views women as a sex objects first.
In their view ,a man trying to pass as a woman is trying to pass as that sex object and to them that is completely unacceptable.

[Sky]

it's totally acceptable for a woman to wear masculine clothing but not for a man to wear feminine clothing.

I don't think that's the case. Women fought for the right to wear clothes seen as masculine before (mostly pants) because they are comfortable. I don't recall women in the 1950s saying "we want to look like men". They wanted to get rid of the frilly laces, shoes and torture lingerie which are exactly the kind of things we cds love. Today, a woman purposedly trying to look like a man would command the same mistrustful reactions that we do (and will be called a dyke).

On the other hand, most of us want to look like women. I admit, some only want to wear skirts while keeping a male appearance, and they have a different point then: but when we wear makeup, wigs, miniskirts and "do me" heels, we shouldn't expect society to react like it did when girls threw away their petticoats.

[Marlena Dahlstrom]

It's not necessarily easy to be a masculine women, but it's definitely more acceptable because of the unfortunately still unequal status between men and women.

As you've said, for a woman to adopt masculine behavior and clothing has generally been a way to gain status, while men who do the reverse lose status. (Although arguably one reason Western culture has been anxious about masculinity is it's never made up it's mind between two competing archetypes of manhood: the "man's man" ala Stanley Kowalski (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stanley_Kowalski) and the gentle, contemplative Christ-like man.)

For what it's worth FTM crossdressers weren't at all uncommon during the past centuries in Western culture and generally they were tacitly accepted. (The Catholic Church even has about a dozen female crossdressing saints -- Joan of Arc being the most famous -- but no MTF crossdressing saints.) Many undoubtedly did it for the greater freedom and opportunitities available to men -- which was popularly assumed to be the reason -- but some of these women, like jazz musicians Billy Tipson (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Billy_Tipton), would probably be FTM TSs today, and it's likely a number of women did so not only for the opportunities, but also because being seen as "masculine" was a better fit for their personalities.

[Nike]

This is no offense to the closet CD people here. But I would like to say, nothing will change until we take the same route the gay community did. They started comming out and being bold about it. They have done much of the groud work for us, with being gay becoming acceptable. They have definately worked hard for it as well.

The sad fact is that the "Gay Pride movement" began because Transgendered people were being arrested in New York, simply for being dressed in the opposite gender. Stonewall was both a significant place and the decisive time. In an attempt to "control" the gay population, the police raided gay bars, but targeted and arrested specifically the transgendered.



In a sense, the gay community did a smart thing by focusing on a single significant issue. Sadly, the opportunity for acceptance of transgendered persons who were on the news and in the papers protesting the harassment, was lost when the movement on some level was hijacked and the gender issue was once again given second class status, by the "community" and the press accepted blindly that transgenderism was a small component of the larger issue.

I guess sexuality sells, but gender doesn't.

[Satrana]

Nike

From what I understand during these times (1960s and before) many gays thought they should crossdress as women. It was a standard role model for gays to be crossdressed. This mode of thinking can still be seen in other countries today like latino countries Mexico etc and throughout Asia where gays routinely dress as women to have sex with "straight" guys.

It was not transgendered people who were arrested at Stonewall but rather gays adhering to a routine of pretending to be women to attract men. Obviously they stood out as gays and could be easily arrested while other gays dressed in male clothes could walk away if they wished.

[Nike]

I think that perhaps the "Ladies of the day" such as Holly Woodlawn, author of "A Low Life In High Heels" and others may differ with you somewhat. That time (late 60's) was rather dynamic socially on many levels. The Drag Queens and other transgendered persons remained transgendered even as acceptance grew.

I can accept that there may have been some who chose to dress feminine at the time, as some may even today, but I don't believe that cross-dressing to "fit in" has ever been a large part of either the Transgendered or Gay communities. Acceptance of someone who was less than sincere about their identity, either their gender identity or sexuality, would have been far more difficult in those troubled times than it would be even today.

