Crossing dressing and dating guys?

[Fab Karen]

I was using the premise that the majority of CDs are heterosexual men who are or have been married. This is admittedly Tri-Ess' viewpoint (paragraph 5), and up til now I assumed that Tri-Ess had a pretty good handle on it. But, maybe they don't.

Remember what I said about assuming? Tri-Ess is an organization for hetero CD's. Their ideas about CD's in general are not to be taken as gospel about all of us. Rather than making blanket statements which help foster misunderstanding, address your comments to married CD's or in relationship with GG's who are having such issues. Just like GG's, just like black people, just like any group you can name, we are not all alike. No-one said not to talk about it- just don't talk like it is true of all of us.

[ReineD]

address your comments to married CD's or in relationship with GG's who are having such issues.

I thought I had.

Their [Tri-Ess] ideas about CD's in general are not to be taken as gospel about all of us.

As to Tri-Ess, I can only get my information from groups that are reputable. Perhaps I should join the meetup sites and find out how many of those CDs are or have been in relationships with GGs? If you can find some studies that show that the majority of CDs are homosexual, then please post the resources here.

Karen, I'm not the enemy and I'm sorry you're taking it this way. Perhaps you'd rather the GGs not come here and contribute their POV at all.

[Jacqueline Vasquez]

Jacqueline

Same for me could not have said it any better

mmmmmmhmmmmmm girlfriend!

[CindyT]

I get the urges but could probably never bring myself to do it, unless it was in a perfect situation. However, I do dream of being the submissive one in a lesbian relationship...
On the other hand, wouldn't it be the ultimate fantasy to actually fullfill a male while dressed??? HMmm tough call. For me I guess it will always be just a fantasy...

[Satrana]

It is not about feeling insecure about a partner's fantasies, but rather feeling insecure from within the relationship. Period. If a CDer should taylor his fantasies to involve his SO, there would be no cause for the insecurity. It is the remoteness that is hurtful.

Indeed if the GG wants to share in the fantasy then I can agree. But what %age of relationships are we talking about here? Most women don't want to even see their partner dressed or specifically state that they want it kept out of the bedroom.
So to be relevant this situation requires

• the secret to be out
• the GG to be 100% accepting
• the GG wanting to be included in this sex role situation
• the CD wanting to share a private fantasy and have it enacted by his wife

So we are talking about a very small minority of relationships in which a happy solution is possible. Now I am one of those lucky ones who qualifies on all the above points so I am not arguing this from a defensive position. I quite agree this is the way to go but I don't see a good solution in other relationships which are not open, accepting and accommodating. How can you tailor your fantasies? they are not conscious deliberate thoughts - some things just appeal to you. It is too individualistic a process to say if it can be tailored or not.

Remember that this is just one of many fantasies in a CD's head. To pinpoint this and state that this is a major reason for loss of sexual appetite is a stretch.

I do understand why this fantasy would be very disturbing to GGs and why it would become a lightning rod on sexual issues but I think it is largely a red herring. Reine you already pinpointed the real issue behind this - namely CDs fantasies are particularity powerful and compulsive. The internal looped feedback of autogynephilia intensifies the imagery and these thoughts can displace the sexual attraction to the wife especially in longer term relationships. This is why I have repeatedly stated over the years that the fantasy based crossdressing that most CDS are stuck in clearly can be detrimental to an intimate relationship unless the partner is included and is happy to partake. The sex with men fantasy is only one example of the fantasyland that CDs have nurtured and developed through a lifetime trapped in the closet.

I will say another thing which people will object to. CDs are damaged goods. The shame, guilt and closeted lifestyle twists our sense of perspective so we are no longer aligned with reality and what others seek. We can mask this well enough so it is not obvious but it is there buried deep inside. We can unlearn these bad habits and focus on the right things but only if we learn to accept ourselves and be honest in recognizing how our CDing has changed us - the good things and the bad things.

The wife feels the increasing distance, and this causes her to retreat as well. It is a turnoff for a GG to feel that her husband is just going through the motions.

I quite agree but again this routinely happens in most relationships for many reasons and it is usually a two way street. The husband can feel his wife backing away as well. Both of them will get angry and depressed that the other is not showing the love and interest that they expect. It becomes self-reinforcing on both sides. In most CDing relationships there is already a lack of openness and communication on both sides, so the chances of CDing matters being discussed and resolved is not good.

