Cultural impact on cross dressing?

[Sid]

Hi,

I hope you don't mind me posting in here (feel free to move this if it's in the wrong place), but my partner and I have been discussing how/why cross-dressing is seen as such a big deal in modern society and whether cultural ideas of gender play a part. I was interested in hearing your opinions on this.

First of all, if society considered it 'masculine' for genetic males to wear lace, silk, tights, jewellery, wigs, make up, etc, then would m to f cross dressing even exist? I'm thinking back to the days of King Louis XIV, as one example, where the women were all covered up and the men walking around showing off their legs in tights, pointy shoes and massive hair. I know there have been different fashions over the centuries where men have worn either practically the same fashion as women or even more elaborate clothes to show off status (like women do now). If society agreed that men could be 'pretty' (or whatever word they wanted to market it as) and take on more submissive/emotional/caring/artistic/whatever roles, then would there be any need to have an extra 'side' to yourself that embodied all of the traits that you currently aren't allowed to have as a man? Or would this just be part of 'you' as a whole?

Also, do you see any change (however gradual) back to a more balanced approach to gender roles now that more guys are incorporating various 'feminine' traits into either fashion or the way they act (where I grew up, men are now regularly shaving all their body hair, using 'products' (not 'make up'), wearing more feminine styles and a wider fashion in general, getting more involved in traditional 'female' activities like cooking (I know far more young men that cook and bake than women) and being more in touch with their emotions)? I realise this is mostly the younger generation, but to me it seems much healthier than the old-school 'macho or nothing' attitudes. Meanwhile, younger women seem to be acting far more aggressive, dominant, many adopting traditionally 'male' clothes and traits, and switching from 'male' to 'female' minute by minute? Amongst my group of friends I would be classed as fairly feminine, yet I would certainly have been labelled a cross-dresser (or whatever the term was) 100 or more years ago. I rarely wear skirts/dresses but live in jeans and boots, I very rarely wear makeup or nail varnish (perhaps a handful of times a year at most), loving being outside and extreme sports, hate cooking but can do the DIY. Yet I am considered a regular woman. Do you think this blurring of gender lines will continue and if so, do you think it will it have an effect on the number of cross dressers (at least in the younger generations)?

Do you think technology will have an additional impact on this? Now that creative, emotional, social skills are becoming more commercially useful than physical strength (aside from sports perhaps), do you think it will become more acceptable for men to act 'feminine', with a knock on effect in the fashion industry? For example, during the war it was necessary for women to take on work that was traditionally done by men, and around the same time they began wearing trousers and traditionally 'male' fashion. More of us work in offices these days and no longer need to wear trousers for practical reasons, yet they have remained a staple item in most wardrobes. If the roles of men and women continue to blur, will fashion follow?

Lastly, is there any correlation between social class and cross dressing? I was wondering if growing up in a mostly blue-collar environment where men were encouraged to be more macho (at least going by stereotypes) would restrict the role of a man even more and result in higher incidences of cross dressing? My partner suggested that growing up in a more aggressive working class environment made it even harder for him as he had to 'act tough' constantly to be accepted as 'one of the guys'. In comparison, my brother went to a school with a large percentage of upper class students and had no trouble at all wearing more 'feminine' clothes, acting less macho and more refined/elegant (the sort of behaviour other boys at my partner's school would have referred to as 'gay'). My brother has no difficulty combining what could be considered traditionally 'masculine' and 'feminine' traits, yet my partner acts far more 'macho' in public (or used to until he admitted he dressed up to me) and wraps all of his hidden 'feminine' traits into a separate persona that he keeps private. I wonder if there are other cross-dressers who do the same?

Again, I hope you don't mind me asking these question here and I certainly don't mean to offend anyone by them. I have been trying to understand cross-dressing since my partner told me about it a couple of years ago, and it is only recently that he has opened up a bit more about his history and how it developed. I have studied fashion, history, psychology and sociology at various points (I'm a mega-nerd) and find it fascinating trying to work out if there are any links between any of the above and therefore if it is society that has the problem rather than individual cross-dressers.

[Dana M]

Sid,
You pose some interesting questions. I'm sure that culture does play a large role in crossdressing. In some cultured It is even allowed and considered " normal". I have read that a some Native American cultures accept it.

