Tired of the labels, I am just a human being, nothing more and nothing less.

[Lovely Rita]

I know labels have their use, but quite frankly, today I am tired of them. I love the term crossdresser but some times I feel that it can be deleterious to my growth as a human being.

The world is so screwed up that everyone and everything has to have a label. Well today, at leaste, the only label that defines me and is acceptable is Human Being.

We read about so much diversity here. We have similarities but we are all very very different.

There should be a weekly post defining the new labels and the ones that are no longer politically correct, I do not even know them anymore. CD, TV, TG, DQ, etc. etc.

I find that the labels are trying to lump us all into one group that others can get a handle on.

The crossdresser, a man who dresses in clothing of the opposite sex?

They are heterosexual right? Well, no, not necessarily, some are bi sexual or homosexual.

There was a post today about two crossdressers that became Transexual, they were on Oprah or something. The question was posed if we are all like them.

Well, I am not like anyone. Yes we have woman's clothing in common, but that is where it ends as far as I am concerned.

I don't believe there is a label that can really fit all of us and I don't have a solution either, and I am not saying that we should get rid of all the labels either. I am just sharing how frustrating labels can be. I am sure they are a necessary evil especially when we need to ban together for mutual support and protest to move our cause along. I am only advocating that we never forget that we are just human beings.

We tend to use labels to coral and lump people together. Labels were always used by racists with the usual, "_________ are all alike". They also help with the us and them mentality.

Thanks for letting me share

Rita the Enigma

[Kate Simmons]

Humans have the unrelenting need to label, classify and pigeonhole. It doesn't stop there, however. Now they are talking about national ID's, bar codes and microchips. Giving up personal freedom in the name of security seems to be in vogue. Whatever happenened to individuality and as you say people just being people? No wonder I'm getting tired Rita.

[Marla S]

Rita, true words.

Either a very general label that covers us all or these labels (http://www.crossdressers.com/forums/memberlist.php):happy:


There should be a weekly post defining the new labels and the ones that are no longer politically correct, I do not even know them anymore. CD, TV, TG, DQ, etc. etc.
:yt:

What was metrosexual ????
Being sexually attracted to subways ??? :thinking:
I hope they don't get confused with tramsexuals.

[Brianna Lovely]

I too get a little upset about labels.

However, over the last few months, I've been asked by several people, why I dress.

This answer came from my heart, because it's how I feel:
"I'm a person, who is fully aware and accepting, of both my feminine and masculine traits. And I wear these clothes, because I like them."

[nikki_t]

Rita, Salandra and Marla, I agree 100% with all of you and every word.

...and Brianna too! We are individuals as well as human beings.

[Dana Carlton]

Unfortunately, everyone of us carries labels. Whether it's from our ethnic background, our marital status, our occupation, etc.

It's the humilitating labels, and those labels that the public is still trying to understand, that affect us. Though I don't think society will every shed the use of labeling certain groups, but they do need to fully understand these labels without quickly jumping into stereotyping.

[sterling12]

Well put Rita! We all should spend less time trying to come up with labels for people and more time just enjoying life.

Besides, people are way too complex to be tagged with a simple label. It's just about guaranteed that you can take any human being and never really understand every facet of their lives.

Yes, I'm a Crossdresser. But, that represents me at only a moment in time. In other moments, I am other things. The only constant is that I'm always Joanie/John, an "evolving" human being.

Peace and Love, Joanie

[Ruth]

Crossdressing is what we do, not what we are. Don't accept the label and it won't stick.

[JenniferMBlack]

if we do away with labels what am I ever going to do with this fancy new label maker I got? he he ha ha !!!! Just joking I know what you mean every time you turn around some one has a label for something they don't understand therefore don't like or vice versa what every it is. it all starts at birth boy girl and goes from there. Where dose it all end?

[Lovely Rita]

Humans have the unrelenting need to label, classify and pigeonhole. It doesn't stop there, however. Now they are talking about national ID's, bar codes and microchips. Giving up personal freedom in the name of security seems to be in vogue. Whatever happenened to individuality and as you say people just being people? No wonder I'm getting tired Rita.

Sally, thanks and I agree that individuality is something we must treasure and protect.


Rita, true words.