[Angie G]

Vanya you said it girl and it has been going on way to long :hugs:
Angie

[Butterfly Bill]

Noname,

I posted a thread in the lounge once touching on this subject, and in it I remarked that possibly the negative reactions of women could be a feeling that a crossdresser is an "imposter" i.e. portraying himself to be something that he is not.

I also stated that, in my opinion, a "man in a dress" has a better chance of being accepted by society than the man who dresses to pass as a woman.

:iagree: That's how I am able to get away with it as much as I do.

[ubokvt]

I agree with much of what has been said here, but let put forth a darker view. We are all conditioned to our gender roles from Birth, pink and blue. Fear mongers tell us as long as everybody conforms life will be safe and stable. If some one doesn't conform they must be forced to comply Like John McCain of failing to make them conform minimized or demeaned Like John Murtha, who advocated bring the troops home. CDs are kept in the closet by shame, fear of ridicule or ostracization from society and when they do come out are demeaned as trying to emulate the weaker sex. The very language we use to discuss this is so full of judgements about right and wrong "weaker sex" male best female lesser That in discussing it we reinforce the need to conform. Its all about power and staying there. :mad:

[kerrianna]

Despite feminism's gains, and a more open tolerant society in general, it's still a man's world, and any member of the tribe who is seen as weakening that power (by renouncing some of its traditions, etc) is seen as a threat to the tribe. There are many people who are comfortable in their little worlds and don't want ANYONE rocking the boat. Some of them run powerful countries and their military. Well, most of them actually.
But I sense a quiet evolution-revolution going on now, like an underswell that is rising slowly, inexorably up. It's like a universal subconciousness that knows it must awaken to save this planet and everything living on it, and the people on this forum are a big part of it. Just by daring to be free selves outside the external constraints we help bring a new way of seeing the world and force others to deal with issues like tolerance and freedom. And we're just part of a long chain that has come before, in all kinds of fights and struggles, and we're all moving the same way. Like an unstoppable wave.

[Brianna Lovely]

For those who are too young to remember, here is a local news story about the Stonewall Riots.

Homo Nest Raided, Queen Bees Are Stinging Mad
Reprinted from "The New York Daily News," July 6, 1969
By JERRY LISKER

She sat there with her legs crossed, the lashes of her mascara-coated eyes beating like the wings of a hummingbird. She was angry. She was so upset she hadn't bothered to shave. A day old stubble was beginning to push through the pancake makeup. She was a he. A queen of Christopher Street.

Last weekend the queens had turned commandos and stood bra strap to bra strap against an invasion of the helmeted Tactical Patrol Force. The elite police squad had shut down one of their private gay clubs, the Stonewall Inn at 57 Christopher St., in the heart of a three-block homosexual community in Greenwich Village. Queen Power reared its bleached blonde head in revolt. New York City experienced its first homosexual riot. "We may have lost the battle, sweets, but the war is far from over," lisped an unofficial lady-in-waiting from the court of the Queens.

"We've had all we can take from the Gestapo," the spokesman, or spokeswoman, continued. "We're putting our foot down once and for all." The foot wore a spiked heel. According to reports, the Stonewall Inn, a two-story structure with a sand painted brick and opaque glass facade, was a mecca for the homosexual element in the village who wanted nothing but a private little place where they could congregate, drink, dance and do whatever little girls do when they get together.

The thick glass shut out the outside world of the street. Inside, the Stonewall bathed in wild, bright psychedelic lights, while the patrons writhed to the sounds of a juke box on a square dance floor surrounded by booths and tables. The bar did a good business and the waiters, or waitresses, were always kept busy, as they snaked their way around the dancing customers to the booths and tables. For nearly two years, peace and tranquility reigned supreme for the Alice in Wonderland clientele.

The Raid Last Friday
Last Friday the privacy of the Stonewall was invaded by police from the First Division. It was a raid. They had a warrant. After two years, police said they had been informed that liquor was being served on the premises. Since the Stonewall was without a license, the place was being closed. It was the law.
All hell broke loose when the police entered the Stonewall. The girls instinctively reached for each other. Others stood frozen, locked in an embrace of fear.