[Wildaboutheels]

Despite anything/everything that went on in the past, [fashion wise] women are getting ever pickier/choosier in CHOOSING/having male companions simply because they don't "need" men as much at least in Societies where women have equal rights to men.

Because of this, CDing WILL increase in the future. CDing for most men [easy to confirm] serves as [at least] a partial substitute for female companionship for probably 99% of the CDers on the planet.

But of course, most of those guys have no reason or desire to go out dressed in public.

Despite the constant declarations of many here, it IS OK for guys to wear any clothes they want out in public and it's perfectly legal too.

Just don't hold your breath to see them in flats and granny dresses and silly looking hats.

[Bria]

Wow, Sid, you really laid out the questions!!! I sure don't have answers off the top of my head. I think that there are a couple of masters theises in there and maybe a disertation as well!!

I do agree with your observation about macho/blue collar and not-so-macho/upper class relationship. I guess that this is a learned trait from a very young age, whichever macho/not-so-macho you grow up with.

I'll ponder your post and see if any light bulb light up and if so I'll be back with a reply!!

Hugs Bria

[Nikki A.]

Sid very good questions. I wish I knew the answers, but I will offer my opinions.
As far as dressing in the past, yes they may have used the items you spoke of but they still did present as males, the finer clothes and accessories were an indication of wealth and nobility. They didn't dress as females or wear clothes that females wore.
I do think there is a shift towards acceptance especially within the younger generations of the blending of styles and fashion. We are seeing gender bending models, shows and movies that incorporate our section of society. We are not always put in the best of light but at least we are acknowledged. I remember when my kids were in H.S. there was one teen who was finding him/herself and was accepted by the kids in the school. In my day I would have had the c**p kicked out of me.

[devida]

Hello Sid, I have always liked that name, don't know why, but nice to hear from you. I will try to answer your questions as much as I can. Like you I do think quite a bit about these topics.

Gender appropriate behavior is very clearly a way in which society enforces norms. For. great deal of human history gender roles had obvious utility. Women were generally better gatherers, men better hunters, both for reasons that were sex specific but also had important social reasons. Women, for example, could carry children while they gathered roots etc. ( try to run down an antelope carrying a young child). After the agricultural revolution 10,000 years ago gender divisions became a useful means to enforce social stratification which was important in keeping people on the land. Religion, a bit later, also helped to reinforce accepted power structures through gender politics. Lots of gender theorists have written extensively about the historical social reasons for gender determination. So, in answer to your first question gender now and for some time in the past has been almost entirely a social construct. A substantial minority of human beings are actually gender variant but are forced by social norms to be gender compliant.

There is very clearly a change occurring in gender norms. There may be a number of different reasons for this including environmental (synthetic estrogens and other hormone disruptors), technological ( the internet has allowed sites like these), socio-economic ( the mass movement of women into the workplace and their steady success at destroying gender based economic structures), and medical ( transition is possible, body modification is normal). As far as fashion following I actually think fashion is leading. Did you look at the men's fashions in Milan, Paris and London this year?

Will technology have an impact? Of course. For those who want to use it for this purpose technology will destroy gender presentation as anything that has some kind of referent to sex assigned at birth. It is a matter of a short amount of time, a few years really, before gender becomes available, medically, as a matter of fashion. This has already happened with the process of aging. You can look forty or fifty forever, if you have the money and the discipline. A cursory glance at older celebrities proves this. There is absolutely no reason why people won't use medical technology to change gender for the purpose of fashion,whim or adventure. This is a few years off from being generally affordable but if you have the money it is already available.


Lastly you ask about social class. Of course you are British, as I am and thus sensitized to matters of class in a way that Americans don't or at least pretend not to understand. Actually it isn't class based. Yes, elites are more likely to afford themselves the opportunity of gender variability than other classes are because they have more money, less concern (sometimes) about social propriety, and a greater tolerance for eccentricity within their class.But this is also likely to change as gender modification opportunities become less socially condemned and more affordable. A small example is the lack of so called feminine clothes designed for male bodies. But that will change and is changing as businesses realize the money that can be made by disrupting the gender boundaries and selling within the disruptions. Just look at the enormous amount of money that was made by the invention of the teenager, something, btw, that happened in my lifetime.