Either a very general label that covers us all or these labels (http://www.crossdressers.com/forums/memberlist.php):happy:


:yt:

What was metrosexual ????
Being sexually attracted to subways ??? :thinking:
I hope they don't get confused with tramsexuals.

Oh yea can't forget metrosexual. good one.


I too get a little upset about labels.

However, over the last few months, I've been asked by several people, why I dress.

This answer came from my heart, because it's how I feel:
"I'm a person, who is fully aware and accepting, of both my feminine and masculine traits. And I wear these clothes, because I like them."

Well said Brianna, just being who you are. Labels are another form for trying to box us in.



Rita, Salandra and Marla, I agree 100% with all of you and every word.

...and Brianna too! We are individuals as well as human beings.


Yes Nikki and thanks for the encouragement.


Unfortunately, everyone of us carries labels. Whether it's from our ethnic background, our marital status, our occupation, etc.

It's the humilitating labels, and those labels that the public is still trying to understand, that affect us. Though I don't think society will every shed the use of labeling certain groups, but they do need to fully understand these labels without quickly jumping into stereotyping.

Dana, I have to agree with you. Still, I think it is important that we always consider ourselves as individuals. yes we can identify with many but no two of us are alike. We are so very unique.


Well put Rita! We all should spend less time trying to come up with labels for people and more time just enjoying life.

Besides, people are way too complex to be tagged with a simple label. It's just about guaranteed that you can take any human being and never really understand every facet of their lives.

Yes, I'm a Crossdresser. But, that represents me at only a moment in time. In other moments, I am other things. The only constant is that I'm always Joanie/John, an "evolving" human being.

Peace and Love, Joanie

Sterling, I could not have put it better. Wearing woman's clothes is not all we are about.


Crossdressing is what we do, not what we are. Don't accept the label and it won't stick.

Exactly Ruth, it is what we do, but there is so much more to us.


if we do away with labels what am I ever going to do with this fancy new label maker I got? he he ha ha !!!! Just joking I know what you mean every time you turn around some one has a label for something they don't understand therefore don't like or vice versa what every it is. it all starts at birth boy girl and goes from there. Where dose it all end?

Wbdavid, I guess it won't stop and it won't end, but what is important is how we let them affect us or not affect us.

[Casandra Carrington]

To Rita and Everyone...very well said...all my life as far back as I can remember I have had some sort of a label put on me...but everytime I came out of the box and proved it wrong...this reminds me of a little story I would like to share with all of you...as I was growing up in Mayberry and going through Jr. high and highschool I had every label you can imagine thrown at me I only knew I was different because everyone told me I was...and most of the time they were very cruel...it got to the point I dropped out of school to get away from it....some years later I was working in a local show bar where at the time for 4 years I lived 24/7 as a woman but not with the first thought of having a sex change but one night much like any other night (and might I add I was very well known in this club) this guy walks in and don't you know it was one of the guys that use to ridicule and make fun of me and called me all sort of names...and let me confess my first instinct was to make his night a living nightmare...but that was not what I did....I went to him and embraced him and made him feel welcome...and we became friends,I was able to put all those years behind me...so I guess the point of my story is #*!? happens and we must be the bigger person and let it slide off the labels will only stick if we let them...

[docrobbysherry]

I've been called a lot of things, but never normal. And I mean WAY before I began dressing. I hear things about normal people, not sure I've ever met one. Hope I don't, they sound boring, intimidating, and close minded! Don't u just HATE the labels they put on us?
RS

myspace.com/robertsherry

[vivianann]

I like to be called a woman because that is how I identify. I like what was said in the posts on the subject of labels

[Lisa Golightly]

If you can't beat them... do a marketing job on them...

Lisa (the one and only Glamsexual ;) ) Golightly

xxx

[BarbaraTalbot]

good to remember we are all individuals first, then whatever we are collectively.

Often times when the "I don't like labels" issue comes up it seems to be in the context of someone saying I do thus and such or enjoy this and that, does that mean I am which, or what?

The time they THEN object to labels is when the apt label is suggested (only in response to their query) and they don't like the label. As expressed here though, I totally agree. the label means nothing.

