Born to CD?

[Kate Simmons]

I was talking to one of my friends from the Forum on the phone last evening. We talked about various things but one thing we talked about and pretty much agreed on was that we are indeed born TG and many of us have it in our genes to express that by crossdressing. I kind of liken it to the "X" factor premise behind the X-Men saga in movies and comics. These folks were born with specialized genes that gave them extra normal abilities. As such they were feared by "normal" Homo Sapiens and in the stories even hunted down with the intent of potentially wiping them out to "save" humanity.

We touched on the idea that we may be part of the next step in human evolution as we are not locked in to traditional ways and by virtue of this are more creative and expressive with our feelings and thinking. While the rest of the world attempts to control and categorize everything and everyone, we do just the opposite and give one another credit for who we are and are appreciated as individuals.

Basically what it comes down to, evolution notwithstanding, is whether or not we are going to go along with the crowd or be our own person. My own decision on that is a "no-brainer" as I have to be myself. What do you all think about this and where do you think we are headed both individually and as a TG community?

[Julie Gaum]

Most of us agree to that certain trgger to which a select few react and became, sooner or later, CDs. There is no proof so far that the sensitivity
to that trigger does or does not come from a type of unidentifed gene. Bottom line: your explanation may have merit.
Julie

[suzy1]

One of the main driving forces in evolution is survival of the species. I.E Procreation.

So are we the next step in evolution?

SUZY

[Marcie R.]

I sincerely think I was born to be a crossdresser. It came to me very early in life and has been with me right into my senior years. Many times I have tried to purge all my wonderful female items and traits, but the pink cloud returns with more thunder than I ever had before.

[RADER]

Someone once said that all the changes in the world was from a chemical imbalance in our
atmosphere. So because of some unseen, unsmell thing in the air caused us to want to dress,
maybe so, but can it be proven.
Will the world, Society ever allow us the dress the way we feel most comfortable in, I hope
so, at least I hope we live long enough to see it.
Were we born to cross dress, I would hope that the question would be, will we be allowed
to cross dress as we always wanted to...... Just my 2 cents worth.
Rader

[Alayna]

I don't think it's evolution but revolution, as in we're not discovering anything new but recovering what we lost millennia ago (for me, this applies to everything socio/spiritual in human society). Western society has hammered home the idea for centuries that there is male and female, and anyone stepping outside the assigned gender roles for each sex is somehow "lesser". However, there are ""primitive"" (double quotes for how ridiculous that word is in this context) societies all over the world that believe there are many genders, and they have been a strong part of their cultures in the past and present.

For me, being TG was definitely not a choice but I do view it as a cherished gift. I believe that our outside perspective on society (which has been forced on us BY society) necessarily causes us to question our nature more, and makes us stronger and more in tune with reality. I also think that the next generation (at least within alternative cultures) has embraced gender expression like never before, and combined with the popularity of RuPaul's Drag Race it has never been more fashionable to be a boy who dresses like a girl. Vive la revolution!

[Dawn cd]

Suzy equates the survival of the species with procreation, but I'm not so sure about that. Animal studies show that in drought years some animals have fewer young or forego breeding completely. For the human species, global overpopulation may be subtly leading some males to be less macho, thereby creating a more welcoming climate for androgynous behavior. So in this era survival of the species may call for less (not more) procreation.

As regards to CDs, it's hard to weigh the nature/nurture influences. Even if we claim there's a genetic element, we have to acknowledge that the psyche develops and the human genome mutates like any other. Whether we were "born to cd" or whether we grew into it is very hard to figure out.

[suzy1]

Suzy equates the survival of the species with procreation, but I'm not so sure about that. Animal studies show that in drought years some animals have fewer young or forego breeding completely. For the human species, global overpopulation may be subtly leading some males to be less macho, thereby creating a more welcoming climate for androgynous behavior. So in this era survival of the species may call for less (not more) procreation.

As regards to CDs, it's hard to weigh the nature/nurture influences. Even if we claim there's a genetic element, we have to acknowledge that the psyche develops and the human genome mutates like any other. Whether we were "born to cd" or whether we grew into it is very hard to figure out.

You make a good point Dawn.
I never thought I would say that about you!

A reluctant but genuine hug from, SUZY

[Kate Simmons]

What Dawn said was kind of the evolution I was inferring. Rather than Homo Sapiens we could be called something like "Homo Nicerians" (meaning nicer people)

[Joanne f]

Yes I think that you are right about TGs being a next step in evolution , even with none TGs the role of the two different genders are becoming more blurred, they take on the every day challenges of what was traditional male and female roles in society and we take on the gender blurring side of it and one day both will merge together with the possibility that there could become two separate species , a two gendered one and a single or dual gendered one with the dual gender one being the most advanced as it will have the attributes of both original genders.

[KellyJameson]

Suzy's mention of procreation is a good point and one that I have also wrestled with because a great deal of human behavior seems to be contrary to procreation.