Thank you for your questions. By all means private message me if you have any other questions and do not want to ask them on this thread. As I said I think about these issues a great deal so I am happy to discuss them. It is a big subject!

[mechamoose]

"Appropriate" dress is linked to its position in geography and time. As you pointed out yourself, there was a period where men's clothing would have made Liberace blush. (ok, maybe not!)

Some African tribes value women who wear a bazzilion rings around their neck to extend the neck to silly levels. Likewise some wear HUGE lip plates for the very same reason.

There's a brand new dance
but I don't know its name
That people from bad homes
do again and again
It's big and it's bland
full of tension and fear
They do it over there but we don't do it here

David Bowie - Fashion

Who are you trying to please, and why are your trying to please them?

That isn't a rhetorical question... think about the answer.

You be YOU. Does it fit with the 'norm'? (I eff'in HATE that Norm guy)

Some 'deviances' can put you at the risk of physical harm. No one here will fault you for protecting yourself. But I encourage your to separate the fear instinct from real threats. Be yourself, it has always worked for me.

"Dress code" is SO subjective.

(awesome questions, by the way!)

<3

- MM

[Katey888]

Great questions, Sid - these have come up before piecemeal but I've asked them myself often...

And some great answers and perspectives too - I'll definitely be reading a bit more on the history of gender determination (thanks Devida) - I do think it's fascinating where we've got to with modern fashions and contemporary society... but to address the points you make..

History has a habit of skewing things - yes, there were days when silk stockings and wigs were the province of males, but generally only wealthy ones... and of course, the ones that were captured in imagery of the time had to be wealthy to afford to have Sir Joshua or similar expand paint and canvas on them... so our view of fashion history is generally incomplete until the late 1800s and photography captures what everyone is wearing. So already, we've got a class distinction - but the social and fashion revolutions of the 20th century changed that radically. I think where we are now can be traced as a continual evolution from the 1920s post-WW1 era in that - steroetypically, at least - men wear trousers, women wear skirts, with the notable exceptions of fashion and film icons who deliberately flouted those distinctions from the female side... I can't really think of any notable males that have had the same success (yes, Eddie Izzard in his dresses and David Beckham in his laughable sarong... but not with the same success..)

I think there is a blurring of lines and more acceptance of what would once have been regarded as more feminine elements in male fashions and grooming - although that has possible been developing since the 60s and 70s with western society itself liberalising. I do like the sound of how "younger women seem to be acting far more aggressive, dominant"... but that's probably less to do with fashion and more my own personal fantasies.. Anyway - a serious point here is that a woman can throw on male garb and make it look feminine - males just cannot do the same (although in reverse, males can certainly don female attire and make it look masculine, just not macho!).

Technology - interested to read Devida's perspectives of gender becoming as procurable as a Versace dress - and I think that's right, scary as it seems. May be on the verge of science fiction now, but how many other things were 50 years ago? I believe that will be true before the end of this century and the world will be a strange place indeed when folk can switch back and forth virtually at will (this idea is developed in Iain M. Banks 'Culture' novels and in a very hard to read novel, 'Triton' by Samuel R. Delany - at least, I found it heavy going...)

Class - ah, yes, that other great British pastime along with the weather.. I think you describe quite well something that has always been true: that the wealthy and privileged have always been able to take liberties to some degree more than the plebs. I agree with your partner having been brought up in a working class environment - you have no security to fall back on other than reliance on your own capability: any weakness is exploited, so you can't afford to exhibit any femininity - you'd be mercilessly ridiculed. It probably changes as you mature but it's hard to shake the lessons and imprinting of younger years.

Is it society that has the problem? Of course it is! Although it's not exactly a problem - but definitely an artificial construct that has evolved over recent centuries to where it is today. Gender is one of those categorisation things that the state likes to impose on us - tick this box if you're male; 45-55; married; own your own home; drive a car... The apparently benign state bureaucracy of western democracies has replaced the partnership of the aristocracy and religion over the past 50-250 years, depending where you live - but they still have difficulty coping with people that drift or actively jump outside of their convenient boxes... However, they adapt very quickly by just adding a new box..

Great points Sid - I look forward to reading other comments to this thread...

Katey x

[Ineke Vashon]

I am too new at this, still learning, to be able to make a valuable addition to this thread. Just want to say: "WOW, what a great post, Sid, and such thoughtful answers.

