I would imagine we might be included in Q, but not sure. What are your thoughts.
Printable View
I would imagine we might be included in Q, but not sure. What are your thoughts.
I always thought we fit under the T.
i think the T covers us; just as the other letters refer to specific orientations.
My thought would be that we would always fit under the "T" portion
But I have contacted several groups in my area, and they all said that,
I really would nit be a good fit for their group
One even suggested that I start a new group just for us,
and she would help me get it going.
Gwen,
A similar question has come up before asking if we fit under the LGBTQ umbrella , I have mixed feelings about it but also doubt if the trans communtiy could go it alone when so many prefer to be hidden in the closet .
As for the Q label , it had shown to be an old label to mean odd or unusual , no matter I don't feel being trans is queer , it feels perfectly normal to me .
There's a thread on the go at the moment about where we sit on the spectrum and I would suggest that it's generally accepted that on that spectrum is Transgender.
Now I'm one who, at this present time, has no plan or inkling to ever transition but never say never. That said like many here I feel there's an element within me that leans towards having female traits. And so while male and hetro I have more than a little in common with those who do seek transition.
One of the things that I feel does bind us into the LGBTQ community is that we sit as a minority within society, one that like Gays is shunned and derided by factions with the broader population. Because of that we have an empathetic link to the LGBTQ grouping much in the same way our dressing gives us an insight into the world of women.
I suspect that one of the reasons some in the LGBTQ community shun us is, like the general population and their equating CD = Gay, they see us as people just acting out a fetish and nothing more. Both are as mistaken as the other in making such assumptions.
Many long time CD's often drift toward being trans. Including many I have met. So, I think CD's should be included under the T umbrella.:thumbsup:
Even tho I'm definitely NOT a trans now. When I began dressing 25 years ago it was because I wanted breasts and fantasized about becoming female!:battingeyelashes:
But then, I do pretty much everything backwards!:doh:
I'm not fond of the whole "gatekeeper" aspect in the first place. Transwomen fight against being kept out of the definition of "women", then turn around and keep us out of the definition of "trans".
Then I become guilty of it myself by thinking of crossdressers as those of us making an effort to present as women, as opposed to "guys just wearing panties and lipstick with a hairy body and beard".
The central argument against us is that if we are doing it for sexual purposes then we don't count. I am sure all of our drives are more nuanced than that.
Bottom line, labels suck.
Depends on who you talk to but I say yes.
T (transgender) fits the bill as a crossdresser navigates between two genders, at least in presentation, and sometimes in more profound ways.
I sometimes get asked for clarification about who/what I am when meeting new people. I tell them technically I fall under the T but then add that I consider myself just a regular Jane with no further requirements than the person asking the question. Regular folk are much better with this than the few TS I have met who consider us pretenders to the throne.
I believe the LQBT+, the + allows for variations
LGBTQA+: The acronym for “Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Queer, Asexual, & Allies.” The acronym is often expanded to variations of LGBTQIA to inclusively represent identities which include intersex and questioning people. Queer:An umbrella term used to refer to all LGBTQA+
I would say that CD's certainly fall under the "T", but it must be said that we are (generally) poorly understood by the LGB community. Never mind the fact that all to many in the straight community can't tell the difference.
If you feel like part of it, I suppose you are. I am not gay, nor trans, so I don't regard myself as part of it. I have fun wearing the clothes and trying to look like a woman, that's all. Someday I might feel that it's no longer so enjoyable and I might put it behind me, or not.
I will point out that for the closeted,they are never going to take a stand and "grasp a letter"... Nothing wrong with that BUT they never take the stand ! Those of us in the daily mainstream face far different challenges.Quote:
Originally Posted by AngelaYVR
I do not have to be defined by a letter. The only definition I need is one word....ME!!!! I am who I am and that is that. X
Helen,
As I pointed out to another question on this subject , the LGB sections are based on their sexual aspect and the Trans section is based on gender . They can also remain anonymous whereas our needs can be more visual . At times I wonder if we they think we lampoon their sexual needs with our dressing .
If you ask some trans people about their sexual orientation they may not be able to give you a definite answer .
