Can you CD w/o being TG?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rianna Humble

"However you identify, what you do fits the adjective.

---

"

And therein lies the problem. People are using transgender as an adjective to describe the person, whereas it is the activity which crosses society's artificially defined barriers. The definition you quote is from an organization whose primary purpose is the promotion of transgender health. As such it is politically motivated, and its cause is enhanced if the "transgender" population appears as large as possible. I am not attacking their intentions, as they are noble, but that is the reality. Their definition contradicts the generally accepted definitions of gender, as applied to the sexual connotation, and sexual identity, which I quoted in my last post. The definition of gender does not change by adding the prefix "trans" to it.

Veronica

When I was a boy, way back in the 1940's, the word "sissy" was one of the worst pejoratives you could call another guy. It was worse than many of the more acceptable (in those days) ethnic nicknames in widespread use. Call someone a sissy and you would get your ass kicked but good. I know that some of the younger people in this community like to use that term to describe themselves or their activities, but when someone clearly avoids its use in their writings, it should be avoided in the replies. And I don't need to go to Canada for any opinions, I am in Canada and proud of it.

Veronica

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ReineD

This discussion is not about you, specifically, it's about the thousands of members here who do feel, act, and look feminine when they dress, and this is reflected in their posts if you take the time to read them.

---

Okay, its not about me, fine. But I read these posts you talk about. We all guys (CD/not CD) have some feminine attributes (emotions/submissiveness/ weakness/ignorance etc) within us and we feel it and either choose to act it or suppress it to be the "solid male" you want(Remember your definition about "solid male"). Feeling/Acting out these attributes when dressed doesn't have to mean the CD begins to self identify as a female. It is like letting off steam.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Veronica27

Health Canada offers this description: "Gender refers to the array of socially constructed roles and relationships, personality traits, attitudes, behaviours, values, relative power and influence that society ascribes to the two sexes on a differential basis. Gender is relational - gender roles and characteristics do not exist in isolation, but are defined in relation to one another and through the relationships between women and men, girls and boys." i.e. society ascribes it. The determinant of masculinity and femininity can differ from society to society and era to era. It has nothing to do with "who we are" but is all about how society arbitrarily categorizes human qualities, and determines gender roles.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Veronica27

The definition of gender does not change by adding the prefix "trans" to it.

---

The Health Canada definition you provide does not mention gender expression as part of the definition of gender. I've entered the term "transgender" in their search box and come up with nothing. I expect they are currently working on a position to address transgender concerns and it is not yet reflected on their website. Canada is a progressive country and I do believe it is only a question of time before they will catch up to the growing global awareness that gender is not binary.

That said, "Gender" is more than just the socially constructed gender roles and characteristics you quote in post #92. A gender role is only one of four components that defines gender. I think it is helpful to break it down:

THE COMPONENTS THAT CONSTITUTE GENDER:

(1) Sex: Our anatomic reality. Physiologically, we can either be men, women, or intersex, which is an atypical anatomic sex development.

(2) Gender identity: A person's self-concept of his and/or her gender. Who they feel they are.

(3) Gender role or expression: Characteristics in personality, appearance, and behavior that in a given culture and historical period are designated as masculine or feminine (that is, more typical of the male or female social role). All people tend to incorporate both masculine and feminine characteristics in their gender expression in varying ways and to varying degrees.

(4) Sexual orientation: Who we are attracted to. I mention this only in passing, but I do mention it since for many people here, sexual orientation can fluctuate with their gender expression, if only in fantasy. But, it is recognized that sexual orientation is independent of the other three gender determinations for some people. A person can be same-sex attracted without having any desire to present as a member of the opposite sex.

Most people have a gender identity (2) that matches their sexual characteristics (1). They perceive themselves as being either male or female and this matches their sex. I think we can agree on this. Those whose gender identities do not match their sex, either fully or partially, are transgender. And if their gender identity is the polar opposite of their sex and they wish to change their sexual characteristics in order to match their gender identity, then they are transsexual. I think we can both agree on this as well.