I think one possibility may be that procreations powers lessen as humanity reaches a point of dominance where survival enmass is insured so the species is not threaten with extinction.

This foundation than allows for individual forms of evolutionary expression such as homosexuality whose behavior seems counterintuitive to procreation. There are strong elements of the artistic, creative, imaginative and highly sensitive in the LGBT world including those who are completely heterosexual but resonate so strongly with their opposite biological sex they can slip into (no pun intended) and express their own sense of the feminine as men or masculine as women.

The powers of our imagination break the bonds of the constraits physical reality tries to impose on us. In a sense each of us are like rockets trying to escape the gravitational pull of the earth so we can become explorers of the great unknown but this great unknown is between our ears as much as outside of us.

This is the motive force behind all creative acts whether as problems related to survival or problems related to reasons for surviving after survival has been insured.

We must be more than just animals while accepting, experiencing and incorporating the animal inside, a dance between imagination and the animal. This is our evolutionary imperative and burden but a burden with many gifts held inside for those willing to make an effort in there development.

[Kate Simmons]

Our journey forward sometimes can be fraught with potential pitfalls unless we have the ability to harness and guide the energies we tap into when we do this. We need to know ourselves and take ownership of our personal grid program and that is where the true skill comes into play. It doesn't happen automatically, however. It takes a lot of trial and error to gain the necessary experience.

[docrobbysherry]

Let me tell u about, "procreation". When in high school biology in the 60's, there was a study published. They put 2 rats in a cage with unlimited water and food. In less than a year, the cage was so packed with rats, there was almost no room for them to move around. Can u guess what happened? Yes! They stopped procreating! Soon, they started dying off. They still didn't begin to procreate. Soon, there were only a few rats left. So then, they began multiplying again, rite? No, they all died!

If ANYONE HERE thinks we need to increase the human population on earth, please say so! I'm NOT saying that CDs r a result of over population. But still, the similarity of our human population to the rat study is -----------------interesting?

None of which affected MY procreation or dressing! As, I had no intention of getting married OR having kids. Until I met the "perfect woman" for me! OK, so that didn't work out so well! But, I have 2 wonderful kids as a result. And, dressing? It never occurred to me to even try on women's things until after I was finished both procreating and being married at age 50!

[Kate Simmons]

Which basically means that you realized that the "preliminaries" were over RS and like many of the rest of us you decided to get down to the real business at hand.

[Barbara Ella]

Was i born to CD, I have no idea, but there was something within me that took many years to surface, and it will not be pushed back.

Crossdressers were here in the past, crossdressers are here now, crossdressers will be here in the future. Has there been an evolutionary development, or is one underway now? Admittedly there are pressures in our society that support the development of males not designed to procreate, but why is it that such a large number are heterosexuals with families,

So, theories are nice, but just crossdressing and not worrying about the future beyond how we can alter perceptions is so much nicer. I love this place, and the myriad ways it makes me think about dressing.....

Barbara

[ArleneRaquel]

I have dream from a very age of loving my adult life as a woman, but I believe these traits are in born.

[gender_blender]

My mother wanted a girl before I arrived.

[busker]

Suzy equates the survival of the species with procreation, but I'm not so sure about that. Animal studies show that in drought years some animals have fewer young or forego breeding completely. For the human species, global overpopulation may be subtly leading some males to be less macho, thereby creating a more welcoming climate for androgynous behavior. So in this era survival of the species may call for less (not more) procreation.

As regards to CDs, it's hard to weigh the nature/nurture influences. Even if we claim there's a genetic element, we have to acknowledge that the psyche develops and the human genome mutates like any other. Whether we were "born to cd" or whether we grew into it is very hard to figure out.

During drought there would be little if any food and NOT having babies is nature's way of NOT wasting efforts. Parents would have difficulty feeding themselves, and would not be able to feed babies. It takes a great amount of energy to forage for food, get it to the young, feed them, hunt for more
and this goes on for many weeks for some animals. I believe it is pelicans that have 3 nestlings and one by one they are culled out until the strongest survives. The parent actually pushes the weakest from the nest. survival is the most important thing, nature has no "heart."

[busker]

Kate, I have to say that I'm the biggest skeptic on born to CD. It is true that we are all female embryos until about 4 months so there is some possibility that hormones play a certain part in this urge we have, but I would put my dime on psychology and perhaps genetics, but even all the folks with Kleinfelter's are not CD's but many or most seem to have gynecomastia which would be closer to being a woman than not via genetics. Things in science are best explained by parsimony, and if we start dredging up all sorts of mysticism, algebra, astrophysics, etc, we'll never discover what it is that really makes us do this, and , I guess for my dime, there will be no discovery, because to the people who have the greatest interest, there is almost no motivation as we've read on this forum a thousand times. No labels, I am what I am, and so it goes. I prefer "I don't know" to almost any other answer. If evolution had much part in this, there would be after 5 million years (or is it 4000) some telltale signs of a "non-procreating" individual species. Evolution is to a large degree survival through improvement.