I agree with Geena75 here, and have the same lack of feeling of integration into most of the "letters". I am not Lesbian (unless you count my attraction to women when I am crossdressed), I am not Gay, I am not Bi nor do I want to transition fully or permanently as it seems the Trans letter implies for those that identify there. Queer seems to be a holdover long term identification that really doesn't fir for the heterosexual crossdresser either to me. The reality is that for many of us, Crossdresser is the most appropriate designation. But is seems to still come with some stigma in the "communities" and even seems to be considered somehow "less" somehow by the other communities. I can't help but think that the key here is not to try to "fit into" one o the letters, but to be whoever you are and be OK with that. I just know I enjoy crossdressing and presenting my female self for any number of reasons (of which so many of us have described in these forums over the years). Perhaps, the best place we all fit is exactly the title of this forum site, crossdressers!
You make an excellent point, Teresa. The criteria in the LGBTQA+ spectrum are mixed and blend sex and gender in a way that is not supported by the science. The criteria being on a level playing field is really important in classification (taxonomy). It is like putting birds, flying insects and bats (mammals) into the same group by virtue of the fact that they have wings and can fly which the vast majority of animals can't do. It is a mixed up classification but does have its value in that all LGBTQA+ folks have one thing in common - they exhibit non-traditional behaviors. Is that justification for grouping them? Well, on the surface, yes.
When you add crossdressing to transgender it creates a new mixed category because the criteria are mixed. One distinction I have noticed pretty clearly is the motivation for crossdressing which, at the basic level, is simply the act of dressing in the clothing of a different gender group but not a change in the person's sense of self (gender). It appears that, in a general sense, crossdressers seem to be motivated by having the dressing create a feeling of being a member of the female gender. Whereas trans crossdress because they have the feeling of being a member of the female gender. In the former the feeling is generated by the clothes while in the latter the feeling is the motivation for dressing in a way that makes you consistent with what is already there - the feeling. The final result is the same, but the motivators are different. One must then ask, why some need to generate the feeling by changing expression? Is it just a recreation or is it more fundamental and just follows a different path of development in the crossdresser as compared to a trans person? That is a very, very difficult question to answer with any kind of verifiable evidence without the ability to read another person's mind without bias.
My personal solution is to group them together because although the motivations may be different the result is very similar. Birds and flying insects and bats can be grouped together as flying animals even though they differ by an incredible amount in terms of anatomy and their technique of flying. The aerodynamic principles are the same for all three, but their approach to applying those principles are very different with the result being basically the same - they can travel through the air rather than being confined to land or water but some fliers can also travel on land and in water. Maybe those are a subgroup of flying animals where many get around in the air but can go elsewhere. Sort of like a person who can change their gender expression but can also comfortably have sex with any other sex. If gender and sex are so functionally separated as seems to be the case it seems unnatural to group those who are essentially universal with those who are more specialized. Yet it works because the criteria change in the classification. So, criteria can become very important in the classification.
So, for now, I include crossdressers as a form of transgender because there is really no easy way to distinguish them by simply looking. You can't tell what the motivations were simply from their expression. However, at a deeper level of taxonomy you will find some major differences in the neurology and functioning of the brain.
I agree with Geena. I am not gay nor do I consider myself as transgender. Even all dressed up wearing a dress, I am still a male who simply enjoys wearing women?s clothing. I guess that there is probably an argument to fit some of us in under the LGBTQ+ umbrella but I personally don’t feel part of it eitherQuote:
Originally Posted by Geena75
While reading the responses I 'googled' a query as to definition of transgender. To me, it always seems there is a necessity to put a person into a certain hole for another person's convenience. Let's get those subtle distinctions categorized. I drifted over to www.transequality.org and found an article on the scope of transgender. There is a segment entitled "What is the difference between being transgender and being gender nonconforming?" It suggests I may fit in that hole based on the premise I am wearing the clothing of the sex opposite of what's between my legs. And adopting the mannerisms too. It proposes such a person may or may not be transgender as described elsewhere in the article. Perhaps, Lacy fits into that definition.