Where you and I differ, is in the gender role and expression (3). You maintain that a man can express feminine traits without being transgender, if he sees himself as a male. You used as an example that a man who cries is not considered feminine, which implies that you may consider the act of crying a feminine trait. But, I believe that men, women, and transgenders have the capacity to feel sad and cry, although I do admit that men are taught to do this privately. I wish to add that some women are also taught it is not proper to cry in public. Nevertheless, crying is a trait that is independent of gender since it is a natural, human reaction to grief, just as laughter is a human reaction to joy. You also mention a dad staying home raising kids as a socially ascribed feminine role. We've already established that gender roles do change across time and cultures, and so I'm sure we can agree it is no longer considered feminine for a single father to raise his kids in our modern society.

This leaves us with gender expression, which is the crux of the discussion in this thread. You ask, why should the fact that a man who wishes to present as a woman be an indication that his gender identity is anything other than purely male?

Although we've established that gender roles and expression do change over time and cultures, there is one constant, and this is the ways in which men and women wish to differentiate themselves from one another. Louis XIV was not considered feminine when he wore lace, tights, and heels in the 18th century, although he would have if he had worn the clothing that his wife wore. He adhered to the gender expression that was acceptable for men at the time. Likewise, women today are not considered masculine when they wear the blue jeans that are considered acceptable for contemporary women, although if they take it one step further and also wear men's shoes, shirts, haircuts, and bind their breasts, they will be seen as falling outside the current feminine gender norms. But for the most part, women want to look like the other women in their culture, men want to look like the other men in their culture, and our choices in clothing and other presentation choices do reflect the gender differences most of us aspire to. (For the purpose of this discussion, let's leave the ways that some gays and lesbians wish to present themselves for a discussion that is tangential to this one).

So, why is it that our choice for gender expression is tied to our gender identity? We've established that we are socialized to conform to a range of expression that is considered usual and customary for either masculine or feminine presentation in our society. Most people are drawn to assimilate this socialization. They do not fight it. They do not question it. They have no desire to go outside their social norms and hide their cross-gendered clothing and presentation preferences. They do, fundamentally, wish to align themselves to the gender with which they identify, in public and in private.

This is why it is difficult for many people to understand that a person's sense of identity is not affected when they crossdress. Now granted, there are men who do fully present as men (no makeup, wigs, forms, no female names, etc) and who still like to wear skirts. I agree that such men are not transgender. But, the minute anyone exhibits a desire to assimilate the opposite sex's full gender expression in a way that aligns them with the opposite sex, and they further open themselves up to societal bias and possibly risk losing their marriages over it, then if it isn't a deep seated urge to express some form of alternate gender identity (even if it is only partial and only sometimes), what is it? A taste for softer clothing? Men have silk, cashmere, fine wool, and microfiber clothes too. A sense of comfort? This leads to the question as to why it is more comfortable to present as a woman. A wish to temporarily drop male responsibilities? Many men experience this and engage in other pastimes that do not involve CDing. Fetish? Perhaps, but it is often not purely sexual or fetish.

And last, I think a major misconception is the idea that a person must identify either fully as a man or a woman, and if there is even a partial identification with femininity it must mean this person is a woman. This is categorically not true. There is a wide range of gender identity in between the male/female binary. It is time we remove the word "sissy" (that you mention in #104) from anything that falls outside the binary. A man can still identify mostly as a male, and still need to cross the gender barriers. This does not make him a sissy or a woman. But it does mean he is transgender.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

EDIT - I have one last thought:

A MtF transsexual experiences a full disconnect between her gender identity, and both her birth sex and the socially ascribed gender role/expression of her birth sex.

A crossdresser does not experience a disconnect between his gender identity and his birth sex. But, there is a disconnect (to varying degrees) between his gender identity and the gender role and/or expression that is ascribed to his birth sex.

A cisgender experiences no disconnect between any of the first three components of gender.

Just a real simple answer to the original question without getting too deep...The great thing about labels is that the tend to fall off and you can replace them with whatever you want to.

You can brush your teeth with a turd, but that doesn't make it toothpaste. The logical definition of toothpaste excludes turds. Similarly, the logical definition of cisgender excludes crossdressing.

I do believe that self-identification is our most important gender characteristic, but as Reine has very carefully and thoughtfully explained, it is not our only one. Some of our other significant gender characteristics are not open to (whimsical) self-definition. You can call your penis a popsicle, but that doesn't make it one. You can crossdress in a costume like everyday is Halloween, but it isn't, and you're not wearing a costume (those are your clothes). You can tell people you crossdress for manly reasons because you are a manly man who likes to cover his manly gender core with a candy-colored feminine shell, but this behavior excludes you from the company of men who don't suffer from this contradiction. You can declare that gender categories and comparisons are arbitrary, but your self-declaration is no match for the truth to the contrary that transcends your beliefs.