I was reading a really good link the other day it was a Wiki-like treatment of terms and definitions of all things TG including some info on etymology (entomology is bugs right? hope I got the word label right...but I digress)

The term transvestite fascinated me. According to this article, the person who coined the term -Magnus Hirschfeld-

quote:


....in 1910 in his book "Die Transvestiten : eine Untersuchung über den erotischen Verkleidungstrieb" ("The transvestites : an investigation of the erotic urge to disguise"). He used it to describe persons who habitually and voluntarily wore clothes of the opposite sex. (The distinction between sex and gender had not been made at that time.) Hirschfeld's group of transvestites consisted of both males and females, with (physically) heterosexual, (physically) homosexual, bisexual and asexual orientations.

Hirschfeld himself was not particularly happy with the term: he understood that clothing was only an outward symbol chosen on the basis of various internal psychological situations. In fact, Hirschfeld helped people to achieve the very first name changes (legal given names were and are required to be gender-specific in Germany) and to get the very first sexual reassignment surgery. Hirschfeld's transvestites therefore were, in today's terms, not only transvestites, but people from all over the transgender spectrum.

Hirschfeld operated very much in a three-gender framework: male; female; and other, or third gender. Included in this third gender were all who, in today's terms, violated heteronormative bounds. Again, in today's terms, this is very much equivalent with the queer community—lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender persons. There was, therefore, no pressing reason to find different terms for the different shades of Hirschfeld's transvestism.

Hirschfeld also noticed that sexual arousal was often, but not always, associated with transvestite behaviour; he also clearly distinguished between transvestism as an expression of a person's "contra-sexual" (transgender) feelings and fetishistic behaviour, even if the latter involved wearing clothes of the other sex.

Today, Hirschfeld's use of transvestism is extinct, but the modern term transgender is used in a nearly equivalent sense.


this is from http://www.reference.com/browse/wiki/Transvestism

Anyway it goes to show that whatever label applies today will be different tommorow.

Think for example of the mentally challenged (probably not a pc term this week, I am out of date no doubt)

They keep getting a new label whenever the old one gets co-opted by the insensitive. It never changes their underlying challenge. The whole thing is silly because depending on how "handi-capable" they are, they often are not upset at all by labels all of which were considered sensitive when invented. Think retarded (not advanced), handicapped (playing the game with a few strokes added for their better character presumedly), Delayed, learning disabled etc etc...the words really don't matter. What their strengths and challenges individually is all anyone that works with or loves them needs to know to be helpful. Same with those of us that are sartorially retarded, or sarcastically retro.

[Marla S]

Anyway it goes to show that whatever label applies today will be different tommorow.

Think for example of the mentally challenged (probably not a pc term this week, I am out of date no doubt)

They keep getting a new label whenever the old one gets co-opted by the insensitive. It never changes their underlying challenge. The whole thing is silly because depending on how "handi-capable" they are, they often are not upset at all by labels all of which were considered sensitive when invented. Think retarded (not advanced), handicapped (playing the game with a few strokes added for their better character presumedly), Delayed, learning disabled etc etc...the words really don't matter. What their strengths and challenges individually is all anyone that works with or loves them needs to know to be helpful. Same with those of us that are sartorially retarded, or sarcastically retro.
Actually this labeling thing is a real dilemma.
For any legal, medical, psychological issue there needs to be a set of criteria which is usually covered by a label to make it it justiciable.
Usually these labels are brought up by the "professionals".
Problem 1 any set of criteria won't match all individuals.
Problem 2 these labels are made labels of self-identification by the persons concerned.
Problem 3 these labels will be used by the society to stigmatize individuals concerned.

That sets up a machinery of redefinition and introduction of new labels which usually is disastrous, because the society will stick to the most simple, hence usually wrong definition, persons concerned desperately try to find one that covers their believes, scientists and professionals try to take both aspects into account while keeping it justiciable.
Usually this ends up in a mess and misleading new labels which nobody understands anymore.

I.e. the above mentioned metrosexual.
It's meaning doesn't have anything to do with sexuality, so why make it -sexual ?
The phenomenon covered actually shouldn't be worth mention at all; men caring for their appearance, should be a matter of course.
There is already a very old term covering just that: Dandyism.
If a label is needed, why not using this one ?
It doesn't have any bad or sexual connotation and covers metrosexual far better than metrosexual.