Only a handful of police were on hand for the initial landing in the homosexual beachhead. They ushered the patrons out onto Christopher Street, just off Sheridan Square. A crowd had formed in front of the Stonewall and the customers were greeted with cheers of encouragement from the gallery.

The whole proceeding took on the aura of a homosexual Academy Awards Night. The Queens pranced out to the street blowing kisses and waving to the crowd. A beauty of a specimen named Stella wailed uncontrollably while being led to the sidewalk in front of the Stonewall by a cop. She later confessed that she didn't protest the manhandling by the officer, it was just that her hair was in curlers and she was afraid her new beau might be in the crowd and spot her. She didn't want him to see her this way, she wept.

Queen Power
The crowd began to get out of hand, eye witnesses said. Then, without warning, Queen Power exploded with all the fury of a gay atomic bomb. Queens, princesses and ladies-in-waiting began hurling anything they could get their polished, manicured fingernails on. Bobby pins, compacts, curlers, lipstick tubes and other femme fatale missiles were flying in the direction of the cops. The war was on. The lilies of the valley had become carnivorous jungle plants.

Urged on by cries of "C'mon girls, lets go get'em," the defenders of Stonewall launched an attack. The cops called for assistance. To the rescue came the Tactical Patrol Force.

Flushed with the excitement of battle, a fellow called Gloria pranced around like Wonder Woman, while several Florence Nightingales administered first aid to the fallen warriors. There were some assorted scratches and bruises, but nothing serious was suffered by the honeys turned Madwoman of Chaillot.

Official reports listed four injured policemen with 13 arrests. The War of the Roses lasted about 2 hours from about midnight to 2 a.m. There was a return bout Wednesday night.

Two veterans recently recalled the battle and issued a warning to the cops. "If they close up all the gay joints in this area, there is going to be all out war."

Bruce and Nan
Both said they were refugees from Indiana and had come to New York where they could live together happily ever after. They were in their early 20's. They preferred to be called by their married names, Bruce and Nan.
"I don't like your paper," Nan lisped matter-of-factly. "It's anti-fag and pro-cop."

"I'll bet you didn't see what they did to the Stonewall. Did the pigs tell you that they smashed everything in sight? Did you ask them why they stole money out of the cash register and then smashed it with a sledge hammer? Did you ask them why it took them two years to discover that the Stonewall didn't have a liquor license."

Bruce nodded in agreement and reached over for Nan's trembling hands.

"Calm down, doll," he said. "Your face is getting all flushed."

Nan wiped her face with a tissue.

"This would have to happen right before the wedding. The reception was going to be held at the Stonewall, too," Nan said, tossing her ashen-tinted hair over her shoulder.

"What wedding?," the bystander asked.

Nan frowned with a how-could-anybody-be-so-stupid look. "Eric and Jack's wedding, of course. They're finally tieing the knot. I thought they'd never get together."

Meet Shirley
"We'll have to find another place, that's all there is to it," Bruce sighed. "But every time we start a place, the cops break it up sooner or later."
"They let us operate just as long as the payoff is regular," Nan said bitterly. "I believe they closed up the Stonewall because there was some trouble with the payoff to the cops. I think that's the real reason. It's a shame. It was such a lovely place. We never bothered anybody. Why couldn't they leave us alone?"

Shirley Evans, a neighbor with two children, agrees that the Stonewall was not a rowdy place and the persons who frequented the club were never troublesome. She lives at 45 Christopher St.

"Up until the night of the police raid there was never any trouble there," she said. "The homosexuals minded their own business and never bothered a soul. There were never any fights or hollering, or anything like that. They just wanted to be left alone. I don't know what they did inside, but that's their business. I was never in there myself. It was just awful when the police came. It was like a swarm of hornets attacking a bunch of butterflies."

A reporter visited the now closed Stonewall and it indeed looked like a cyclone had struck the premisses.

Police said there were over 200 people in the Stonewall when they entered with a warrant. The crowd outside was estimated at 500 to 1,000. According to police, the Stonewall had been under observation for some time. Being a private club, plain clothesmen were refused entrance to the inside when they periodically tried to check the place. "They had the tightest security in the Village," a First Division officer said, "We could never get near the place without a warrant."