The class of transgender people is wide in diversity (particular diversity, not general diversity), so stop bitching about your small box. It isn't that small. The cisgender box is smaller, and crossdressers don't fit into it.

Reine:

"A crossdresser does not experience a disconnect between his gender identity and his birth sex. But, there is a disconnect (to varying degrees) between his gender identity and the gender role and/or expression that is ascribed to his birth sex."

Pink Person:

" ... the logical definition of cisgender excludes crossdressing."

There's a difference between experiencing a disconnect and acknowledging it - e.g. cognitive dissonance. The major point I wanted to make, however, is that expression doesn't exist in a vacuum. One doesn't just express, one expresses something, i.e. it's a manifestion or outward sign of something in one's thoughts or psyche.

I agree that the male cisgender definition (substitute behavior, conventions, etc. if you're hung up on "definition.") completely excludes crossdressing as a habitual activity that's part of your normal life. So to say it is an expression of maleness is a logical absurdity.

The question for the non-TG crowd, then, is just what is your crossdressing an expression of? Those I've read so far all have very conventional cismale alternatives that don't involve wearing women's clothes, makeup, wigs, forms, etc.

Lea

To Reine

Thank you for the well written summary of your position on the question of being transgendered. I appreciate that you have not indulged in name calling or sensationalized metaphors to make your point. In fact, you and I are not that far apart in our analysis of the various factors and definitions involved, with the exception of the degree of inclusiveness of your final conclusion.

I see the important factors here as being gender identity combined with motivation, a factor that neither of us has emphasized to any degree. Identity is our self-concept as you state. The transgenderists are reading something into our activities and behaviours, likely based on their own experiences and education, but their assumptions may be entirely wrong, as nobody knows what is going on in someone else's mind. Many describe their urge to dress as a "need" and say they are incomplete unless the are giving vent to this "need" on a regular basis. Personally, I can take it or leave it, and have abstained for very lengthy periods during my lifetime. This is the case with many of my favourite activities. I don't need to do them, I simply enjoy doing them. Frequent indulgence leads to monotony and boredom so I refrain for a while. The desires may return depending upon what else is occupying my time and resources. I feel the same way about crossdressing.

Motivation can refer to a wide range of differing factors. As a heterosexual individual, I have always been attracted to, aroused by and desired intimacy with a woman. I have no particular affinity for very many of the so-called female type activities, but prefer more of the stereotypical masculine type of endeavours. As a result, I have a great admiration for the beauty and image of womanhood, but a marked indifference toward anything that might be remotely considered physically attractive about the male sex. Consequently, I like to watch women, but spend the greater part of my time and discussions on what society considers to be masculine activities.

Over the centuries, many men have celebrated the beauty of women in a number of ways. Poetry, songs, sculpters, paintings and in recent memory photographs. Many of these involve the unclothed or semi-clad figure to emphasize the natural beauty of woman. There are, of course, some similar artifacts depicting the male, but they are not nearly as numerous. Society has recognized the universal beauty of womanhood, by placing a much greater emphasis on fashion and grooming for the female compared to the male. I see my own personal desires to crossdress as a reflection of my male admiration for the physicality of women as appreciated through my own male heterosexual eyes.

But why crossdressing and not something like excessive viewing of pornography, or painting nudes and so on? The fact is at times I have indulged in some of these other things as well. I grew up in an era when there were very clear cut roles in society for men and women. We were instilled with the demands and expectations that came with our birth sex, both at home and at school. The proper rules of etiquette were emphasized, sexual discrimination existed in many aspects of school life, and boys were told they had to learn to "be a man", not be a "sissy" and hide their emotions. Conformity with this strictly defined definition of masculinity was expected throughout our lives, which creates pressures and consequent stress, depending upon how closely our own personalities match the societal concept of the male gender. This stress intensifies by high school, and reappears at various stages throughout our career as it intertwines with the other stresses of our jobs, and roles as husband and father.