Then these CDs are not fully disclosing themselves to their GG partners when they initially say the CDing is only about the clothes or getting in touch with their feminine feelings

YES. The CD community is dishonest in wanting to describe only a positive outlook on their behavior while denying (even to themselves) the less appealing aspects. It is understandable why this happens but it results in a lack of progress in relationships and the community at large.

To blame the insecurities on the GG is not fair.

Blame? Insecurities exist, we all have them. The insecurities that GGs feel about CDing came into being on the day of revelation. The issue at hand is how you deal with them and how much you will let them affect your behavior towards your partner. If there is no evidence that your partner wants to act on his fantasy then you must take personal responsibility for your own feelings.

Here is the nasty side of human behavior. We want to uncover evidence that confirms our worst fears, we want to feel our insecurities were justified and we were not silly to feel this way. We want to shout out - See! I knew it! I told you so! Insecurities can easily lead to destructive behavior and the breakdown in trust when nothing has taken place to justify it.

if the CDer unapologetically places increasing importance on the CDing and the fantasies involved with it, it makes it even more difficult for marriages to thrive.

I agree which is why it is important that the CDer needs to exit both the physical closet and his fantasyland. But that can only be a realistic expectation if his SO is accepting and accommodating and wants involvement and openness. When the SO shuts out the CDing she is effectively keeping her partner in the closet. What effect do you think a rejecting SO has on the CDer's feelings of shame and guilt and willingness to divulge everything including the less appealing parts?

This is precisely why non-accepting GGs do not like the CDing.

Are you not getting ahead of yourself? Non-accepting GGs do not accept the dressing period. Lets not confuse the ignorance and prejudice that precludes SO acceptance from the issue that CDs may focus on fantasies to the detriment of their sexual relationships.

This is when she realizes that the CDing is a lot more than just about the clothes.

I would hope that everyone realizes this by now. The big problem is the "Tri-Ess effect" where the sexual aspect is swept under the carpet by both CDs and SOs. The prudence of Western society can be exacerbating.

In this case, the husband would not be turned off because the wife is the wrong gender.

No you got this wrong. We are attracted only to women (assuming not gay or bi) and we are not turned off by them being the wrong gender. You are confusing a gender based fantasy with sexual attraction. If you look at the comments it is all about being with "men" - not a particular man. The men are just mannequins, their purpose is to enhance our desire to feel feminine by placing us in a certain role.

This might be because they are not getting much action from their husbands

It could be that but the point is that 1/3 of western women regularly consume sexual fantasies and it happens in all age groups and all states of relationships. I was countering the idea that obsessing with fantasies is only a male activity. The damage you are describing where CDs focus excessively on fantasies also happens in other relationships such as women who seek their satisfaction from romance novels and not from her partner.

Do you not believe this to be the beginning of late onset transexualism? I am coming to the conclusion that a TS does not need to feel she needs SRS in order to be a TS. Not in this definition.

Well that is a whole other thread! but yes I absolutely agree with you. I communicated extensively with three TS many years ago and I know the "female spirit trapped within a male body" is another example where the whole truth is being smudged for the purposes of societal acceptance. Secondary transsexualism is about the evolution of gender identity through crossdressing.

I will take your remark as being addressed to me.

You know it was not. I was pointing out how *some will use this information to justify non-acceptance and will stop listening to what their partners are actually telling them.

This is not about trust. I am sure the wives whose husbands are remote from them sexually but are otherwise in the home physically know that their husbands have not had sex with others. It is all about the disconnect.

And you think disconnect does not lead to distrust? Isn't the whole point that one or both parties is not telling the whole truth? How can doubts be dispersed that perhaps something will not happen in the future?

It looks as if we disagree on this one though, because the debate for me is not about what motivates or doesn't motivate someone to CD, but rather how the behaviors (when present) do affect the GGs.

Actually we agree on most things. However you are approaching this from a different angle focusing on the detail of the fantasy and the emotional hurt it can produce. I am saying there is a much bigger picture behind all of this which strikes at the heart of the problems CDs and SOs encounter even when there is a fair degree of acceptance. I think focusing on this particular fantasy can be counter-productive and misses the bigger opportunity to draw back the curtain on this whole charade.

There are so many obstacles in dealing with CDing in a relationship that I sometimes wonder how relationships survive. I wish I could say it was always through empathy and honesty but clearly denial plays a major part in many relationships.

I always enjoy debating with you Reine. There is always much to be learned when people actively engage in swapping ideas and experiences. I am dismayed at the close mindedness of those who cry derision listening to a different point of view.