Police Talk
The men of the First Division were unable to find any humor in the situation, despite the comical overtones of the raid.
"They were throwing more than lace hankies," one inspector said. "I was almost decapitated by a slab of thick glass. It was thrown like a discus and just missed my throat by inches. The beer can didn't miss, though, "it hit me right above the temple."

Police also believe the club was operated by Mafia connected owners. The police did confiscate the Stonewall's cash register as proceeds from an illegal operation. The receipts were counted and are on file at the division headquarters. The warrant was served and the establishment closed on the grounds it was an illegal membership club with no license, and no license to serve liquor.

The police are sure of one thing. They haven't heard the last from the Girls of Christopher Street.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This article was posted to GLB News. For more information and for information on other topics of interest, see the Queer Resources Directory.

Ian Cabell / ian@yak.net Last updated: J3T / 29 March 1999

[ShannonDragon]

A lot of men view male cross dressing with being "gay" It doesn't matter that they are two different things, its how they perceive it.

Funny thing is, I work in a prison. The guards are always calling each other girlfried and what they plan to do to the person when alone. Its a form of "who is top dog-macho man"

:tongueout

[Anima-87-388]

Therefore, when a woman appears as masculine it's viewed as aspiring to climb that ladder of social equality, not actually to *be* a man, but to show the world they can do most anything a man can do.

Pants are comfortable and you don't have to shave to wear them...

I am ashamed that soo many CDs seem to think men are just macho-overprivileged-primitive and let's not forget-oppressive beings.:o

Women have had their troubles but they were and are still greatly exaggerated.:eek:

[GG Vanya]

I hardly see the relevance in your comparison, and quite frankly your wording is crass, crude, and offensive.

[ashlee chiffon]

its interesting you don't like the ****ty, trashy, young for their age look on cd's, as that must what those individuals are into... in their mindsets. Their thing...Something in their psyche is triggering their need to dress and act in that manner and i would submit it is their right to do so...if they want to live a time they never had the chance to do because of their sex, then i say "have a blast"! I'm sure their intent isn't to denegrate women and i'm sure vanilla people don't look at them as women dressing as ****s...so what's the harm? It's absolutely no different then a man wearing any Other kind of fem dressing...i Luv tight ,short miniskirts and waytoohighheels, but seldom wear them because as i get older, i look for comfortable clothes...but still love to picture myself in some "hot", ****ty,outit!!
loosen up, Luv...life is toooo short...live it any way you want!
please don't take this as a criticism and i know you were just expressing your opinion...as i am..:hugs:

[ReginaK]

The sad fact is that the "Gay Pride movement" began because Transgendered people were being arrested in New York, simply for being dressed in the opposite gender. Stonewall was both a significant place and the decisive time. In an attempt to "control" the gay population, the police raided gay bars, but targeted and arrested specifically the transgendered.


In a sense, the gay community did a smart thing by focusing on a single significant issue. Sadly, the opportunity for acceptance of transgendered persons who were on the news and in the papers protesting the harassment, was lost when the movement on some level was hijacked and the gender issue was once again given second class status, by the "community" and the press accepted blindly that transgenderism was a small component of the larger issue.

I guess sexuality sells, but gender doesn't.

There is a bigger reason than that. A lot of gay rights activist sweep TG people under the rug so they will be easier accepted by their conservative opponents.

[GG Vanya]

its interesting you don't like the ****ty, trashy, young for their age look on cd's, as that must what those individuals are into... in their mindsets. Their thing...Something in their psyche is triggering their need to dress and act in that manner and i would submit it is their right to do so...if they want to live a time they never had the chance to do because of their sex, then i say "have a blast"! I'm sure their intent isn't to denegrate women and i'm sure vanilla people don't look at them as women dressing as ****s...so what's the harm? It's absolutely no different then a man wearing any Other kind of fem dressing...i Luv tight ,short miniskirts and waytoohighheels, but seldom wear them because as i get older, i look for comfortable clothes...but still love to picture myself in some "hot", ****ty,outit!!
loosen up, Luv...life is toooo short...live it any way you want!
please don't take this as a criticism and i know you were just expressing your opinion...as i am..:hugs:

The harm, to me, is that while their intent might not be to denegrate women, they do. They also, in my opinion, harm the general opinion that John and Jane Public forms of transgenderism as a whole. I *do* understand that many CD's "missed out" on puberty in the feminine aspect. I do not agree that it is not harmful.