When my crossdressing started in my early teens, it was probably somewhat fetishistic, as I was fascinated by the blossoming emergence of all my female classmates into young womanhood, and began to notice that their clothing and other elements of appearance were changing. Much of it seemed ridiculous and unnecessary to me as it seemed so impractical to my male mind, but this only added to my curiosity about what kind of sensation these things must create, and why every girl felt it necessary to conform to such silliness. The only new item of clothing that the girls were gradually adopting that seemed to have an element of usefulness to it was the bra. Coupled with my newfound attraction to this previously unnoticed aspect of the female anatomy, I became extremely curious to know what it must feel like to suddenly have to start wearing such a thing, how to put it on, and numerous other questions.

Over the years, this fetishistic attraction to the bra has diminished greatly for various reasons such as getting used to the feel of wearing one, to being married and experiencing the intimacy of being with a woman. However, it has slowly led to the realization that it and the various other elements of female appearance provide a very strange form of relaxation when worn. They are for the most part physically uncomfortable, but they create an excitement as a result of the risk taking, and mental explorative nature of the activity. Many authorities now believe that crossdressing releases endorphines in the body which are natures way of overcoming stress and pain. The "high" that we experience compensates for any discomfort from the wearing of the garments and enables us to take a break from our normal stress producing existence. This does not necessarily have anything to do with identifying as female, although to an outsider our external appearance may be what they are expecting of a female because of societal conditioning. It is simply a method discovered somewhat subconsciously over our lifetime of handling stress, which may have started by something as simple as curiosity.

We are all unique, have our own motivations, and derive our own forms of satisfaction from whatever we might do. I simply do not believe that the somewhat obvious but debatable conclusion that crossdressing is connected with gender identity is true in all cases.

Veronica

You do manly things because society forced you to do them? You do womanly things
because you are paying tribute to women who are definitely not like you? You have conveniently opted out of having any intrinsic gender characteristics, except your so-called masculine identity that doesn't spring from anything you can call your own. You must have skipped biology class while you were getting your superior education.

There are biological imperatives that drive most of our gender identification, expressions, and values. These imperatives are more powerful than anything society imposes on us. You can't cope with the mixed signals your body is giving you, that's why you deflect the main problem by blaming society for pushing you into your feminine behavior and why you blame women for pulling you into it.

The stress you are avoiding when you play dress-up is called biological gender sadness. The euphoria you feel is called biological gender happiness. If you were cisgender then your reactions would be reversed.

Welcome to your transgender reality. You can keep your diminished primary masculinity but it comes in the same package as your conspicuous subordinate femininity. If you still insist on hiding the truth then try changing your name as a tribute to your fake persona. Pick something more butch.

Pink person, brutal honesty has it's place, but unless the recipients are completely objective, it tends to alienate people.

I've been guilty of writing strong opinion in this thread too, but it doesn't hurt to remember that human beings are complex and don't always fit neatly in a theoretical box. :)

We all come to conclusions about ourselves at our own speed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pink Person

You do manly things because society forced you to do them? You do womanly things
because you are paying tribute to women who are definitely not like you? You have conveniently opted out of having any intrinsic gender characteristics, except your so-called masculine identity that doesn't spring from anything you can call your own. You must have skipped biology class while you were getting your superior education.

There are biological imperatives that drive most of our gender identification, expressions, and values. These imperatives are more powerful than anything society imposes on us. You can't cope with the mixed signals your body is giving you, that's why you deflect the main problem by blaming society for pushing you into your feminine behavior and why you blame women for pulling you into it.

---

A careful reading and comprehension of my various posts in this thread would reveal that I have not said any of the things that you are falsely attributing to me. Nowhere have I said that society has forced me to do anything, but rather I have described the expectations of society, based upon our sex. Force and expectation are not equivalent. We are free to conform or not, in whole or in part, but must be mindful of the circumstances when making our decision. The primary factor here is our circumstances, such as jobs, family and so on. Also, I have clearly stated that my interests have always fallen more along the lines of traditional masculine ones than feminine ones, so your claim that I have opted out of any intrinsic gender characteristics is laughable and indicative of a failure to comprehend. Appearance, which is society's determinant of what it EXPECTS each sex to wear, is in reality a very minor aspect of overall gender expression and identity, and basing a person's total persona on such a minor factor as what they happen to wear occasionally in specific situations is totally ludicrous.

I will not dignify your posts with any future comments except to point out that your insistence on referring to the term cisgender is indicative of your mentality. It provides a convenient means of distancing yourself and your confusion over your own gender identity from what you want to be, but know you are not, and enables you to denigrate others who do not share your confusion. You fear allowing expression to your own sense of femininity, and try to leave yourself somewhere in limbo between honesty, and the man you wish you were.