[Sheila]

There is always much to be learned when people actively engage in swapping ideas and experiences.

This is true Satrana, but only if one engages with an open mind and heart

I am dismayed at the close mindedness of those who cry derision listening to a different point of view.

It dismays me when people make themselves appear to be open minded and accepting of other viewpoints while all the time digging at them and trying to be-little their view points and those of others they are trying to put across

Whether you like it or not Satrana Reine and other GG's here are telling you how we/other GG's feel and how it affects us/their relationships ........... some GG's will not post int his section because of the flak they get from some of the CDERS, and that is sad and scary ........... all of us do not have the intellectual ability that you and Reine have to make your points and views know, but just because we don't, does not make them any less valid ............ whether you choose to believe what Reine and other GG's are saying about how things affect their/our relationships with their CDing partners is neither here nor there ................ we are saying those because it happens to be the truth ........... maybe our truth, and not yours or what you want to hear, but they are our truths non the less

[Karen564]

[SIZE=2]Wow, this getting Way to deep for me....[/SIZE]
[SIZE=2][/SIZE]
[SIZE=2]Sorry, I guess this is my way to tell everyone to lighten up ![/SIZE]
[SIZE=2][/SIZE]
[SIZE=2]Love & Peace..[/SIZE]

[siantv2003]

But its not for me.

Given it some thought based on posts I've read here but it ... well, lets just say its no for this girl! Guess I'm a member of the lesbian side :-)

[Michelia]

I am dismayed by the "we" vs. "them" attitude by many of the posters here. I am also dismayed by the lack of allowance for different personalities. It seems many of the posters are being quite judgemental on both sides. Many of you are using your own feelings and viewpoints to create a "truth" for others to adhere to. We are all different, have different needs and wants. In the spirit of this forum, when we become so critical of others, we shut down effective communication.

Satrana has a lot of great points here and to dismiss them as stubborness or arrogance or her being argumentative is doing no one any good. I also respect Reine's point of view and she makes a compelling argument for coming clean with our partners. This may also be an ideal to aspire to, but it is not always within the reality of our lives, CD or no CD. And yes, many people in this world have to "settle" for a less than ideal relationship! This is true around the world! Like it or not! And please voice your concerns for all GG's but do not speak for all GG's. They are all different too. Thank goodness!

And the only "truth" about this subject that I know is this... This is a very complicated topic with no "easy" solutions. Thus, there is very little room for dogmatism.

As a CD with a boyfriend and married to the best GG in the world I know this from first hand experience. It takes a lot of work and communication to even broach the subject, much less discuss it in depth with your SO. This is not for everyone and I do not necessarily recommend it, specially if you do not already have a lot of common ground you have sown and harvested together. I am lucky to have a brilliant and open-minded GG who knows everything about me and helps guide me. I thank my lucky stars everyday she is in my life. I also thank her so for allowing me to explore another side of my life I did not even know existed.

I chose to post about my experiences elsewhere specifically to avoid the very exchanges displayed in this thread. But I would have loved to share them with all the great people I have come to love and respect on this site. So please, realize the harm you do when you get so carried away with your judgements of others.

By the way, Tri-ess has a history of canning and censoring members who disagree with them on this very topic. In spite of the good work they have done advancing the cause of the transgendered and promoting self-acceptance, they remain heavily politicized over-representing the CD population as strictly heterosexual at the expense of the bi-curious, bisexual, and gay CD population. Simply put, they lie about a lot of things.

[Satrana]

while all the time digging at them and trying to be-little their view points and those of others they are trying to put across

So no-one else can have a different point of view or else you consider that to be belittling? My way or the highway indeed.

whether you choose to believe what Reine and other GG's are saying about how things affect their/our relationships

If you had bothered to read my posts I have repeatedly acknowledged the hurt this can cause. I have never once questioned it does not occur. You have mis-characterized my posts. In fact you will see that I mostly agree with the points Reine and others have made.

I agree that this fantasy will cause distance between couples, will lead to pain, fear and misgivings and that CDs are being dishonest in not revealing to what degree their sexuality revolves around their crossdressing fantasies. What part of your "truth" am I not agreeing with?

You have now responded twice to me with dismissive put-downs and have not discussed even a single issue raised.
Why is it you insist that we must recognize your point of view as valid while mine apparently is not?

How is understanding going to develop if you refuse to acknowledge a different point of view and engage? If you think my thoughts misguided then feel free to explain why they are. I welcome positive engagement and the exchange of ideas. That is an important function of this forum. Tell me why I am wrong without the personal insults.