Is that sufficient for how I feel or what I feel? I feel very comfortable being all dolled up in a dress, hosiery and heels and everything else a woman wears, although I do not have anything "to pack into a bra" as my wife has stated. I also feel very comfortable looking like an unshaven slob in cutoff ratty jeans with no socks and a well worn tee shirt. No angst either way. So, what drives me to wear the clothing of a woman? Many times in the past it seems there is more. An escape from one entity to another. I've said many times a counselor I have seen for the past ten years suggests men and women have some dna of the opposite birth sex in their genetic chain. In some it is stronger than others. When the going gets tough handling some issues, why do I revert to the comfort of wearing women's clothing rather than seeking comfort in drug and alcohol like so many of my fellow vets have done?
I have always suggested answering such inquiries as this to express oneself in sentences and paragraphs rather than trying to justify your existence with one word.
Oh, my wife's second cousin is a transgender man who is currently pregnant and is delighted as his mother is. How does that fit into the equation of assigning a single word to his feelings? Just be who you are!
In my opinion, "No".
I miss the "olden days" when were the "transvestite/transsexual community", it was so much easier back then.
As for if occasionally dressers are part of the LGBT... it really depends on the context of how "transgender" is used and who is using it. The terms we use are not standardized, and in this PC age probably never will be. For example, a local health agency has a "transgender health outreach"; they addressed trans who have sex with men and how to stay safe, and how to safely obtain hormones. Clearly straight crossdressers like me were not included, on both the sexual orientation and lack of HRT part. Health issues of someone like me are the same as other straight men who don't dress.
Crossdressers have usually been slighted, IMO, when it comes to labeling in regards to alternate sexual or gender expression communities. Many Cders certainly do not fit firmly in the broad definition of transgender.
On the other hand, most folks consider queer essentially the same as gay. So, perhaps drop the Q and add C.
LGBTC. And forget adding further alphabet?
Is a crossdresser who honestly wishes to transition but cannot (Do not read as 'Will not') considered trans?
Good question Cindy. I'm more confused now than ever :).
So the funny thing is that this community has a unique sense of identity. If you ask the LGBTQ community, they will say we are just a part of the trans spectrum. Within the gay community “crossdresser” usually refers to straight men who dress in women’s clothing for sexual kicks. So it really comes down to how you identify. If crossdressing is part of your gender identity, then yes, you would absolutely be part of the LGBTQIA+ umbrella. If you dress for kicks, then probably not.
Cindylouho,
The dressing part to most TGs is a visual indicator of how they feel inside , gender transition is fairly broad not everyone takes hormones or are capable of taking them and not everyone will go onto GRS . A member who I had great respect for but no longer visits the forum accepted she socially transitioned , she later told me she couldn't take hormones because of other health issues evenso she was accepted as a female major in the Canadian armed forces .
I consider myself "trans " or a "transwoman " as I go out full time as Teresa . Wearing male clothes now feels like crossdressing because it doesn't feel right .
At one point I didn't feel part of the LGB community because I'm not gay but if we need to fight the trans cause we have to join forces otherwise the trans community will struggle to be heard , most of us started as CDers but as some of us move forward we can encounter more problems with society , can we afford to ignore the LGBTQ banner ?
Just to simply this. Cross dressing itself is a behavior, so a person who wears the clothing of another gender is cross dressing and a cross dresser, just as a bicyclist is a person who rides bikes. Its more a matter of degree that kind. I can ride a bike, but I am not a committed cyclist. Some people may enjoy dressing occasionally but not strongly identify with it. And there are others, like me, that have been drawn to womens clothing as a way to express some inner sense of self. That would, in my view, put me and others who feel the same on the T spectrum.
Cindylouho,
The current body of thought, by those who make it their business to understand us, is to define gender dysphoria rather than force one into (or out of) a particular "box" like transsexual. To quote an article from the American Psychiatric Association's web site, "Of note, not all people who are transgender will desire all domains of gender affirmation, as these are highly personal and individual decisions." The real trick, I've learned, is to understand one's self enough to know, really know, where you're comfortable on that spectrum. Undiagnosed and untreated gender dysphoria can manifest in many ways, many of which will not be associated with gender issues at all.