[tvbeckytv]

dont know why you get upset about it.
Labels are there for you to use about yourself as a shorthand ballpark indication of 'where you are at'. Without them we would all have to give a thesis on our inner selves everytime you talk to a stranger about yourself. a Label dosnt define you, it just a broad indication to aid communication.
And if you dont like them, dont use them...simple.

[Lovely Rita]

QUOTE=Casandra Carrington;1045207]To Rita and Everyone...very well said...all my life as far back as I can remember I have had some sort of a label put on me...but everytime I came out of the box and proved it wrong...this reminds me of a little story I would like to share with all of you...as I was growing up in Mayberry and going through Jr. high and highschool I had every label you can imagine thrown at me I only knew I was different because everyone told me I was...and most of the time they were very cruel...it got to the point I dropped out of school to get away from it....some years later I was working in a local show bar where at the time for 4 years I lived 24/7 as a woman but not with the first thought of having a sex change but one night much like any other night (and might I add I was very well known in this club) this guy walks in and don't you know it was one of the guys that use to ridicule and make fun of me and called me all sort of names...and let me confess my first instinct was to make his night a living nightmare...but that was not what I did....I went to him and embraced him and made him feel welcome...and we became friends,I was able to put all those years behind me...so I guess the point of my story is #*!? happens and we must be the bigger person and let it slide off the labels will only stick if we let them...[/QUOTE]

Casandra I salute you. That was very big indeed and a great example to us all. You certainly showed love for an enemy.



I've been called a lot of things, but never normal. And I mean WAY before I began dressing. I hear things about normal people, not sure I've ever met one. Hope I don't, they sound boring, intimidating, and close minded! Don't u just HATE the labels they put on us?
RS

myspace.com/robertsherry

Docrobbysherry, I know I have never been normal, in the sense of the basic definition. I don't believe there is even such a thing anymore, unless you are a hypocrit and are just staying in line with societies rules and mores.

I like to be called a woman because that is how I identify. I like what was said in the posts on the subject of labels

Hey Woman, Vivian, thank you for your encouragement.


If you can't beat them... do a marketing job on them...

Lisa (the one and only Glamsexual ;) ) Golightly

xxx

Hi Lisa, I know we can't beat them, and certainly don't want a new one, I guess I am trying to stay free from what labels can do to us.


good to remember we are all individuals first, then whatever we are collectively.

Often times when the "I don't like labels" issue comes up it seems to be in the context of someone saying I do thus and such or enjoy this and that, does that mean I am which, or what?

The time they THEN object to labels is when the apt label is suggested (only in response to their query) and they don't like the label. As expressed here though, I totally agree. the label means nothing.

I was reading a really good link the other day it was a Wiki-like treatment of terms and definitions of all things TG including some info on etymology (entomology is bugs right? hope I got the word label right...but I digress)

The term transvestite fascinated me. According to this article, the person who coined the term -Magnus Hirschfeld-

quote:


....in 1910 in his book "Die Transvestiten : eine Untersuchung über den erotischen Verkleidungstrieb" ("The transvestites : an investigation of the erotic urge to disguise"). He used it to describe persons who habitually and voluntarily wore clothes of the opposite sex. (The distinction between sex and gender had not been made at that time.) Hirschfeld's group of transvestites consisted of both males and females, with (physically) heterosexual, (physically) homosexual, bisexual and asexual orientations.

Hirschfeld himself was not particularly happy with the term: he understood that clothing was only an outward symbol chosen on the basis of various internal psychological situations. In fact, Hirschfeld helped people to achieve the very first name changes (legal given names were and are required to be gender-specific in Germany) and to get the very first sexual reassignment surgery. Hirschfeld's transvestites therefore were, in today's terms, not only transvestites, but people from all over the transgender spectrum.

Hirschfeld operated very much in a three-gender framework: male; female; and other, or third gender. Included in this third gender were all who, in today's terms, violated heteronormative bounds. Again, in today's terms, this is very much equivalent with the queer community—lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender persons. There was, therefore, no pressing reason to find different terms for the different shades of Hirschfeld's transvestism.

