Don we now our GAY apparel

[Tina B.]

Lea, I made that leap. from Vest-ite to dressing, as I've said before, in my day the word Transvestite, was not in the dictionary, at least not the old one I had. So I looked up the word Trans -to cross over, as in trans Atlantic, then I looked up vestite, found nothing, so I looked up vest, and all of it's meanings, Vest -an article of clothing. I remembered from high school, ite showed something was doing something, so cross an article of clothing, Wow cross dress, that's what you call what I had been doing all my life. I'm a Transvestite, it has a name, it's not just me. I've always had a fond feeling for the word myself. It's funny, our sisters across the pond don't seem to have a problem with the word, not even the ones that are happily married, and don't seem to be gay (not that theres anything wrong with it). I considered myself to be a transvestite, way before I ever heard anyone actually use the term cross dresser. As far as sex goes, I've found it's about the same drive no matter how I'm dressed, more about how long since sex.
Tina B.

[LeaP]

Tina, you missed my point. It's not about etymology, but current usage and connotation.

Many here like the term. Some based on it's supposedly pure meaning, though even the originator thought it problematic. Some (my interpretation) almost as a badge of insider honor, ala the n-word among some African Americans. Still others would reclaim the term, though they recognize the current usage issues. A few embrace the overloaded aspects of the term, including it's sexual connotations.

Well, have at it. I crossdress. In a very limited identity sense I may be characterized as a crossdresser. I definitely don't "transvest" (English non-sequitur)! and I'm assuredly none of the other things people ascribe to transvestites. It's become a perfectly repugnant concept to most people (in the US anyway).

Changes in language are normal. Psychiatric usage and concepts evolve constantly with changes in culture and scientific understanding. It seems reasonable to do the same.

Lea

[Frédérique]

[SIZE="2"]I’m sure everyone is familiar with Eddie Izzard, or at least aware of him? Well, I dug out my DVD of his 1998 concert in San Francisco, Dress To Kill to replay what he says. At the beginning of the show, he states the following:

“If you’re a transvestite, you’re actually a male tomboy – that’s where the sexuality is. This is not drag queen – no, gay men have got that covered. This is male tomboy. And people do get them mixed up – they put transvestite there [in with drag queen]. No, no, no – a little bit of a crowbar separation, thank you, and gay men I think would agree. It’s male lesbian – that’s where it is. It’s true, because most transvestites fancy girls, or fancy women, so that’s where it [the sexuality] is.”

Keep in mind that Mr. Izzard was in San Francisco, a rather cosmopolitan city in the U.S., and he had to explain what a transvestite is, probably to put certain people at ease so they could enjoy his show. This is America, and people have a problem with the word ”transvestite.” Of course, the fact that Eddie is English works against him, and most Americans will never hear what he has to say. It’s sad, but that’s how it is – I have a sister who cannot “hear” anything a person from the UK says, no matter how clearly they speak, because they are foreign, or non-American, and thus suspect (in her mind). Izzard also says (famously), “I come from Europe, where the history is!” cultured people will laugh (because it’s true), but most Americans will never hear him speak, or care what he has to say, or dismiss him without a second thought…

Just imagine – here’s a gentleman who IS a transvestite, TELLING you what a transvestite is, at least what type of transvestite HE is, and an obstinate crossdresser in America won’t listen, because he does not choose to listen. So, the idea of ALL transvestites being homosexual, and dressing to somehow accentuate effeminacy in a gay context, is perpetuated and not challenged. I don’t know about you, but when I hear a real tranny speak about the whys and wherefores of his personal expression, something akin to what I do, I sit up and take notice. Hmmm…Eddie Izzard says he fancies girls, and then I see him WITH numerous females between gigs. How can that be, when ALL transvestites are gay? When I first began to crossdress I went through a brief period of confusion, wondering if I was a closeted gay male. That lasted only five minutes. Luckily I wasn’t aware of the homophobic stigmas that cling to the word “transvestite” for no good reason…

You know, I often tell about the time I was on another crossdressing site, much like this one, in the UK. The word “crossdressing” was not in the title of the place, and most of the MtF Cd’ers referred to each other as “tranny.” I like the term very much – it’s cuddly! Since I prefer to see myself as a transvestite, and I like English everything, I liked the place. Being among other crossdressers who quite naturally embraced the word transvestite was enlightening, and every form of sexuality was on display - I’ve been there, I’ve seen it, and I’ve discussed it ad nauseum. Guess what? You CAN be a transvestite and be heterosexual – you can also be a male homosexual, asexual, bisexual, transsexual or pansexual and wear women’s clothing for pleasure. The terms transvestite and crossdresser can be interchangeable if need be, but don’t tell me there is only ONE definition for anything, OK?[/SIZE]

I don't want to put words into Sissy Stephanie's mouth, but I think when people say that "transvestites dress for sexual purposes" I think they are referring to transvestic fetishism. This would not presume that you are gay, only that you find dressing to be erotic and may require it for sexual function. This might entail self-eroticism, or be with a partner either gay or heterosexual.