Lets leave the score-pointing to the politicians.

Enuf said.

By the way, Tri-ess has a history of canning and censoring members who disagree with them on this very topic. In spite of the good work they have done advancing the cause of the transgendered and promoting self-acceptance, they remain heavily politicized over-representing the CD population as strictly heterosexual at the expense of the bi-curious, bisexual, and gay CD population. Simply put, they lie about a lot of things.

This is what I have repeatedly heard as well. It differs from chapter to chapter but some refuse to allow gay membership while others are more relaxed. It it not just the bi-homosexual angle that bugs me though. It is the suppression of all aspects of sexuality which also expands the lie. Their official line apparently is that crossdressing is primarily about emotions and release from stress and thus sexuality is minimized as an irrelevant side issue. The truth is the sexual angle is the dominant behavior for large numbers of CDs.
I guess the objective of Tri-ess is to make CDing as compatible and non-threatening as possible to encourage SO acceptance. Along the way truth lost out.

[Sarah_GG]

I've really enjoyed reading this thread, specifically the Reine and Satrana posts.

Uncomfortable issues have been aired and discussed intelligently and I'd like to thank both parties for expressing what I - for one - feel and intrinsically understand, but can't quite put into words in an articulate and coherent way.

There is plenty of food for thought here.

Thank you.

[Sue101]

I usually just read here but I wanted to express a big thanks to ReineD and Satrana for great postings. made me really think hard about waht I am doing and if it is a good thing to do. Made me question these things for the first time.

I have no idea why people are picking on Satrana. what they say is untrue. She writes forceful but balanced posts. I am really looking forward to Reine's reply. Keep up the good work this stuff changes lives

Go ReineD!

[Fab Karen]

I thought I had.
As to Tri-Ess, I can only get my information from groups that are reputable. Perhaps I should join the meetup sites and find out how many of those CDs are or have been in relationships with GGs? If you can find some studies that show that the majority of CDs are homosexual, then please post the resources here.

Karen, I'm not the enemy and I'm sorry you're taking it this way. Perhaps you'd rather the GGs not come here and contribute their POV at all.

There have been no reputable studies done to show the majority of CD's are hetero, gay, bi, pansexual, or even left-handed. You can play it safe by saying "many are ____"

You assumed all the CD's responding to this thread are married to or in relationship with a GG, I pointed out to you it isn't accurate to do so, and tends to encourage stereotypes. That's why I say for example create a post addressing such people rather than assuming all CD's are in a ( monogamous )relationship with a GG.
If you read back, you can see I agree with you about such people who don't communicate/lie/hide etc. I never viewed you as "the enemy," and did not & do not imply that GG's shouldn't come here and contribute. I FEEL QUITE THE OPPOSITE, I'm glad that you & they do.

[mklinden2010]

**The truth is the sexual angle is the dominant behavior for large numbers of CDs.


I absolutely agree with this - although I might say, "a sexual angle of some sort..." and wish it was put forward more often as "the" reason for everything CD related.

Having a "femme side" as an explanation just makes me sick - and it causes my four sisters to laugh at such foolishness:

"Yeah. Hey, let me get my boots, cutoffs, and crappy t-shirt and express my "masc" (masculine) side for an hour. I need a break from the horror of being me. Snark-snark-snark...")

Sex as a reason or explanation for behavior is universal common ground and the key to acceptance. "Oh, I get THAT!"

Gender desires are a bit murkier, but, "You think and dream what you think and dream..." Barring actual mental defect, abuse, or confusion, live life any way you want to.

In childhood and early adulthood, CDing is auto-erotic behavior sexual behavior and, I think, it then gets layered with various "explanations" as one lives one's life. You can start up a behavior, like collecting model trains, and layer on "reasons" for continuing the activity - as it may wind up having more uses - like it becomes an investment vehicle, a way to socialize, a way to understand things other people live with... Whatever.

I doubt, when you get down to it, that anyone disagrees with sex as "the" or "a" reason for many things. Then you get down to "which" or "what" sex to discuss.



**I guess the objective of Tri-ess is to make CDing as compatible and non-threatening as possible to encourage SO acceptance. Along the way truth lost out.


Tri-ess may just be a niche that some people file into and which those already "invested" want to maintain. It may work for couples because through membership they "agree" on "the rules" of the behavior in their lives. That's better than nothing, but, as noted, it's not the truth really. Meanwhile, for those who wonder about "those people" Tri-ess may serve as just enough of a touchstone for the mildly interested/concerned that they take the explanations given and go on with their lives without acting against, "those people." That's all to the good, as far as it goes.