Ineke

[Kate Simmons]

I personally feel we should make our own way in the world and not worry so much about what the "world at large" thinks. I think the real challenge these days is to just be ourselves, whoever those "selves" happen to be and do what makes us happy. Unless someone signs my paycheck, I care very little what they think of me.

[mariehart]

Naturally it's something I've thought about too, although from the perspective that I am TS, in that I internally I am female but not about to transition and am one who uses crossdressing as a means of temporary respite.

I'm just using the first line as a reference but I am answering the whole question.

First of all, if society considered it 'masculine' for genetic males to wear lace, silk, tights, jewellery, wigs, make up, etc, then would m to f cross dressing even exist?

Yes it would. While there are various strands to crossdressing from simply liking the clothes to living as a woman. The essential differences between men and women will always remain. Not least because women themselves want masculine men and men like feminine women. That's a generalisation of course but that won't change. Even in the gay community there is that difference. So no, I think crossdressing will always remain unless everyone has to wear the same shapeless jumpsuit.

Also, do you see any change (however gradual) back to a more balanced approach to gender roles now that more guys are incorporating various 'feminine' traits into either fashion or the way they act

No I don't, just like my above comment. Whatever is the norm in the straight male environment will become masculine. Look at kilts, they're skirts really but wearing a kilt is possibly one of the most masculine things a man can do.

The fact that you wear trousers and that it's considered normal for a woman, at least in western society, to adopt what were once considered masculine traits and roles that were the domain of men doesn't mean men have had the same option to dress and act in what is perceived to be a feminine manner. But also, I believe most men wouldn't even want to be more feminine. Remember it wasn't men who were....are repressed. It was women who were severely restricted in the behaviour, their dress, their careers and their interests. It's a distortion to say that women have become more masculine. Women are now freer to express themselves in ways that a patriarchal society didn't allow them in the past. Now of course you can say that men are repressed too but not to the same extent as women were.

On the other hand men and indeed women still perceive feminine behaviour in men as a negative, notwithstanding the greater acceptance of gay people who may display feminine attributes. In fact that can be a problem if you are somewhat feminine like me. The first question everyone asks a crossdresser, including the wives and girlfriends is: 'Are you gay?' All my life the natural assumption of everyone around me was that I was gay. Feminine behaviour in men is considered 'gay'. That is a problem for straight men who are crossdressers.

So don't confuse the two. Women now have greater freedom to be themselves, men too but to a much lesser extent.

Will technology have an impact? Of course.

Yes to some extent but no in general for many of the same reasons above. The average straight male will not become more feminine. Not least because for one thing, they don't want to. Secondly testosterone is a powerful hormone and drives male sexuality and personality. Also quite simply because women as a rule prefer masculine men. If that changes then perhaps men will change too. The late great Rik Mayall once quipped: 'Of course I'm a 'new man'. It's the best way to pick up a bird.' If being feminine made you more attractive to women then every man would have more make up and high heels than any woman.

Lastly, is there any correlation between social class and cross dressing?

Maybe but in the modern context isn't it more a fact that the middle class in general are better educated and have a more liberal and tolerant outlook on issues like that? Also there is more of a tradition of that kind of behaviour in certain parts of society. After all their Fathers did it before them and their Fathers too.

But there is a huge blurring of the classes now even in Britain. There is no true working class anymore. Everyone is lower middle class unless you're poor.

While I live in Ireland where we pretend there are no class differences, my own experience is that tolerance of feminine behaviour isn't exclusive to one class. I remember shopping with a friend once. She knew all about me. We met a very camp gay friend of hers who worked in one of the shops. We chatted and after we moved on she explained that his brothers were all very straight, hard men with it but they were extremely protective of him. Both she and he were definitely from a poorer rougher background than me.

So I think you can't generalise.

As I said these are just some of my views from my own perspective and experience.

I do believe crossdressing will never become socially acceptable in the way many of us would like. It will remain misunderstood and hidden for the most part. There is nothing to stop me putting on the dress I bought this morning and going for a stroll around the area I live in. I won't be doing it. Even though it's likely no one will say a word about it. Nor will I ever be able to wear it around my wife, tolerant though she may be of the fact of my crossdressing. But she would find it disturbing and I in turn would find it embarrassing. So it is with most crossdressers I think. It's still socially unacceptable even if Eddie Izzard has tried to bring it out into the open. I do have to say though that even he compromises on the crossdressing. That tells you something.