[SIZE="2"]About two years ago there was a discussion about the word transvestite, and Stephanie posted very similar thoughts, quite clearly stating the homosexual “angle” I referred to. I mean, you’re allowed to state your opinion on this site, but the whole thing read like, “I wish to disassociate myself from any connection with homosexuality, so I prefer the term crossdresser.” Fine, but I feel that polarized, homophobic mindset is out of place on a site like this, and out of touch with reality as well. I got very upset at the time, and the same tired old opinion, or definition, gets trotted out each and every time the word transvestite is discussed. It’s both frustrating and exasperating. The fact that there are highly visible heterosexual transvestites (see above) out there trying to educate others in regards to this extremely misunderstood human "activity" (for lack of a better word) is heartening, but some people just don’t care. Oddly enough, I’ve heard the exact same definition of “crossdresser” that the above-mentioned individual uses for “transvestite,” so both words can have numerous interpretations. BTW, “sexual purposes” and sexual stimulation (or sexual function) are two different reasons to crossdress. I do neither, yet I am very much a transvestite, so go figure…[/SIZE]

Back to Transvestite:Magnus Hirschfeld believed that transvestites differed in their focus of pleasure, that it was on themselves, especially on themselves in their clothes. It appears that there may be many sub-categories of Transvestism, one of which most likely being "Cross-Dresser".

[SIZE="2"]I’m VERY glad to see that SOMEONE else has read the Magnus Hirschfeld book… [/SIZE]

[Miss Maxine]

[SIZE="2"]I’m sure everyone is familiar with Eddie Izzard, or at least aware of him? Well, I dug out my DVD of his 1998 concert in San Francisco, Dress To Kill to replay what he says. At the beginning of the show, he states the following:

“If you’re a transvestite, you’re actually a male tomboy – that’s where the sexuality is. This is not drag queen – no, gay men have got that covered. This is male tomboy. And people do get them mixed up – they put transvestite there [in with drag queen]. No, no, no – a little bit of a crowbar separation, thank you, and gay men I think would agree. It’s male lesbian – that’s where it is. It’s true, because most transvestites fancy girls, or fancy women, so that’s where it [the sexuality] is.”

Keep in mind that Mr. Izzard was in San Francisco, a rather cosmopolitan city in the U.S., and he had to explain what a transvestite is, probably to put certain people at ease so they could enjoy his show. This is America, and people have a problem with the word ”transvestite.” Of course, the fact that Eddie is English works against him, and most Americans will never hear what he has to say. It’s sad, but that’s how it is – I have a sister who cannot “hear” anything a person from the UK says, no matter how clearly they speak, because they are foreign, or non-American, and thus suspect (in her mind). Izzard also says (famously), “I come from Europe, where the history is!” cultured people will laugh (because it’s true), but most Americans will never hear him speak, or care what he has to say, or dismiss him without a second thought…

Just imagine – here’s a gentleman who IS a transvestite, TELLING you what a transvestite is, at least what type of transvestite HE is, and an obstinate crossdresser in America won’t listen, because he does not choose to listen. So, the idea of ALL transvestites being homosexual, and dressing to somehow accentuate effeminacy in a gay context, is perpetuated and not challenged. I don’t know about you, but when I hear a real tranny speak about the whys and wherefores of his personal expression, something akin to what I do, I sit up and take notice. Hmmm…Eddie Izzard says he fancies girls, and then I see him WITH numerous females between gigs. How can that be, when ALL transvestites are gay? When I first began to crossdress I went through a brief period of confusion, wondering if I was a closeted gay male. That lasted only five minutes. Luckily I wasn’t aware of the homophobic stigmas that cling to the word “transvestite” for no good reason…