An alternate definition of cisgender is: macho, misogynistic male.

Well, ladies and gentlemen, at this juncture I fear thread closure. Too bad, too, as prior to the fire, some interesting depth on two radically polarized views was being driven to the surface (excuse the mixed metaphors). if Veronica and Pink Person can take out the ad-hominems and take a stab at discussion rather than propagandizing their respective viewpoints, I'd really like to see this continue.

FWIW: Veronica, I read some of Pink Person's characterizations into your responses as well. Pink Person, taking such a reading and recasting in extreme terms is unfair at its best. In both cases, some questioning and explication would have been useful. What came down was not.

Lea (hopeful, if not optimistic)

I agree with Kim on her original post. It could be the only between the different levels is how much we are willing to let go of our male side not how much we want to be a woman.

Kitty

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Veronica27

An alternate definition of cisgender is: macho, misogynistic male.

---

Not in any reputable dictionary

This is my understanding of the word, "cisgender":

Up until the last hundred years (?) or so, there was no real awareness of people who felt a disconnect between their birth sex and gender identity, let alone an understanding there could be a mild disconnect in some people and a strong disconnect in others, even though throughout our history there has been recognition of "third genders" such as the groups described here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_gender.

As we learned more about the complexities of gender non-conformity in recent history and particularly how widespread it seems to be, it became useful to find a word to include the binary people who don't feel a disconnect between their gender identity, role, and expression, with those that do, under an overarching "Gender" meaning.

"Cis" is a latin adjective that means "to the same side" and it describes people who do not wish to cross any gender lines.

So, it is my understanding that "cisgender" (binary male/female) + "transgender" (everyone else in between) = "gender" (every possible way that people can identify their genders).

:2c:

Some people need a good dose of tough love sometimes. I wasn't speaking about you Lady Veronica. You're a cactus trying to be a canoe. I love the people on this site who are smart and self-aware, but might be struggling with their self-awareness.

Sometimes, I try to help by unpacking some of the nonsense that I read from obtuse people. In this thread, your nonsense is packed pretty tight, and unpacking it has become a large exhausting chore. Dynamite can't move it.

You can complain about my reading comprehension, but I think I read you better than you read yourself (and me). The next time you are wearing a bra, try contemplating your manly nipples. Perhaps you will have an epiphany about them.

I do, there for I am, but so much more. it's like a relationship with so many levels of understanding. I know who i am but i also learn more about myself everyday.
does it really matter what label (cd,tv,ts, ect...)is put on us. so long we live our lives to the fullest with the one we love

Do labels matter? It depends how meaningful your want your life to be and if you want to communicate with other people and have meaningful relationships with them. If you don't care about understanding yourself, communicating with other people, and having productive social relationships with them (that involve true love and such things) then continue to order the chicken when you want the waitress to bring you the fish. Keep in mind, also, that she will never love you because she isn't a waitress. She's a watermelon and you never tip her. The other women in your life won't love you either because you keep slicing them into pieces when you make a fruit salad.

Honestly, why does this question even get asked (you should ask yourself)? Gender labels matter because gender matters, to everyone. Misconceptions about gender cause a lot of grief in the world. You might have noticed it if you hadn't been so busy turning a blind eye to it.

This topic is worthy of discussion and so far has been kept civil up to a point. Too many threads are closed because members cannot accept a different point of view to their own. Unless you are specifically called to answer a point in your post, it is pointless trying to reinforce your opinion time and time again. Any further posts that do not add to the topic, but rather than de-rail it with a view to reinforcing a comment already made will be deleted.

Nigella
Moderator

I've explained in the past that my objection to the term 'transgender' is just that it makes it easy to conflate crossdressers with transsexuals. This confusion exists among those outside the community, but it is also present within the community. There is a view popular with transsexuals that the well-adjusted TGs eventually recognize that they are TS, and work towards transition. The ones who don't are either in denial, or they're really just pervy fetishists. Are crossdressers TG? Let's consult an expert.