[Lorileah]

Despite anything/everything that went on in the past, [fashion wise] women are getting ever pickier/choosier in CHOOSING/having male companions simply because they don't "need" men as much at least in Societies where women have equal rights to men.
Because of this, CDing WILL increase in the future.

CDing for most men [easy to confirm] serves as [at least] a partial substitute for female companionship for probably 99% of the CDers on the planet.

This is the most convoluted logic I have ever seen. Women won't need men so men will dress like women? Men can't get dates so men dress like women?

[Frédérique]

…do you see any change (however gradual) back to a more balanced approach to gender roles now that more guys are incorporating various 'feminine' traits into either fashion or the way they act (where I grew up, men are now regularly shaving all their body hair, using 'products' (not 'make up'), wearing more feminine styles and a wider fashion in general, getting more involved in traditional 'female' activities like cooking (I know far more young men that cook and bake than women) and being more in touch with their emotions)? I realise this is mostly the younger generation, but to me it seems much healthier than the old-school 'macho or nothing' attitudes. Meanwhile, younger women seem to be acting far more aggressive, dominant, many adopting traditionally 'male' clothes and traits, and switching from 'male' to 'female' minute by minute?

No, I don’t see a change back to “balanced” gender roles, and I don’t expect to see such a change, unless large portions of the male population suddenly disappear. We are living in a time when male virtues are first and foremost, strength and boldness are championed, and anything remotely sissified is vilified, rejected, or destroyed. The younger generation is the same as it always was, IMHO – I see this on a daily basis…

I can’t go along with your opinion that younger women seem to be more aggressive these days. This is a kind of male prejudice brought on by male fear, and cultivated by TV. Out in the world, I see the same types of women that I’ve always seen. Evolution of gender roles is slow, in fact evolution of any kind is slow. You can’t expect sweeping changes to come by every generation…

I grew up during a period of what I would call “traditional values,” and then there was a period where gender roles were challenged. Briefly. I think a lot of people got nervous, so everybody went back to what was going on before, and every new “discovery” (in terms of gender roles) since then has had to overcome the immovable “object” of tradition. Add to this the subtle (or not too subtle) messages that keep everyone in their allotted gender space. Instinct is a powerful thing, and even the most rebellious youths I’ve known have conformed over time…

In this atmosphere of traditional repression, changing from male to female, even for a few minutes, can be a useful way to relax, but things always snap back into place, and the human panoply continues…

[PaulaQ]

This is the most convoluted logic I have ever seen. Women won't need men so men will dress like women? Men can't get dates so men dress like women?

I agree - this is completely illogical. Many (most?) of the heterosexual CDs on this forum are married - so how are they not getting dates? Apparently they got at least one - at the altar!

Those who aren't married would likely be delighted to have a female partner, and it would make little to no difference, long term, in their CDing.

Been there, done that, working on the divorce...

[Confucius]

You've been doing a lot of thinking, haven't you? If I may summarize the myriad of questions you pose it would be, "is modern culture making today's males more feminine?" This summary is covering fashion, career opportunities, technology, and social class. Off hand I would say that all of the evidence is circumstantial. More central to your understanding of cross-dressing within modern society is communication. Through technology like the internet, we are able to cross cultures and gain greater understanding of people who are different than ourselves. This helps society become more understanding and tolerant, and that makes cross-dressers more tolerant than in previous decades.

With respect to gender roles we are still basically in the stone age. Our genetic make-up dictates our biology and the male/female relationship. Men have always been attracted to as many young attractive healthy females as possible to spread their seed and ensure the survival of their progeny. Females have always been attracted to alpha males - males who had power, influence, wealth, and the respect of their peers. Women know that mating with the alpha males will provide the best advantages/privileges for their progeny.

So if a man is celebrity, a rock-star, with fame and wealth, he can be a cross-dresser and still attract the females (like Steven Tyler of Aerosmith). However, most cross-dressers do not have the respect of their peers and are not alpha males. Despite increasing social tolerances of modern society we are still biologically a bunch of cavemen.