You know, I often tell about the time I was on another crossdressing site, much like this one, in the UK. The word “crossdressing” was not in the title of the place, and most of the MtF Cd’ers referred to each other as “tranny.” I like the term very much – it’s cuddly! Since I prefer to see myself as a transvestite, and I like English everything, I liked the place. Being among other crossdressers who quite naturally embraced the word transvestite was enlightening, and every form of sexuality was on display - I’ve been there, I’ve seen it, and I’ve discussed it ad nauseum. Guess what? You CAN be a transvestite and be heterosexual – you can also be a male homosexual, asexual, bisexual, transsexual or pansexual and wear women’s clothing for pleasure. The terms transvestite and crossdresser can be interchangeable if need be, but don’t tell me there is only ONE definition for anything, OK?[/SIZE]



[SIZE="2"]About two years ago there was a discussion about the word transvestite, and Stephanie posted very similar thoughts, quite clearly stating the homosexual “angle” I referred to. I mean, you’re allowed to state your opinion on this site, but the whole thing read like, “I wish to disassociate myself from any connection with homosexuality, so I prefer the term crossdresser.” Fine, but I feel that polarized, homophobic mindset is out of place on a site like this, and out of touch with reality as well. I got very upset at the time, and the same tired old opinion, or definition, gets trotted out each and every time the word transvestite is discussed. It’s both frustrating and exasperating. The fact that there are highly visible heterosexual transvestites (see above) out there trying to educate others in regards to this extremely misunderstood human "activity" (for lack of a better word) is heartening, but some people just don’t care. Oddly enough, I’ve heard the exact same definition of “crossdresser” that the above-mentioned individual uses for “transvestite,” so both words can have numerous interpretations. BTW, “sexual purposes” and sexual stimulation (or sexual function) are two different reasons to crossdress. I do neither, yet I am very much a transvestite, so go figure…[/SIZE]



[SIZE="2"]I’m VERY glad to see that SOMEONE else has read the Magnus Hirschfeld book… [/SIZE]

I've been waiting for someone to mention Eddie. Thank you very much. Give my regards to Mrs. Badcrumble and Mr. Dog.

[Rachael Ray]

Fah la la.. Fah la la.... La la la... There was a cartoon I saw once with a crossdresser getting dressed at Christmas time with that as the title..

It was in Playboy Magazine.........

[Kaitlyn26]

For some reason when I see this thread title I get a mental image of a fireman wearing a t-shirt with GAY printed on it, putting on his tights and girlie clothes over his real clothes and rushing to someone's rescue.

[Miss Maxine]

For some reason when I see this thread title I get a mental image of a fireman wearing a t-shirt with GAY printed on it, putting on his tights and girlie clothes over his real clothes and rushing to someone's rescue.

Those were the good ole days...

[LeaP]

"... when I hear a REAL [emphasis mine - Lea] tranny speak ... I sit up and take notice."

Good grief - what MUST you think of us? Perhaps one must also be a comedian and who knows what else, in addition to being out, to qualify as real.

I'll note in passing, between pinches reassuring myself of my reality, that Izzard is a Brit, and the word does not carry the same connotations there.

Oh, and I fail to see how an appeal to a strawman authority advances substantive discourse.

Lea (really, truly)

[Frédérique]

Good grief - what MUST you think of us? Perhaps one must also be a comedian and who knows what else, in addition to being out, to qualify as real. I'll note in passing, between pinches reassuring myself of my reality, that Izzard is a Brit, and the word does not carry the same connotations there. Oh, and I fail to see how an appeal to a strawman authority advances substantive discourse.

[SIZE="2"]Yes, yes, YES. I was sure someone would choke on the word “real,” but I was NOT trolling. I meant a highly visible transvestite, who, under the cloak of comedy, is trying to educate his audience. Some will take note of what he says (such as other crossdressers, etc.), but many will never hear him. I think it’s extremely unfair to call the gentleman in question a “strawman,” however, since most trannies will never be in such a position, meaning having an opportunity to INFORM in a public setting…

What must I think of US, meaning you? Well, when some people go to great lengths to pick at everything I write, and completely ignore my well-reasoned OP’s (or responses), I tend to wonder why I bother writing these things, but then I realize that it takes courage to lay one’s thoughts in front of mixed company. I know a lot of gentle, caring, compassionate, inspiring and REAL people on this site who would never address me in the body of the forum so brusquely – do you think I’m purposely trying to agitate everyone? I find it amusing that my critics rarely post their own original thoughts, preferring to take aim at the ones who do – it’s also quite obvious that many people around here do not possess a sense of humor, or understand a “play on words” when they see one. The fact that YOU dismiss Mr. Izzard as a mere comedian is telling in this regard, and the act of doing so prevents substantive discourse. Thanks for killing the thread…
[/SIZE]