My position is that CDing, to keep this simple, as an activity is "training wheels" for what logically and practically follows from taking/playing/living the role of the opposite sex. CDing, as a practical matter, I think, just barely crosses the line from "plain heterosexual" being to "slightly homosexual" being. A CDer begins to "get" things about "what's going on over there" that a non-CD might never consider in their heads.

I was very lucky to encounter some of my issues with CDing when it was already possible for people to say, "I might be a little gay... You know... Good looking guy with lots of money and too much tequila going around at the party. Oh, well..." I was also lucky to encounter some of these issues when it was more commonly held that "sex is just sex and it doesn't cause solar eclipses or crop failures."

Historically the main "problem" with "the gay issue" seems to not have originally been a church angle at all, but the abuse of one person by another. In ancient times, men and women engaged in the same behaviors people do now, but the abuse of one person over another - rape - was noted as a real problem in wartime (males taken and forced into sexual actions against their will) and, on a smaller scale, the strong male bully against the weaker male. Not to mention that "the boys" spending so much time with one another was time spent away from the women and (their) families. Women, you may recall, used to be more in charge of things in the ancient world... There were always more goddesses than gods... Yet, historically the "winners" write the history books.

And, speaking of history and sex, groups that could sell personal safety and family safety were groups likely to compete better and grow more successfully. And, here we are, 2,000 years later trying to figure out how we can all safely and happily live together given all the new living arrangements now possible - and necessary. Who after all, can know who's child is going to grow up and be happiest with someone of their own sex? Can't we all just be loved and be safe?

I don't have a problem with 20,000 people viewing this thread. I have a problem, however, with 19,990 viewing these posts mainly for it's possible sexual content and nothing more. Sex is sex, but everyone you have sex with, or, think about having sex with, is a person.

So, don't abuse people or yourself by imagining that this is just a short trip over the line. You'll be back. There's nothing wrong with what you're doing, it's mostly just how you're doing it. Be who you are, but be well and be kind.

[KayC]

Good post #332 Satrana...you and Reine have done an excellent job of covering this subject. I don't feel this should be an us vs them thing either, we are all here because we care about each other and want to learn. Sometimes, however, it can strike a chord in us or not come across how we intend. Not everyone, as Sheila pointed out, is as articulate as Satrana and Reine, but we all have our own valid perspectives...it's sometimes frustrating if we can't figure out how to get it across the right way.

I appreciated how Satrana put it:
"We are attracted only to women (assuming not gay or bi) and we are not turned off by them being the wrong gender. You are confusing a gender based fantasy with sexual attraction. If you look at the comments it is all about being with "men" - not a particular man. The men are just mannequins, their purpose is to enhance our desire to feel feminine by placing us in a certain role."
...however, I'm not sure that's the case for all CDers that want a male.

My biggest point I wanted to get across is if someone is in a committed relationship, to pursue someone else, regardless of gender issues, is harmful to their SO and relationship. Period. Honesty is the better road but yes, sometimes comes with a price...but so does dishonesty. For myself, dishonesty is a deal breaker. I don't think a person has to share every thought that goes on in their head, but if it's pertinent to the relationship, yes, it should be brought into the open.

[Kaitlyn Michele]

Groups have differences...lots of crossdresser clubs exist...

i used to go to parties that were TG friendly...lots of crossdressers hang out and drink cosmo's and is lots of fun ...its pretty well attended and the host takes pictures and posts them (leaving out folks that don't want to be photographed)...that's all well in good...

but if you look at the pics, VERY FEW are of CD's in typical female clothing, even typical party/saturday nite female clothing...there are TONS of stiletto's, garters, garish makeup and a generally Sexed-up vibe

and when you look at more pics you often see pictures of girls sitting on each others laps or just pictures of fish nets on legs or legs in a red leather mini skirt and 5 inch heeled boots..

and this includes folks from TriEss and other "straight CD" groups

there is absolutely nothing wrong with this...but its impossible to say there is no sexual component and its difficult to say its not a primary motivation..

and btw...its a reasonable point to say that the sexual component is just a male way to release the anxiety of gender conflicts, but thats still a sexual thing, so at a minimum there is a sexual component to it...

if i was a married woman reading this thread i would be sending panicked emails to folks like Reine, Presh and Kay for support and understanding, because whether you like it or not, its going to make your SO feel more isolated and insecure about your dressing unless you have everything on the table.