But which fragment of the T community would you advocate for this alliance? :thinking:. Because if it's all of them, it might require a willingness to, say, walk down the street together . . .Quote:
Originally Posted by Teresa
- L.
I'm pleased so many of you were intrigued by my question. I asked it not on a personal level, but more of a chicken and the egg follow-up question to this thread. I might have made a full transition were I born in a different time in a different circumstance but I'm wasn't. Under the circumstances I'm in I'm very happy, maybe that will change in the future maybe not I'm not worried about that. My point really is if a person cannot transition for whatever reason they should still be accepted as being transgendered even if they haven't actually had GRS or HT after all this is how they truly feel inside. Just my .02.
Kim hits the main point of it. Cross dressing is a sufficiently socially inconvenient if not outwardly proscribed behavior that I think few of us would engage in it if it weren't for a strong inner drive. That inner drive, regardless of whether it is toward transition or not is sufficient to align us within the Transgender spectrum.
If any one on this board is a trans person looking down their nose at cross dressers or a cross dresser looking down their nose at trans people, please STOP IT! In our unity and our loving respect for each other lies our strength.
The whole 'labelling' thing has alwaysleft me cold. So what should we do? Add a C into the mix?Quote:
Originally Posted by JennB
LGBTQAI+C?
I don't know whether to laugh or cry.
Additionally ... if this website is for crossdressers (only), what are all the other people who are not, stictly speaking, crossdressers doing here?
Another can of worms opens. For what reason? To what end?
Get real, folks! This website is for the provision of mutual support, not division. We are all somewhere on the spectrum and it does not really matter where, as long as we can honour each other.
This question (or something similar to this) comes up a couple of times a year. There is lots of discussion but it appears there is no right or wrong answer. Some people like labels and others don't want to be labeled. The debate will probably continue.
Not to split hairs, Helen, but it would seem to me that this line of thinking is more along the lines of "The enemy of my enemy is my friend"...a tenuous and forced alliance at best, with the main commonality being that the LGBQ and T camps are both minorities within the hetero/cis worlds and to some degree are threatened by the same kind homo- and transphobia and violence that is often being visited upon all of us for being "different". Kind of like the forced alliance between the Western Allies and the Communist Soviet Union during WWII in order to defeat the Nazis, and look how well that worked out in the long run.Quote:
Originally Posted by Helen_Highwater
The LGB group is defined by the fact that that theirs is primarily a sexual orientation issue. For us, it is a matter of gender orientation, and as for the transsexuals and the "Q" contingent it is often a mixture of the two. Drag queens are almost exclusively homosexual, claim that theirs is an "art form" and an alternate style of entertainment, and that they derive no particular enjoyment or erotic arousal from their female impersonation activities. We CDer's, on the other hand, feel an innate mental connection with GG's and a deep-seated admiration for the way they look, act, and approach life as a whole. Ours is an act of attempted emulation and homage to the feminine lifestyle (a form of "method acting", if you will), and not one of presenting an over-the-top caricature of women as many drag queens do.
The truth of the matter is that most gays don't "get" us and feel no particular affinity towards us beyond the fact that we are both marginalized societal outliers. Kind of like that pesky little kid brother or sister who always tries to tag along with their older sibling and is usually unwanted, but always underfoot. In both cases, whether we as individual groups thrive or not - or are able to stake out our rightful place within society at large - depends primarily on the good graces of the hetero/cis majority. That is often tenuous at best (opposition to same sex marriage, infamous "Bathroom Bills", anyone?), and often depends on which way the political winds are blowing at any given moment.
Now when you deliver that sentiment, I do not throw up in my mouth. I mean, both are correct, but some are more suitable candidates to deliver it than others.Quote:
Originally Posted by April Rose
- L.
From my observations of our local LGBTQ group, and my own reading. Even trans people (despite the "T" in the designation) are often not welcome. This seems especially true coming from many of the more militant Lesbians. Their argument being that trans-women get all the good of being a woman and do not have to suffer the bad. YMMV.
It depends...
ppl dress for different reasons. I think all fall under T+ which to me is anything that is not CIS. There's a war being waged around the word "transgender", both sides having valid points but ultimately futile since only you can identify you.