[Kaitlyn26]

[SIZE="2"]Yes, yes, YES. I was sure someone would choke on the word “real,” but I was NOT trolling. I meant a highly visible transvestite, who, under the cloak of comedy, is trying to educate his audience. Some will take note of what he says (such as other crossdressers, etc.), but many will never hear him. I think it’s extremely unfair to call the gentleman in question a “strawman,” however, since most trannies will never be in such a position, meaning having an opportunity to INFORM in a public setting…

What must I think of US, meaning you? Well, when some people go to great lengths to pick at everything I write, and completely ignore my well-reasoned OP’s (or responses), I tend to wonder why I bother writing these things, but then I realize that it takes courage to lay one’s thoughts in front of mixed company. I know a lot of gentle, caring, compassionate, inspiring and REAL people on this site who would never address me in the body of the forum so brusquely – do you think I’m purposely trying to agitate everyone? I find it amusing that my critics rarely post their own original thoughts, preferring to take aim at the ones who do – it’s also quite obvious that many people around here do not possess a sense of humor, or understand a “play on words” when they see one. The fact that YOU dismiss Mr. Izzard as a mere comedian is telling in this regard, and the act of doing so prevents substantive discourse. Thanks for killing the thread…
[/SIZE]

To be honest I found the read slightly boring. I was in a very similar situation 4 years ago, we even had the discussion on *drum roll* his balcony. I told you we were similar. The biggest difference between mine and yours, would be that she fancied herself a temptress, and only started the relationship because she has the belief that she should try to hurt or "mess with" anyone she deems a bad person. It kind of went into the fan when she fell in love with me though, because I was not the person she thought I was. She realized that her "soul mate" was a guy with some massive problems. It's amazing how being alone with someone without any other friends can jade your perspective on what is right and what is wrong. She ended up leaving him and going off on her own and eventually back to school, to get her life together. Wouldn't you know it, tranny to the rescue!

Reading your posts for me is not pointless though. It serves as a good window into what/who I may have become, or could still become. As far as me learning much from a post about something that was so similar to my own experience, probably not learning much about what you actually covered. Old hat is old, for me.

[Toni Citara]

That's the driving force behind many people, myself included. Sure I watch what I eat and work out to stay healthy and live a longer life, but honestly - I want to look good for the ladies!! Or, gurls? LOL

Everything I do is for sexual purposes. Everything. In male mode and in female. It boggles the mind.

[Miss Maxine]

That's the driving force behind many people, myself included. Sure I watch what I eat and work out to stay healthy and live a longer life, but honestly - I want to look good for the ladies!! Or, gurls? LOL

LOL! High five! ^_^

[Andi.Devine]

Well, when some people go to great lengths to pick at everything I write, and completely ignore my well-reasoned OP’s (or responses), I tend to wonder why I bother writing these things..

Keep posting Frédérique! I love reading your words, they are usually quite interesting and very thought provoking. Especially this topic, it is hard to belive how differently everyone interprets the meaning of transvestite and how crossdressing relates to it..

So worldly coming from a Kansas girl!

-KD

[Stacy L]

.




Ok, now I’m confused, am I a Crossvestite or a transdresser?

Like reading your post Frédérique keep it up.




.

[Miss Maxine]

.




Ok, now I’m confused, am I a Crossvestite or a transdresser?

Like reading your post Frédérique keep it up.




.

A religous person once called me a transgressor. Hmm...

[Stacy L]

A religous person once called me a transgressor. Hmm...

I think I may be one of those too!





.

[valerie_vanesse]

Freddi, With all due respect, All of your posts are deep and reflective. I find them a chore to read and frankly am not in the turmoil you must find yourself in. I am 60 years young and have been a crossdresser, TV, Queen, etc ad nauseum for 45 of those years. I have saved myself a bit of angst and guilt by not over analyzing. I enjoy being Valerie and DO NOT CARE about the peripherals or correct definitions of my "dysfunction" (another label)!
Please enjoy yourself if you can, otherwise you may be in for a ton of inner problems. Life is short, hard to survive, and must be happy, not morose.