[mklinden2010]

**My biggest point I wanted to get across is if someone is in a committed relationship, to pursue someone else, regardless of gender issues, is harmful to their SO and relationship. Period.


KayC,

I respect that your point is your point, but I do not think it's necessarily true that someone in a committed relationship pursuing someone else is harmful. In a particular relationship, the partner's knowledge and support of an activity - in the main here, a CD's perhaps convoluted pursuit of themselves - is important to their partner's and thus their own health and well-being.

I get it that when CDer's complain about their partner's lack of support or interest that they do have a valid need there somewhere. It's too bad, however, that few CDer's seem to understand, "She IS telling you what you need to know to reshape your game. Now, do that and improve your common relationship. Get on with it."

More commonly, their are "open" relationships where people are committed to one another, in marriage for example, but between themselves have worked out some particular variation(s) that suit them just fine. They're often called "open" relationships but it's more a term for "leave us be" than anything else. In reality, it may be a more intimate and functional model, for them, than any cookie-cutter, textbook, dictionary definition of what people's lives are "supposed" to be. So, I, for one, am content to, in fact, leave them be so long as I am free to go elsewhere if I chose to: "Your being honest gives me information to make choices too. Thank you."


**Honesty is the better road but yes, sometimes comes with a price...but so does dishonesty. For myself, dishonesty is a deal breaker. I don't think a person has to share every thought that goes on in their head, but if it's pertinent to the relationship, yes, it should be brought into the open.


Honesty with oneself and significant others is perhaps the most important of all things. I have been simply amazed at how my discussing my feelings and concerns with SOs has resulted in us being closer and happier. "Oh, is that all that's bothering you?" And, "So, where do I fit in all this. Can I do something to help?" It's not all been champagne and roses, but it has always been something that could be worked out and as it worked out we were both happier with it. I had, however, to do more than half the work to get the issue(s) on the table and to keep refining them until we got to, "Oh, well, that will be fine." Then, the only problem was I had to do what I'd been asking to do. These were no longer wishes; they were "Things to do" lists we'd agreed on. Very like singing in the shower and suddenly finding the wall slide open to a audience seated there waiting for the next verse...

To the OPs original post, the "man angle," I think - and as has already been noted - is always woven into the CD/TS/TG issues either before or after a certain age, no matter what one's maturity with the idea may be at any age or level of experience.

My SOs have always kept this in mind, even when I didn't. Some of their best advice has been:

"Well, yeah... But, be careful what you wish for. Most men are just jerks. Why do you think we - you and I - spend so much time together? You're one of the good ones."

That works.

[KayC]

I do not think it's necessarily true that someone in a committed relationship pursuing someone else is harmful.

Interesting take. I don't think "open relationships" are in the majority and I don't think they're as happy as they might at first think they'll be, but that's just my to each their own.

[JulieK1980]

Interesting take. I don't think "open relationships" are in the majority and I don't think they're as happy as they might at first think they'll be, but that's just my to each their own.

Then again some of us have been quite happy for years.....


I don't think sexuality and CD'ing are linked, I think its more that everything in life has a connotation to sexuality. It tends to define us as people, whereas gender identity only partially defines us. I still say (perhaps my own bisexuality makes this biased) that Crossdressers are merely a microcosm of the general population. Whatever the normal percentage of Gays, Bisexual, and heterosexual are probably similar to the percentage of them in the Crossdressing community. Perhaps we are more likely to experiment than others, but that doesn't necessarily mean more of us are homosexual.

[mklinden2010]

Interesting take. I don't think "open relationships" are in the majority and I don't think they're as happy as they might at first think they'll be, but that's just my to each their own.

I think most relationships, if they work well and everyone is happy, are "open" in the sense that they have flexibility - via communication - within them. If they are "open" in that sense, and everyone is and stays happy, then they are what they are. Meanwhile, from that point of view, or, the other, I agree that the majority of all relationships aren't as happy as they could be.

I see no real point - if my SO says she is interested or finds someone attractive - to throwing a fit about it. Pay attention? Yes. Go nuts? No. Better, I think, to say, "Oh, really? Well, how do you feel about that? And, what might you want to do about it?" Usually it's just wanting to talk - and maybe talk again. Life is full of temptations, let's just be honest about it. I'm not in favor of keeping her locked up, but I am in favor of us discussing things that will impact us individually, as a couple, as a family, as members of the larger community.