Quote:

---

Regardless of whether a person is a famous author and celebrity or just an average working class Joe or Jane, coming out and publicly identifying as a transgender person is no easy task. Even in the best of circumstances and in the most progressive of political climates, transgender identities are usually hard-won, generally involving reams of paperwork and documentation, court appearances, and psychological evaluations, not to mention completely reorganizing one's personal and professional life to accommodate their new gender presentation. Depending on the laws of the jurisdiction a transgender person lives in, works in, and was born in, transitioning from one gender to another is often a tedious, expensive, and time-consuming process, sometimes even actually impossible to accomplish entirely. While a gay or lesbian person can come out of the closet by simply declaring their identity to others, transgender people must fight for our identities, sometimes for years, before we will be legally and socially recognized in many quarters as the people we know ourselves to be.

---

Do those sound like the experiences of a crossdresser, or a transsexual? They are being presented as representative experiences of TGs in general, but they are obviously describing the difficulties of being transsexual. Why would an expert focus on those issues, rather than, say, the problem of coming out to one's spouse as a crossdresser, or the difficulty of moving back and forth between male and female presentation? The reason is because when it comes to counting numbers, CDs must be counted in order to swell the ranks of the TG community. When it comes to discussing issues, or representing the community, though, we don't count. We are seen as either proto-transsexuals, or we're labeled as fetishists and booted out of the community.

Being a crossdresser and being a transsexual are two different things. Some transsexuals may go through a "crossdressing phase" on their path towards discovery, but that is not the universal experience for crossdressers. We have a different relationship with our birth gender. 'Trans' suggests a crossing over from point A to point B. Its presence in both transgender and transsexual gives the false impression that it means the same in both cases: A one-way journey from one gender presentation to another. Not all crossdressers are on that journey.

So here's my view: Call us whatever you like. Stick whatever label you want on us. But treat our views with respect. Stop trying to shoehorn our experiences into your idea of what it means to be TG. Stop being derisive and dismissive. Stop doing the "oh, but you're MEN" thing. Stop telling us that we're in denial. Stop acting like you know what path we're on before we even know it. Just. Stop.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sophie86

Being a crossdresser and being a transsexual are two different things. Some transsexuals may go through a "crossdressing phase" on their path towards discovery, but that is not the universal experience for crossdressers.

---

This is very true, thank you for reinforcing this. :)

A transsexual feels a complete disconnect with her birth sex, AND her assigned gender role and expression.

Unlike transsexuals, crossdressers DO NOT FEEL ANY disconnect with their birth sex (except maybe the crossdressers who toy with the idea of breast creams), although they do experience some disconnect (to varying degrees) with their assigned gender expression (and perhaps gender roles, for the crossdressers who fantasize about being maids, sissies, etc). This is why they dress. If there was no disconnect with socially assigned gender expression, they wouldn't dress with forms, wigs, and makeup, would they?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sophie86

Stop doing the "oh, but you're MEN" thing.

---

So, if your'e not MEN, you're not Transgender (according to you), and you are certainly not WOMEN - what are you?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rianna Humble

So, if your'e not MEN, you're not Transgender (according to you), and you are certainly not WOMEN - what are you?

---

I am a MtF crossdresser.

I did not say that I am not a man. I am a man with a strong feminine side that I like to express. When I am dressed, I prefer that people use femme pronouns to refer to me, especially people in the community who understand that sort of thing. When posting on this forum as Sophie, I am en femme. When someone here uses my underlying masculinity to deride me, or dismiss my opinion, I see that as a deliberate attempt to insult me. It is extremely rude.

I also did not say that I am not transgender. I said I don't like the term, because I think it causes confusion. If crossdressers are TG, though, then by definition I am TG. Furthermore, if crossdressers are TG--I mean all crossdressers, not just the ones who will eventually discover that they are TS--then don't you agree that transsexuals should treat them with respect as members of the same community who have at least some common interests?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ReineD

If there was no disconnect with socially assigned gender expression, they wouldn't dress with forms, wigs, and makeup, would they?

---

I can't speak for all crossdressers. Let's consider the case of Drag Queens for a moment, though. Do they feel such a disconnect, or is it purely a form of artistic expression? Perhaps it's closer to the latter for some crossdressers? I don't know.

In my case, though, I think there is a certain amount of disconnect with my assigned gender role. Sophie is an expression of some qualities that I've felt the need to suppress over the years. Not so much the sensitivity/nurturing role, which I have been able to integrate with my masculinity, but the desire to be attractive, sexy, and sensual, which I just don't get from masculinity.