[Kaitlyn26]

Freddi, With all due respect, All of your posts are deep and reflective. I find them a chore to read and frankly am not in the turmoil you must find yourself in. I am 60 years young and have been a crossdresser, TV, Queen, etc ad nauseum for 45 of those years. I have saved myself a bit of angst and guilt by not over analyzing. I enjoy being Valerie and DO NOT CARE about the peripherals or correct definitions of my "dysfunction" (another label)!
Please enjoy yourself if you can, otherwise you may be in for a ton of inner problems. Life is short, hard to survive, and must be happy, not morose.

I can agree with that too. Maybe that's what I meant to say. Idk.

[LeaP]

[SIZE="2"]Yes, yes, YES. I was sure someone would choke on the word “real,” but I was NOT trolling. I meant a highly visible transvestite, who, under the cloak of comedy, is trying to educate his audience. Some will take note of what he says (such as other crossdressers, etc.), but many will never hear him. I think it’s extremely unfair to call the gentleman in question a “strawman,” however, since most trannies will never be in such a position, meaning having an opportunity to INFORM in a public setting…

What must I think of US, meaning you? Well, when some people go to great lengths to pick at everything I write, and completely ignore my well-reasoned OP’s (or responses), I tend to wonder why I bother writing these things, but then I realize that it takes courage to lay one’s thoughts in front of mixed company. I know a lot of gentle, caring, compassionate, inspiring and REAL people on this site who would never address me in the body of the forum so brusquely – do you think I’m purposely trying to agitate everyone? I find it amusing that my critics rarely post their own original thoughts, preferring to take aim at the ones who do – it’s also quite obvious that many people around here do not possess a sense of humor, or understand a “play on words” when they see one. The fact that YOU dismiss Mr. Izzard as a mere comedian is telling in this regard, and the act of doing so prevents substantive discourse. Thanks for killing the thread…
[/SIZE]

The argument is a strawman, not the gentleman. Logic 101 - see appeals to authority.

"US" vs "you" - Us as in the not on the world stage. If you like, the closeted. Doesn't really matter.

Do I think you're trying to agitate? I can't really say, as I don't know you and the nature of forums like this, of course, introduce all the usual distortions of intent. I can say this - your post has provoked a lot of responses as to your mindset and motives. You might consider that style matters. If the play on words was the "real" bit, I still miss the play, to be frank. And, of course, you might want to extend me the same interpretational courtesy and leeway that you essentially plead for yourself.

Izzard has described himself as a standup comic. He is described that way by the press. I never described him as a "mere" anything. And finally, what I was actually soliciting (yes) was what you really meant by "real." (You answered, clearly, in your reply.) You've missed the point by focusing only on the reference to Izzard, who, by the way, I neither dismissed nor dismiss. Re-read the line.

On the troll: When one posts, subsequent to an arguably inflammatory statement, that one knew it would provoke a reaction ("sure someone would choke"), that, my friend fully, completely, and totally qualifies as a troll, disclaimer notwithstanding. Exulting ("yes, yes, YES") doesn't help your case.

On being genuine: I agree. I've also made an attempt to be so, generally and in this thread - certainly in my earlier responses and in this one. I appreciate your intent. Your writing style, not so much.

On killing the thread: Seems not.

Back to your question in the OP. I'll go back along the lines of my original response, as well as a similar one in another thread. I see no reason to try to breathe life into a wheezing, dying corpse of a word*.

Lea

*in America

[JulieK1980]

I have saved myself a bit of angst and guilt by not over analyzing.

I question why analyzing or "over" analyzing leads to angst and guilt. For myself it is quite contrary, my search to understand myself has brought nothing but joy, and a deep satisfaction with who I am as a person. If anything, understanding, (or at least attempting to understand,) has removed any guilt.


Me, I dress for pleasure. Not necessarily sexual pleasure, but pleasure none the less. Human beings are pleasure seeking individuals at our core, it drives us in everything we do. Sexual pleasure is a big portion of that drive but, it would be a mistake to quantify that as a sole driving force in anything for most people.

[Sophie86]

It was an interesting story, Frédérique, but did you have to end it on such a combative note? It's a mood ill-suited to the holiday season when all should be merry and gay.

[LeaP]

A religous person once called me a transgressor. Hmm...

That's really quite funny. I may use this one!

Lea

[SarahLynn]

It was an interesting story, Frédérique, but did you have to end it on such a combative note? It's a mood ill-suited to the holiday season when all should be merry and gay.