[Sid]

Wow! Thank you all for your replies. There seems to be a huge variation in how people view things. I'm over in the UK, so perhaps things are a little different here. I don't know that many conservative people, although I'm sure they still exist. My peers are mostly in the 20-30 age bracket, so my observations are based mostly on that group.

One other point I forgot to mention was the portrayal of women in the media - specifically in the advertising/marketing field. I studied advertising as part of my business degree and the overwhelming message was that sex sells. Fear is also good if you can't use sex. But sex was number one. Specifically the female body. That's why you get pictures of women draped over cars, an attractive woman smiling in a toothpaste ad, a half naked model eating french fries or whatever it is. Do you think growing up surrounded by sexy images of women whilst not fitting into the uber-macho definition of being a man would have any impact on whether you developed a desire for cross dressing? I know there's been a lot of research into the impacts on women, but what about on young boys/teenagers/men?

[susan54]

I think Devida is on to something here. A lot of womenwear companies are struggling. Instead of tolerating male crossdressers they need to embrace us and help make it 100% acceptable for a man to wear a skirt or dress. There are tens of thousands (hundreds of thousands?) of us in the UK, all potential customers or customers who would buy more if it was easier. I spend several thousand a year on womenswear - how many more woulddo the same if it was socially acceptable. I know you an go out but this is tolerated rather than accepted. Let the companies do their bit for us because ultimately it is for them. It just needs one major retailer to set the ball rolling, for example by promoting changing facilities for all - it can be done in a way that avoids upsetting their more traditional female customers. I have tried on clothes often in shops as a man and presenting as a woman that only sell womenswear and the people who run the shops have assured me that no one has even remarked on it let alone complained. The ones they need to encourage are those who are scared to try things on.

[mariehart]

No, I don’t see a change back to “balanced” gender roles, and I don’t expect to see such a change, unless large portions of the male population suddenly disappear. We are living in a time when male virtues are first and foremost, strength and boldness are championed, and anything remotely sissified is vilified, rejected, or destroyed. The younger generation is the same as it always was, IMHO

Really though doesn't it depend on the local culture? I see you live in Kansas. When I think Kansas I think conservative, perhaps unfairly. But you see my point. What goes in the mid West doesn't necessarily follow in Middlesex.
The question really is which attitude represents the future?

I'd like to think think that overbearing masculinity is in decline. The problem is that only a few men really embody those so called virtues. The rest are far more middle ground.

You only have to look at countries with a strong patriarchal cultures to see why it's not a good thing.

[Beverley Sims]

Sid,
I just looked at your Bio.
I maybe was a bit unkind in one of my other replies, I understand more now.
One thing that is a hoary old argument is "I can wear trousers why can't he wear a skirt?"

That has been done to death here.

Other points you have raised have also been done quite well with long arguments.

I can only say it is good that you are both talking freely about it, and enjoying your relationship.

Technology will have an impact as far as the internet and dissemination of information goes.
We are better informed these days.

Upbringing in different socio economic backgrounds does make a difference and some are ruff and tuff while others are softies.

Depends on which side of the tracks you come from.
Whilst you remain a mega nerd you will have an open mind and be acceptive to change and alternate lifestyles.

All the best.

[Nadine Spirit]

One of my favorite historical examples of cross dressing, or cross gender expressions, are with Native American tribes. Within some tribes they had some men that lived as women and vice versa. They were known as Two Spirits. Did they wear lace and frills? No these people just assumed the roles of the gender opposite of their births. They were not seen as weirdos, just different.

[hope springs]

This is the most convoluted logic I have ever seen. Women won't need men so men will dress like women? Men can't get dates so men dress like women?

I agree. Since admitting to myself im CD, i want MORE female campanionship. Im o n a journey to truly understand woman's perspective and have noticed my desire to be more socially engaged has dramatically increased. I value the female viewpoint, so i dont want it substituted by CD, i want to engage with women in a more emotional meaningful way.

[Ivie]

Hi Sid
Sorry for the delay, I've not had chance to post since seeing your thread at the weekend; the extra thinking time may well be evident!

I think in a truly tolerant society there would not be crossdressing, because it is only "cross" or "trans" because there is, or are, lines to cross. I was considering this recently in terms of my experience, I'm hoping to tell my SO soon so I am trying anew to understand my particular variation so that I can explain it as well as I can.