I apologize for lighting a fire under anyone in this thread, so I'll turn off the heat. Sometimes when you roast a bird, delicious juices flow out. I was trying to get some good insights from one or two people who seemed capable of providing them. The results were not so sweet until Sophie joined us.

Sophie introduced the excellent point that conflating gender classifications is a serious problem for transgender people. Crossdressers do not like it when they are conflated with transsexuals, and vice versa. People in the middle range of transgender classification also struggle with being conflated with people who are not like them in important ways.

A related problem that doesn't get voiced much on this site but is voiced very loudly in the outside world is that cisgender people don't like being conflated with transgender people. CDs who object when they are conflated with transsexuals are frequently in favor of conflating themselves with cisgender people. Similarly, transsexuals who object to being conflated with other transgender people, frequently conflate themselves with cisgender men and women. Cisgender people do not want to be conflated with CDs and transsexuals. If you have any doubts, go ask one.

Why can't everyone have their own personal gender category if it makes them happy? The answer is that everyone isn't so special. Our similarities outweigh our differences for some groups of people.

If you are a crossdresser who wants to conflate yourself with a cisgender person then you will receive a much harsher response in the outside world than anything you get here. Try climbing over that fence and see where you fall.

I'm responding to a post that Veronica 27 made in another thread, since the topic is a continuation of the discussion here.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Veronica27

Identity, cannot be separated from the role/expression, because by definition it is determined by the roles with which we identify.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Veronica27

Dress and external appearances are a very small aspect of the overall gender role in life, and when you factor in that this is, for many, more of a leisure time activity, it has little impact on their overall identity or awareness of who they are.

---

Don't these two thoughts contradict each other? If identity cannot be separated from gender expression, doesn't it follow that gender expression is to varying degrees tied to identity even if minutely?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Veronica27

Transgender describes who the individual is, and has a tendency to imply constancy.

---

Transgender does describe who the individual is, and it also describes what he does, since ultimately we propel our own behaviors. Who else drives our decisions, if it is not our own sense of "I"? It is also true that transgender implies constancy, but so does crossdresser. A man can hardly be called a CD if he has only worn panties a few times in his life while having sex. I do not call myself bi just because I had a threesome in my 20s.

How would you define someone who comes into this forum identifying as a CD who is looking for breast creams to enhance his breasts "just a little bit so it won't show in guy mode, even if only to fit into a 36A"? And what is the difference between this person, and another who is satisfied with only donning breast forms while dressed? Don't they both want to appearance of breasts when they are dressed?

What is the motive for presenting fully as a woman, even if it is only done occasionally? If it is only for pleasure, then the question remains, what is it about crossing the gender presentation boundary that gives you (and others) pleasure or comfort, and how can it not be a sense of identification with the opposite gender even if this is experienced only during the crossdressing?

I believe that we are what we do.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Veronica27

For that reason, I prefer not to apply it to myself, and if any descriptive is needed simply use crossdressing as it refers more to the activity.

---

This is your prerogative, but again, what motivates the choice to CD particularly, as opposed to dressing like a cat or Superman? We all have likes and dislikes. I dislike fast fairground rides because they make me feel dizzy and they upset my sense of balance. I love to ski because I enjoy the speed, the sound, the swaying and gliding motions, and also feeling in concert with the ground below me. I like puzzles and logic problems because I enjoy challenging my mental acuity. I am among other things, a skier and a puzzle aficionado. I am not a fair ground ride fan. I love to draw and paint and so I am an artist, even if I do not exhibit or sell my work commercially.

Sorry to be repetitive, but you've got to admit that to the rest of us who do choose our fashions based on the way we see ourselves (whether it is goth, prep, business, outdoorsy, biker, emo, extreme, loud, conventional, etc), it is difficult to understand that a man presenting as a woman does this completely divorced from his sense of self. This just seems too disjointed.

I began this thread with what was a loaded question...and obviously, I have a point of view on the subject. It has precipitated far more and more heated discussion than I would have imagined. Perhaps I could have asked the same question in a less provocative manner...but it certainly has been interesting to see the reaction.

The point of the question was not to achieve a resolution. The query doesn't yeild scientifically valid data. And since there's no blood test that I aware of that can definitively answer the question, so all we can do is observe how this highly selective sample of CDrs (Am I safe to assume that most of the respondents are CDrs?) perceive themselves. And it appears that many of us do identify ourselves as TG, while others are quite adamant that they dress for other reasons. Perhaps that's all we need to know on the subject.