It is one thing for a genetic male to wear clothing of genetic females. It is quite another for a 50 year old genetic male to wear the clothing of a 16 year old genetic female. Just the visual is enough to make *some* people immediately think pervert.

Just as I stated in the school girl thread, I feel it is exploitation of young girls.
Now given the fact that I am married to, and fully accepting of, a crossdresser, how do you think those "not in the know" about transgenderism would view a "mature" male dressed like a pre (or post for that matter) pubescent school girl?

This all goes back to the reason men crossdress. The majority say they adore all things feminine and wish to emulate women. Well, I have not seen many 50 year old GG's wearing clothing better suited for a GG who is sixteen years old. When I do encounter this, I notice that they are oggled and snickered at.

Absolutely one has a right to dress as they please. I would only ask that they keep attire which draws negative attention to the CD community and exploits females, in private. To be sure, Trudi has some apparel that is better suited for a much younger woman, and we both enjoy her wearing it, but she would *never* go out in public dressed that way. Her ****ty look <grin> is for MY eyes only!

I'm not offended by your post and I appreciate your acknowledgement of my right to my opinions. :happy:

[Robin Leigh]

(The Catholic Church even has about a dozen female crossdressing saints -- Joan of Arc being the most famous -- but no MTF crossdressing saints.)

Joan's CDing certainly helped her achieve her military/political position, but it definitely wasn't accepted by the Church at the time. Her continued CDing was the evidence used to prove that she hadn't truly recanted her "heresy", and this lead to her execution. She only was given the official status of sainthood early last century. Her feast day is the 30th of May. Maybe she should be the patron saint of TGs?

A few months after reading about Joan in "Transgender Warriors", my mum sent me a postcard from the Jeanne D'Arc chapel in the Sainte-Croix cathedral. Cosmic! :)

Robin

PS You did a typo on Bill Tipton, but the link's ok.

[Robin Leigh]

From what I understand during these times (1960s and before) many gays thought they should crossdress as women. It was a standard role model for gays to be crossdressed. This mode of thinking can still be seen in other countries today like latino countries Mexico etc and throughout Asia where gays routinely dress as women to have sex with "straight" guys.

And a lot of straight people in Western countries still think it's true, too.


I can accept that there may have been some who chose to dress feminine at the time, as some may even today, but I don't believe that cross-dressing to "fit in" has ever been a large part of either the Transgendered or Gay communities. Acceptance of someone who was less than sincere about their identity, either their gender identity or sexuality, would have been far more difficult in those troubled times than it would be even today.

I don't think Satrana really meant people were pretending to be into CDing in order to fit in with the gay community. It's more about finding your gender & sexual identity when you're in the closet, pre-internet. Back then, people growing up non-straight had very few examples of other non-straight people as role models. Crossdressing sticks out (like the tiny tip of a very big iceberg), so it becomes natural for people to associate CDing with being gay, whether or not they are gay or CDs themselves. This point is discussed nicely from the FTM point of view in Les Feinberg's "Transgendered Warriors". In fact, I've begun calling it "The Feinberg Effect".


There is a bigger reason than that. A lot of gay rights activist sweep TG people under the rug so they will be easier accepted by their conservative opponents.

I think we could have achieved so much more if it weren't for Gay-Trans phobias. Oh well.

Robin

[Sheila]

The harm, to me, is that while their intent might not be to denegrate women, they do. They also, in my opinion, harm the general opinion that John and Jane Public forms of transgenderism as a whole. I *do* understand that many CD's "missed out" on puberty in the feminine aspect. I do not agree that it is not harmful.

It is one thing for a genetic male to wear clothing of genetic females. It is quite another for a 50 year old genetic male to wear the clothing of a 16 year old genetic female. Just the visual is enough to make *some* people immediately think pervert.