There was also an interesting piece by Laurie Penny in the New Statesmen considering the potential "Trans rights tipping point" recently discussed by Time, and indeed how there has been friction recently between parts of the TG, CD, BG (and other initials) and some feminist activists who see it as men further entrenching the patriarchal ideas of femininity, and the idea of intrinsic "difference" which also led me to study my motivation.

I propose that perhaps the mistake that all of society, and us included on occasion, is making is to assign a range of visual aesthetics and behaviours on the basis of, what we of all groups know to be, a grossly simplified concept of sex/gender. I am certainly leaning towards what might be considered the spectrum model, that a given person has three attributes in this area, physicality, identity and attraction, that these are all spectra not binaries, and can be combined in any way. As one of the previous comments mentioned few men are ultra masculine, we are mostly somewhere closer to the feminine, I know being 1.7 metres (5'7") and 59kg (130lbs) I occasionally (wonderfully!) get taken for female just when my hair gets long. As a species we physically flow between masculine and feminine through intersex, which some estimates suggest maybe 1.7% of the population (which could mean 119,000,000 people globally despite there supposed rarity). Of course as mentioned, we are polarised to some degree by sexual selection, but random variation and personal preferences continually stir that up, as a result we don't all look like 1950's cartoon characterisations.

From my experience I find that I am not looking to "be" a women, I am male, simply a more feminine one and I think that my underlying identity is aligned with traits currently solely allotted to women; and because that damned line I mentioned is so close by I'm a crossdresser with the slightest variance. And of course, while it may seem obvious, it's the prohibition that really screws things up; not in the sense that if it was allowed then we could just "be" (which is true too), but that because it is so prohibited it distorts or experience and outlook fundamentally, indeed it probably attracts some because of that, but it means we can't tell where we would "naturally" settle. To degender the description a little and refer to presentations, I feel that I want to be beautiful rather than handsome (not that I'm typically considered that either!) and in the context of the real world we must deal with, it means I long to look passingly feminine; but that may have been heightened because there is no alternative space. For my identity I also feel, possibly, most comfortable in female company, and the range of personal expression open to females (while acknowledging of course that women remain terribly discriminated against across the world, and that we should all be fighting together to ensure everyone has truly equal rights.)

Sexually I am male bodied and attracted to women (the fact I fancied women yet also wanted to be like them was the major source of my confusion, if only the internet had come along 5 years earlier), I'm straight, but I also realise that physicality is only skin deep and it strikes me as a particularly curious and encouraging quirk of society is that if I was to be with a post-op transwoman only the most uneducated and prejudiced would consider me gay despite the fact she was actually GM. Still the community that would think that would probably think me so already...

I think there is a socio-economic bias, but that it simply comes down to the fact that as you become more affluent you "can" have a broader world experience fostering a broader mind (though as ever no generalisations are complete... including this one... about generalisations) And of course if you are more affluent you are more secure, in every sense.

So I propose that, separate from the practical procreational functions of sexual differences we can be anywhere on the physical spectrum, feel like anywhere on the identity spectrum, and fancy anywhere on the attraction spectrum. And we are all affected equally but differently by the restrictions of society; a friend of mine is a gay crossdresser and her experience has been the equivalent of mine. My assumption on first meeting her and learning her personal situation was that she would be free to be how she wanted, but she was actually just the same as I. She is not looking to transition, she feels it is an expression of her nature, and she realised this after becoming part of a happy life partnership. Her SO of course no more wants a female partner than mine does and she was presented with the same dilemma of coming out, of course for her a second time and this one she found far more challenging than coming out as gay, because most people understand that. She felt I was very brave for having been out and about, but I feel she is far more so as she has come out to her partner and has begun to work through it.

It seems to me that awareness and tolerance is improving, although it strikes me that I only perceive times past remotely, and that in practice previous eras may have been more understanding than I give them credit for; indeed I recall hearing that during Isaac Newton's life his homosexuality presented no problem, but he was afraid of being outted as an alchemist! Technology will help, in that medial advances will make it easier for people to settle on their parts of the spectra, but hopefully society's development in parallel may mean people have more options and may not feel the need to complete transition, finding some comfortable space in between the old binaries.

That is all... (and probably enough!) apologies for the brain dump, all responses fascinate, and do message if there's anything you wish to discuss further
Love
Ivie