Is this Hypocrisy??

[Pythos]

Comparing your wearing of 100% socially acceptable and appropriate clothing to our wearing of 100% unacceptable and inappropriate clothing is not fair or valid.

The wearing of pants by women outside the garden was pretty much the same. It was also 100% unacceptable for a woman to show any part of the ankle.

Frankly the wearing of female garments by a male is not 100% unacceptable, it is maybe 30%, but that 30% is very vocal, and full of bigotry.

Don't support that 30%

[Taylor186]

The discussion should always focus on what really matters - namely what feelings are generated, why do they exist, are they justifiable and morally right, are they flexible, what compromises need to be made to make things work.

Yes, I fully agree that the discussion should "focus on what really matters."

So I say the "women can so why can't men" is a "tired old cliche" because invoking it may actually do exactly the opposite of what the crossdresser wants. It basically reminds the partner/wife that the full weight of society and social norms are on their side. It totally sidetracks the discussion from "what really matters" and how "to make things work," to one about how "society is unfair." The unfairness of society with regards to crossdressing is just not something most partner/wives want to expend much effort changing, and rightly so, given most CDs are closeted and not actively trying to change those social norms either.

I say she has to become an activist in that she has to be prepared to defend this currently "anti-social" behavior if and or when this "shared secret" becomes public even if it is only to neighbors, co-workers, family and/or friends. Every week on these boards someone posts a topic that says, more or less, "I've been outed, what now?" So, if she cannot defend this seemingly strange behavior when confronted publicly then her own self-esteem comes into question. The neighbors, co-workers, family or friends will certainly wonder, "what's wrong with her to stay with a kook like that?" It ideally will never become public, but she carries the burden of being prepared anyway.

"I agree not the most helpful way to put it, he should have talked about society's double standard not go personal. However I would guess this was said during an argument so it is forgiveable."

I cannot imagine any couples/family counselor (and I have talked with many) who would ever say that going "personal," even during the heat of an argument, is "forgivable." Going "personal" is never ever productive, in the heat of the argument or not, if you "want to make things work."

"What is more important is the recognition that it exists and should not be used."

Agreed

[ReineD]

No it is not Hypocrisy, and for the very reason that you mentioned. Comparing your wearing of 100% socially acceptable and appropriate clothing to our wearing of 100% unacceptable and inappropriate clothing is not fair or valid.
But honestly, that's really not the question at the heart of this, is it? The real question is, is it fair or right that he apparently is not allowed to wear what he wants in his own home? That question has nothing to do with society and is entirely between the two of you.

And that, in my opinion, is the crux of the matter. Heather, I think it would be good if your husband were to tell you that he feels the need to dress a certain way, and if he can, also tell you why or where it comes from, even if it is a need to feel feminine sometimes. It would be more honest than trying to disassociate himself from the need to CDress by spouting arguments over the unfairness of gendered clothing. And hopefully the two of you will be able to agree to a compromise especially since he is talking about dressing at home.

Also, Heather, you've no doubt by now discovered that we love a good discussion here at CD.com and that threads often veer away from the original concerns the thread starter may have had. I hope that you will appreciate that many of the points made in your thread were in the spirit of general discussion rather than specific advice and support for you, and just take it for what it is.

[TxKimberly]

The wearing of pants by women outside the garden was pretty much the same. It was also 100% unacceptable for a woman to show any part of the ankle.

Frankly the wearing of female garments by a male is not 100% unacceptable, it is maybe 30%, but that 30% is very vocal, and full of bigotry.

Don't support that 30%

Yepper, but the key word in your statement is "WAS". Long ago it WAS inappropriate for a woman to wear pants, but that is history and not valid today for most developed nations.

Women stood up for their freedoms and fought for them. I guarantee you that the first women to start wearing pants were laughed at, picked on, and abused, but they toughed it out and achieved their goal. If a significant number or majority of men are willing to do the same for the "right" to wear skirts, then society will again adapt and bow to the majority. The thing is though, that the majority of males are not going to clamor for the right to wear what the majority of females fought to get out of. LOL

[ReineD]

Kim, I agree with you and an added point is, there is such a thing as universal truth. Women were ready at the turn of the last century to be recognized as also having rights, and though the first women may have caused raised eyebrows among other women and perhaps some fear, deep down they weren't disapproved of. If they had been universally scorned, then the movement for women's liberation would not have taken on the epic proportions that it did. Pants became a symbol for a woman's ability to be her own person and to make her own choices in terms of no longer being a man's property, and it didn't take long for all women to want to shed their shackles. And as you say, the battle to cross gender lines, even though it is also a matter of equal rights, does not speak to nearly as many people as did the battle for women's rights.