So....
if you feel you are, you are
if you feel you aren't, you aren't
In my city, most CDs go out and about in the LGBTQ part of the city. We feel safe there. I guess that the idea behind the LGBTQA+ community is fighting for inclusiveness. I believe they support CDs regardless on which letter we are in the acronym, and we support the community, either because we feel we belong to it, or at least we understand, and sympathize what they are fighting for. We all suffer prejudice and bigotry.
And..There is nothing wrong with that ! We are all queers from the same playground, just different corners of it !Quote:
Originally Posted by Lydianne
I like your comparison to riding a bicycle Kim. It is not an either/or kind of thing. Sticking labels on things and defining them narrowly is a synthetic way to catalog things, but it rips out individuality. And Aunt Kelly you comments are also right on.
I agree Char. This is a subject that comes up often and I agree the discussion of this subject may be never ending because, perhaps, there is no clear answer. On the other hand, sometimes the questioning and learning other people's views on the subject is much more important than finding a precise answer. You can paddle a canoe to get to a particular place or you can paddle a canoe just for the sake of paddling a canoe and seeing what ever you can see in your journey to nowhere in particular.
Sure . . .Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogina B
. . .
. . . apart from preaching unity with LGB while being more than prepared to leave the other categories of T behind :straightface:.
- L.
I totally agree. I have learned so much from asking what I thought a simple question.Quote:
Originally Posted by GretchenM
Gretchen,
Interesting analogy and I agree at one point I paddled my canoe round in circles now I have a definite destination .
All I can say is that the LGBT... community at large has been very accepting of my dressing in bars and clubs. For that, I am very grateful. I do not think I would have ever gone out so many times without their positive influence.
Sandi
Growing up in San Francisco in the 70s and 80s this was a much easier question. The answer was always "yes". The LGBT community was for all those who fell out of the mainstream. Clearly we do.
It seems that as the years go by there appeared people who were not satisfied with an amorphous overview of the LGBT community. For whatever reasons decided that there needed to be definition and boundries and pigeon holes. They didn't ask US if we were happy with the way things were. They needed to control their lives and to do that they needed to control the narrative of the community.
This asking of who fits where does more to divide the community and fracture the movement ( such as it is) than to help. It wasn't until relatively recently that I even knew this was an issue.
When I go to a Lesbian bar I'm one of the community. When I go to a straight bar I'm one of the community, if anyone even notices. If I go to a gay bar I might run into some problem. In that if I let myself be picked up....I'm one of the community. If I'm there to socialize with my friends, then while I'm a member of the community to my friends, I might not be to the men whose attention I turn down. Just as a straight woman in a straight bar might be called a choice name if she turns down male attention. The ONLY time I really have issues, and it depends very much on the group, is when I'm with other TG/CDs.
Generally we get along, but every once in a while we get that "nazi" type that demands everyone "fit" into a neat catagory..."Oh, and btw YOU are NOT one of us".
It's why I generally hang around with Straight and Lesbian GG's.
I'd say fitting into the LGBTQ spectrum would depend on the reasons for dressing. I'm not gay, don't identify as a woman and don't dress to appear to be a woman so I don't fit into any of the initials of the group. Obviously, others here do. It's not all inclusive for the members of the forum. Decide for yourself.
It all depends on WHY you cross dress, now doesn't it? Crossdressing is not what a person is, like a Transsexual, Homosexual, etc. it is something someone DOES--and for various reasons. A person who cross dresses because he identifies with the opposite sex is does so for a very different reason than a Heterosexual who sees CD as a fetish or an erotic Humiliation/SM device. Still, the best Standard definition of "a Crossdresser" is a Heterosexual who wears the clothing of the opposite sex----For whatever reason. As Non-Heterosexuals Cross Dressing is something they may DO as a consequence of their atypical Sexuality.as a coping procedure or sexual identity thing. LGBQ is a different "animal", so to speak, as far as CD is concerned, than the Heterosexual CD.
I think that a Straight Man who likes and sometimes wears Women's clothing, jewelry, etc. most likly does Not fall into the LGBTQ group. Suzih