Honesty, openness, and trust are "givens" in a good relationship. To the OP, I think if someone is CD and has sexual feelings and relationship fantasies about (other) men, that the best thing they can do - my opinion - is to talk to THEIR SO about it.

As I've already said, "men angles" are a component of every CD/TS/TG situation - my opinion - eventually and I'm willing to just say so and not worry about it. It is what it is... People may want to argue that it is not, not every time, and I can only wonder how either of us can prove our position short of discussing the reasonableness and likelihood of one thing flowing from another.

SOs have reasonably asked, "So, where is this going...?"

I'll say it again, the CD/TS/TG world would be better off to grant that "There is some shade of g-a-y to all that" and be done with that as a debate point. "So, you think about sex with men/women/sheep/basketballs/ice cream... Who doesn't?"

Meanwhile, in relating to your SO... Bad enough you should dwell on such things and wonder, worse to do it alone - digging a useless hole for both of you. And, as I have said, my SOs have, once they got the drift of my thinking, been surprisingly willing to talk about it and to supply some sensible cautions to such ideas.

(And, God bless they ones who volunteered, "I can get a guy for you if you want me to..." "Uh, no, thanks - very kind of you. But, I think you're getting ahead of me on that... Besides, I think it's the sort of "catch and release" thing I really should do myself. it just wouldn't be the same as doing my own homework..." Besides all that, I'm fully aware that picking up men as a CD is probably the worst way to approach, "the gay thing." You want to have sex with a man, as the joke sort of goes, just show up naked... Really naked.

Part of this being helpful to me (getting back to the SOs) may go back to trust, and/or just knowing me. They know me to be intelligent, and trustworthy to the point they don't have to worry about where I am and what I am doing at any time, much less all the time. And because of that feeling of trust and the caring that goes along with it, I think they feel good about being able to offer some useful advice and counsel:

"Hey, I can't follow you around and tell you what to do all the time, but here's a few things you might want to keep in mind about all that..."

Two heads ARE better than one. That is a big reason why we "couple up" in life, right?

[ReineD]

and this includes folks from TriEss and other "straight CD" groups

...but its impossible to say there is no sexual component and its difficult to say its not a primary motivation..

I see your point. My SO belongs to a TG support group and afterwards, many of the members would go to a particular, recurring private party such as you've described. The parties are no longer being held due to the host (an admirer) having become ill. But I've seen the pics. I do think the sexual component is the primary motivation and even my SO expressed interest in going once (on her own), but she ended up not going. We were going to attend together once too, but she did discourage it and now I understand why. This is not a place that mixes well with GGs.

Up til now I took it the guests were fetish CDs. I see now that they are not. They are regular CDs acting out on their fantasies, not necessarily with men, but "shaking their bootie" as my SO put it.

You assumed all the CD's responding to this thread are married to or in relationship with a GG

Please read my posts:

Granted, even if most of the CDs who posted in this thread (who did not disclose their marital status) are now divorced and they are free to do as they please,

Satrana, I'll get back to you. I'm working on a response.

[Cait]

I'm very much in the try everything once (and if you like it keep doing it) camp myself. I intend to try it.

[ReineD]

Satrana, thanks for your response and I do see now that we are in agreement, but discussing two different angles.

... and these thoughts can displace the sexual attraction to the wife especially in longer term relationships.

This is the prime issue as I see it too. In most of my prior posts to this thread (although sometimes my thoughts do become scattered ), I was speaking from the point of view of a GG who accepts that her husband CDs yet she still feels him moving further and further away from her.

I will say another thing which people will object to. CDs are damaged goods. The shame, guilt and closeted lifestyle twists our sense of perspective so we are no longer aligned with reality and what others seek. We can mask this well enough so it is not obvious but it is there buried deep inside. We can unlearn these bad habits and focus on the right things but only if we learn to accept ourselves and be honest in recognizing how our CDing has changed us - the good things and the bad things.

You are speaking of having baggage. I sense this in threads and it is always a point on which I have a lot of compassion. But many GGs have their own baggage too, from their childhoods or from prior, perhaps abusive relationships. Speaking for myself (although I think that most GGs would agree with me), I'd be willing to move mountains if my SO were to let me in. So again, for those who are still reading this thread, I encourage doing what you can to incorporate your wife into your sexual fantasies, lest she should feel cast aside. Even if it means ... a lot of talking!

If there is no evidence that your partner wants to act on his fantasy then you must take personal responsibility for your own feelings.