Just as I stated in the school girl thread, I feel it is exploitation of young girls.
Now given the fact that I am married to, and fully accepting of, a crossdresser, how do you think those "not in the know" about transgenderism would view a "mature" male dressed like a pre (or post for that matter) pubescent school girl?

This all goes back to the reason men crossdress. The majority say they adore all things feminine and wish to emulate women. Well, I have not seen many 50 year old GG's wearing clothing better suited for a GG who is sixteen years old. When I do encounter this, I notice that they are oggled and snickered at.

Absolutely one has a right to dress as they please. I would only ask that they keep attire which draws negative attention to the CD community and exploits females, in private.


:clap: :iagree: :clap:

[ashlee chiffon]

I totally see where you are coming from, but my take on it is still different...Most of us don't go out, just dressing at home and taking pics for places like this or at the most for a small audience. Those that dress flamboyant and go out regularily are a small part of the total cd population and some probably have other agendas then just dressing...
but...i love pleated skirts and that look and enjoy wearing them a lot! Check out vogue or the fashion channel...the younger look is in and not just for younger people...showing off one's better assests before age takes them away is part of the glamour of dressing! I agree the "shoolgirl" look is harmful to young girls and does create a problem, but dressing young and "****ty" is fun, just as wearing long skirts, sweaters, petticoats, bathing suits, long formal gowns, short formal gowns, slips, slip dresses, lingerie, sexy lingerie, foundations, hose, garters, heels,toohighheels, boots, wigs, makeup, accessories, etc. is Fun! oh..did i mention i loved pleated skirts?
lots of diversity in this crowd and i think one should enjoy dressing any way that suits their pleasure...whether it's lace...or leather...or mini skirts~
once again..just my personal liberal opinion!

[crossing-the-rain]

Yes,you are right ,why female dress like a man is acceptable but if a male dress like a female is not accept by our society, even the whole world are looking at you like a creature or came from space or some one even said we should be killed openly in a web site and the other ladies and gentleman are cheering for them.They don't understand most of us are not gay,some of us just want to be a womwn,some of us only want to dress women's clothing or the high heels.Even as a gay ,that is their own life ,why those "normal' or "moral" people judging us as quilty without trial,for me I never had sex with any other woman after we married and never had sex with any man in my whole life or even never thought about that.On tthe other hand ,lots of those normal people have affair with their boss,family friends even brothe or sister in -law or even just picked one up from the bar,with their hair dresser,their kids' teachers or trainer,a travel agent when pick up air tickets,in the airport washroom,when the spouse slept in a hotel during vacation,the guy/ woman cross the street or next door,the food court owner,his/her office cleaner,the mall's security guide.
If some one can tell me why like I'm a six years old kid.
Rain.

[Julogden]

it's totally acceptable for a woman to wear masculine clothing but not for a man to wear feminine clothing.

I'm struggling for the correct words to express this, so bear with me:

Though women have come a LONG way since the days of not being allowed to vote and the attitudes that a woman's place is "barefoot, pregnant and in the kitchen" we are *still* not viewed as *equal* by the majority.

Therefore, when a woman appears as masculine it's viewed as aspiring to climb that ladder of social equality, not actually to *be* a man, but to show the world they can do most anything a man can do.

On the other hand, when a man appears as feminine it's viewed as him taking a step back *down* that ladder of social equality.

As wrong as the concept has been proven to be, women are still viewed as the "weaker sex".

I do not in any way personally subscribe to, or agree with, these points of view, but I do feel it is a major reason for society's rejection of M2F crossdressers.
Hi Vanya,

I think you've hit the nail squarely on the head, and it's really sad that women are still perceived by some as being second-class humans.

Carol:hugs:

[noname]

why those "normal' or "moral" people judging us as quilty without trial,for me I never had sex with any other woman after we married and never had sex with any man in my whole life or even never thought about that.On tthe other hand ,lots of those normal people have affair with their boss,family friends even brothe or sister in -law or even just picked one up from the bar,

so true, so true.