Hirschfeld also noticed that sexual arousal was often, but not always, associated with transvestite behaviour; he also clearly distinguished between transvestism as an expression of a person's "contra-sexual" (transgender) feelings and fetishistic behaviour, even if the latter involved wearing clothes of the other sex.

Today, Hirschfeld's use of transvestism is extinct, but the modern term transgender is used in a nearly equivalent sense.


this is from http://www.reference.com/browse/wiki/Transvestism

Anyway it goes to show that whatever label applies today will be different tommorow.

Think for example of the mentally challenged (probably not a pc term this week, I am out of date no doubt)

They keep getting a new label whenever the old one gets co-opted by the insensitive. It never changes their underlying challenge. The whole thing is silly because depending on how "handi-capable" they are, they often are not upset at all by labels all of which were considered sensitive when invented. Think retarded (not advanced), handicapped (playing the game with a few strokes added for their better character presumedly), Delayed, learning disabled etc etc...the words really don't matter. What their strengths and challenges individually is all anyone that works with or loves them needs to know to be helpful. Same with those of us that are sartorially retarded, or sarcastically retro.


Actually this labeling thing is a real dilemma.
For any legal, medical, psychological issue there needs to be a set of criteria which is usually covered by a label to make it it justiciable.
Usually these labels are brought up by the "professionals".
Problem 1 any set of criteria won't match all individuals.
Problem 2 these labels are made labels of self-identification by the persons concerned.
Problem 3 these labels will be used by the society to stigmatize individuals concerned.

That sets up a machinery of redefinition and introduction of new labels which usually is disastrous, because the society will stick to the most simple, hence usually wrong definition, persons concerned desperately try to find one that covers their beliefs, scientists and professionals try to take both aspects into account while keeping it justiciable.
Usually this ends up in a mess and misleading new labels.

I.e. the above mentioned metrosexual.
It's meaning doesn't have anything to do with sexuality, so why make it -sexual ?
The phenomenon covered actually shouldn't be worth mention at all; men caring for their appearance, should be a matter of course.
There is already a very old term covering just that: Dandyism.
If a label is needed, why not using this one ?
It doesn't have any bad or sexual connotation and covers metrosexual far better than metrosexual.

Hi Barbara

Thank you for your wonderful post. I know that lables will remain a part of our human condition. I am also aware of how even negative labels can be changed into something positive by those who take ownership.

For example, when I was a child queer was a horrid word to be called, but the Gays embraced it and took out the sting. the show Queer eye for the straight guy illustrates that. This has happened many times.

It is also not that our labels carry a sting but I guess what seemed like a thorn in the side is when labels are like some kind of space probe and others believe they know about me like some dissected frog in biology class.

Some of us go out en femme, some of us do not. Some of us are married and some of us are not. Some like minis some like long skirts, etc. some are heterosexual, some are homosexual or bi sexual it goes on and on.

As things move forward labels are probably necessary to keep us united as a group with a common cause, but when Oprah show cases two cds that are married and wish to become woman and some ones asks if the truth is that we all secretly want that, that is when I have a problem being all lumped together and classified.

[Marla S]

dont know why you get upset about it.
Labels are there for you to use about yourself as a shorthand ballpark indication of 'where you are at'. Without them we would all have to give a thesis on our inner selves everytime you talk to a stranger about yourself. a Label dosnt define you, it just a broad indication to aid communication.
And if you dont like them, dont use them...simple.
It's the discrepancy of using a label for self-identification and a label bing used as stigma (integrative vs. separative).
Inside the community a label can be a boon (people usually know what they are talking about), outside the community the same label can be a bane, because people usually don't know what they are talking about and will pick up the bits that are most spectacular and most easy to get in order to show "I am not one of these freaks. They are all the same."

In the extreme you get to hear than: Nature has no mercy for freaks.

[xxx.sabrina]

People are like snowflakes. Every one is different and should be appreciated for the way they are. Labels are for the small-minded people who can not comprehend the diversity of humanity.

[KrazyKat]

:devil:Sometimes I just want to say...

CAN'T WE JUST ALL GET ALONG?!

I've always thought Human Beings should be enough as a label!!