But there doesn't need to be any evidence, any physical acting out with affairs. Just preferring to self-pleasure with the fantasies is enough to relegate the wife to second place. Also, if the wife senses on any level that her husband gets off more on his fantasies (using whatever fodder ... porn, the image of someone who is impossibly sexy, cybersex) than being with her, she will feel deeply hurt. It will make it even more difficult for her to believe that her husband's fantasies do not take away from his lust for her, especially if they have issues in the bedroom.

You are confusing a gender based fantasy with sexual attraction. If you look at the comments it is all about being with "men" - not a particular man. The men are just mannequins, their purpose is to enhance our desire to feel feminine by placing us in a certain role.

I see your point, but it's not the impression I got from this thread. How can someone want something so much yet refuse it if the opportunity should present itself? And there are posts by CDs who have tried it and they want more. Maybe everyone does have it in them to be bi, and CDs are more prone to experiment ... and then love it because it panders to their femme feelings. Why dress to attract men when out in public, even when it is done tastefully? Just the act of wanting something and seemingly dressing for it is enough to cast doubts in any GG. Especially, again, if they have issues in the bedroom.

I know the "female spirit trapped within a male body" is another example where the whole truth is being smudged for the purposes of societal acceptance. Secondary transsexualism is about the evolution of gender identity through crossdressing.

I do wonder if it is not more prevalent that people like to think it is. I can see it in this forum, in the many threads where the CDs say they would like to be women and do everything biologically that women do, yet they say they are not TS, nor do they wish to rid themselves of their male anatomy. It is difficult for a GG to rid herself of doubts about her SO when so many CDs seem to be in denial about themselves.

Their official line apparently is that crossdressing is primarily about emotions and release from stress and thus sexuality is minimized as an irrelevant side issue. The truth is the sexual angle is the dominant behavior for large numbers of CDs.
I guess the objective of Tri-ess is to make CDing as compatible and non-threatening as possible to encourage SO acceptance. Along the way truth lost out.

I see your, Michelia's and Misty's points about Tri-Ess and I do understand why they've adopted their stance. I wish they were more honest though, since eventually the wives who do accept the CDing will sense the deeper desires, it will affect their sex lives, and not having been told the truth up front can cause all kinds of issues.

I suppose I can understand a CD not wanting to tell his GG partner that he fantasizes about wanting to be a woman with a man. When you think of it, it should be obvious if you look at the way he dresses, in the same clothes that a GG would wear in order to attract men. Along the same vein, a non-CD husband wouldn't want to draw attention to the fact that he fantasizes about young hotties on a regular basis. I guess most men have the understanding that women would see this as a betrayal, since GGs tend to think about sex entirely differently. *Groan* and a GG married to a CD now has to contend with a double whammy! Her husband dreaming of young hotties AND sexy men!

But seriously, I need some time to absorb all your points. In all honesty, this thread is making me reexamine how I feel about having the CDing in my life.

[Karan49]

I've looked into this thread over twenty times and I think it goes beyond looky-loos or sexual titilation, rather there have been some wonderfully erudite explanations of what cross-dressing and even transgender behavior really means.

I'm impressed and I have examined my behavior. Reine, I also have come to consider what crossdressing in my life has come to mean. But I can't run or move away from it. I can but try to distance myself from it, but then I am refuting a part of me. I'm torn about what I can do. I transitioned over 22 years ago, divorced over 31 years ago and resolved to stay away from relationships as I did not want to inflict my behavior on another woman even though I told my wife to be before we married.

So many of the issues that Reine and Satranna brought up churn me up with long examined emotions and longings for a relationship, but I still don't have the answers of how to deal with myself in relating with another. It all seems so difficult and even impossible.

These discussions have been difficult but very neccessay. Thank you all for bringing them forth.

Karan

[NathalieX66]

Groups have differences...lots of crossdresser clubs exist...

and when you look at more pics you often see pictures of girls sitting on each others laps or just pictures of fish nets on legs or legs in a red leather mini skirt and 5 inch heeled boots..

and this includes folks from TriEss and other "straight CD" groups

Kaitlyn, pardon me for being naïve, but seeing that you are from NJ, I have yet to see what you've described from any support group in this area, Tri-Ess included from the half dozen months I've been at them.
Maybe your experience is different, or you saw things I haven't. maybe I'm boring, I'm not sure. You must've been at the Raven if you saw this kind of thing, no? The Tri-Ess crowd is mostly married guys looking for an outlet. So far most of the people I've met have been pretty low-key.