Dear Sophie, I refuse to be Mary or Gay, I am SarahLynn and shall remain so until I chose to change, so please do not call me Mary or Gay.

Tell me, my finely dressed MtF crossdresser friends – don’t you think there’s room for more than one definition of TRANSVESTITE, other than the archaic one everybody* seems to fall back on? Thanks for reading...

Most asuredly there is, however because of the homophobic nature of language and the perception of "personal and private" bedroom activities of those few transvestites who identify as drag queens and the open confessions of some of them, the perception of most Americans of the United States is that all transvestites are homosexuals. We (those of us who frequent this site) know and acknowledge many of the varied reasons for wearing clothes of the opposite sex. And we know there are perhaps more than we know and acknowledge. I believe for this reason this site is known as a Crossdressers Forum and not a Transvestite forum. I believe to call this a Transvestite Forum would carry all the negative connotations associated with that title. It's a pity really that crossdressing carries such a negitive stigma but we (most of us here) do our very best to disassociate ourselve from the drag-queen example of what a crossdresser is to the general public. We are to be commended for setting a good example before the general public.

Now, if only we could get Karren to wear girly jeans we'd have much better luck in the perception of the general public that we are mainstream.

[Barbara Dugan]

I still love being a Gay Transvestite sometimes I do some crossdressing just for fun

[Frédérique]

Freddi, With all due respect, All of your posts are deep and reflective. I find them a chore to read and frankly am not in the turmoil you must find yourself in. I have saved myself a bit of angst and guilt by not over analyzing.

[SIZE="2"]I assure you I am NOT in any kind of “turmoil.” I just write these things to relax, and explore the many ways that crossdressing is perceived by society. I don’t feel I’m over-analyzing anything; in fact my aim is to generate discussion or “sideways” thinking. I do not possess an ounce of angst or guilt, but I get very worked up when one of my peers generalizes about CD/TV terms…
[/SIZE]

It was an interesting story, Frédérique, but did you have to end it on such a combative note? It's a mood ill-suited to the holiday season when all should be merry and gay.

[SIZE="2"]What holiday season are you referring to? I only “sound” combative when the same person pokes me with a pointed stick (post) for the umpteenth time, and, if I feel like it, I will respond with candor. I would prefer to respond only to positive replies in a purely feminine manner, but these things happen. As far as the OP is concerned, what can I say? I don't like closed minds. Some people around here don't like to have their MtF crossdressing associated with homosexuality - I call that closed with a capital "C."[/SIZE]

…the perception of most Americans of the United States is that all transvestites are homosexuals. We (those of us who frequent this site) know and acknowledge many of the varied reasons for wearing clothes of the opposite sex. And we know there are perhaps more than we know and acknowledge. I believe for this reason this site is known as a Crossdressers Forum and not a Transvestite forum. I believe to call this a Transvestite Forum would carry all the negative connotations associated with that title. It's a pity really that crossdressing carries such a negitive stigma but we (most of us here) do our very best to disassociate ourselve from the drag-queen example of what a crossdresser is to the general public. We are to be commended for setting a good example before the general public.

[SIZE="2"]I was thinking that if this place was called “Transvestites Dot Com,” most Americans would avoid it like the plague! I get upset when negative stereotypes are trotted out HERE, where they do not belong, and, even after the word (or term) “transvestite” has been discussed from all possible angles, until we’re all blue in the breasts, the same people will feel the same way about it! In this scenario, I wonder what the purpose of discussion is – is it so hard to say “Oh, I see your point,” and modify one’s intractable stance for the benefit of all concerned? I actually see this happen now and then, and I will (of course) submit to superior knowledge from my peers, in fact this is why I came here – to learn by discussion…

What if a newbie comes along, shyly and nervously, not really knowing what to make of this desire to wear women’s clothing? This is the best place I know to get answers, but what if a new member encounters this bias against the word transvestite, or confusion about the term “crossdresser,” and the persistent homosexual connotations scare the person away? I mean, there’s nothing to be scared about, but I would like to see a more flexible approach to definitions, rather than a “this-or-that, no further discussion” kind of mindset. The homosexual male of 50-70 years ago and the homosexual male of today couldn’t be less dissimilar, so I think an overhaul is due for the term “transvestite.” Effeminacy is not exclusive to homosexuality, and anyone that thinks it is lives in the past… [/SIZE]