I kinda prefer being a Cat(Kat) myself!!:shades: If a label is needed, I prefer Kool, or Krazy!!:heehee:

Thanks for sharing your frustrations, it's long been one of mine!!:thumbsup:

[Rachaelb64]

Labels are part of our base tribal instinct, your part of my tribe, your part of that tribe. It makes the base of social interaction, friend/foe. Labels defined what you were in that social make-up, John the Archer, Jake the Blacksmith, Peter son of John (Johnson), Joe the Farmer, Alan from Essex etc....

The best size for a human social group is about 150, we accept each, know each and defend each other within this group size. Unfortunately most of live in social groups greater than 1000+. So labels get distraughted. Most ofus need to part of a group as we are social creatures by nature. Social groups are not fixed in stone they flow into each other labels have thier meanings changed.

An individual can change the mindset of a group, a group can change the mindset of a nation and a nation can change the World.

The fact is Transexuals make better TV (no pun intented) then a bloke in a dress saying he just likes wearing woman's clothes.


But this is just my :2c: rant

[Lovely Rita]

People are like snowflakes. Every one is different and should be appreciated for the way they are. Labels are for the small-minded people who can not comprehend the diversity of humanity.

It really is true, we are each different in so many ways. Ok we crossdress, but we also breathe and eat like anyone else, but the dressing part seems to be all that matters.


:devil:Sometimes I just want to say...

CAN'T WE JUST ALL GET ALONG?!

I've always thought Human Beings should be enough as a label!!

I kinda prefer being a Cat(Kat) myself!!:shades: If a label is needed, I prefer Kool, or Krazy!!:heehee:

Thanks for sharing your frustrations, it's long been one of mine!!:thumbsup:

Thanks for the encouragment Krazy Kat. I know that labels will always be around, but some times labels are the cause of us and them.

It has always been US in a myriad of shapes, colors and charachteristics. Labels help seperate and segregate.
Thanks again:thumbsup:

[Wendy me]

lol it took me for ever to understand me .... and i could be almost any label out there to some what ....for the most part i am happy .... just being me ....

[kerrianna]

lol it took me for ever to understand me .... and i could be almost any label out there to some what ....for the most part i am happy .... just being me ....

:shocked: How can you be ME?

I'm ME! :straightface:


The next thing you know EVERYONE will be saying they are ME.

How confusing is that? :heehee:


Yeah, labelling is shorthand. And nothing more. Too bad we as a society like to take shortcuts and use shorthand...because it shortchanges us all.

[Lawren]

Like my new tagline says...:D

[Marla S]

:shocked: How can you be ME?

I'm ME! :straightface:


The next thing you know EVERYONE will be saying they are ME.

How confusing is that? :heehee:
Pretty confusing. Try to define ME ... a nightmare ... impossible ... and everybody will have a different definition or three :shocked: :Pullhair::cry:

Would refusing to be ME a solution ? Maybe I am YOU or THEM, a barber or two ? :wall:
I get headache:surrender

[Sheri 4242]

Crossdressing is what we do, not what we are.

"Crossdressing" IS what we do and not what we are -- IF we crossdress for whatever reason, then "crossdresser," to whatever degree, is what we are. But here's the rub: IS it a definition??? OR, is it a label??? OR, is it some percentage of both???


It's the discrepancy of using a label for self-identification and a label bing used as stigma (integrative vs. separative).

Inside the community a label can be a boon (people usually know what they are talking about), outside the community the same label can be a bane, because people usually don't know what they are talking about . . .

You've made two important points, Marla!!! My spin is:

(1.) We'd be at a loss if we didn't have words by which to communicate, and it is basic, fundamental logic that words require, and thus have, definitions. So, the discrepancy lies between (a.) the need to be able to communicate clearly, and (b.) those that would take the words we use to communicate and utilize them to "box in," label, indict, and denigrate.

(2.) Everybody who contributes to a dialogue wants to be understood -- and the hope is that we have comprehension, and can communicate the same without ambiguity. The bane is when our words are used in an injurious, denigratory fashion!!!

[docrobbysherry]

[QUOTE=Rachaelb64;1045736
The fact is Transexuals make better TV (no pun intented) then a bloke in a dress saying he just likes wearing woman's clothes.[/QUOTE]

In another thread, I might argue with u on this point. But,Rachael, I would be happy to describe myself as, " A bloke in a dress", but TV, or CD, requires much less typing!
RS