Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst ... 2345 LastLast
Results 76 to 100 of 125

Thread: Are we LGBTQ?

  1. #76
    Gold Member Sometimes Steffi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Nation's Capital
    Posts
    5,587
    Quote Originally Posted by Micki_Finn View Post
    They are correct on Drag not being gender identity, though there are gender variant people who do drag. As far as the crossdresser thing, it's a semantics issue. Many within the LGBT community will say that if you're NOT doing it for sexual pleasure, that makes you trans. Just because you don't want to transition doesn't make you not trans. There are LOTS of trans folks who have no desire to modify their bodies surgically or hormonally.

    So it's more that the LGBTQ community uses a wider definition of trans, and a narrower definition of ?crossdresser?. I've mentioned this a few times on these forums.
    If drag queens are only into dressing as a job, are probably not T, unless they're LGBT when not "working".

    Quote Originally Posted by Megan G View Post
    So with that said since you all identify firmly as males, your gender identity matches your birth gender..... you do not belong under the “transgender” label. I’ve seen stuff that does include you but honestly if you read above you can see why this is not possible.
    Who said that we all firmly [no pun intended] identify as males Some days I'm sot so sure.

    Some assorted responses without quoting.

    That's the problem with labels; they're not specific enough. Remember, T stands for Transgender, not transexual.

    As for passing. I've seen many GGs who don't pass as women as well as I do.

    I would probably call myself bigender or gender fluid. Am I CD or T.

    Don't forget that you can be a non-op T.

    Some people believe that the difference between a crossdresser and a transwoman is 2 years. So, at worst, we're only 2 years from T.

    I happen to personally know a lot of Ts who fit that cliche. Maybe they knew that they were T at the when I met them as a CD, but they had me fooled; I thought that they were "just a CD".

    Lastly, if you are assaulted on the street while dressed, do you or they care whether you're CD or T? If the person assaulted you thought you were T, that could be a hate crime. If that person thought you were a CD, no hate crime?
    Hi, I'm Steffi and I'm a crossdresser... And I accept and celebrate both sides of me. Or, maybe I'm gender fluid.

  2. #77
    -1.#QNaN Lydianne's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Posts
    1,451
    Quote Originally Posted by Sometimes Steffi View Post
    As for passing. I've seen many GGs who don't pass as women as well as I do.
    I think we need to refrain from the idea of applying the notion of passability to genetic females. It's like division-by-zero, and it probably loses us support... lest another genetic female challenges us to give birth, for example.

    We also need not to confuse attractiveness with passability. Not being attracted to a genetic female is totally fine, but that is a different assessment than passability. Unless most of us pass with real hair, real breasts, no makeup, independently of clothing, without clothing, etc, we probably shouldn't go there.


    ( There are plenty of women to whom I am not attracted, with whom I would trade places in an instant ).


    - L.
    Last edited by Lydianne; 06-18-2020 at 01:22 PM.

  3. #78
    Silver Member Pumped's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    2,544
    Quote Originally Posted by Robertacd View Post
    Not a box, an inclusive umbrella that covers everyone from fetish crossdressers to post-op transexuals.

    The only reason I can think of why so many here do not want to be included in this umbrella is transphobia.
    Could be. Personally, I don't care where a person fits in any of these labels. I joke with friends that I hate everyone equally until they prove themselves. I have gay friends that I enjoy being with. I can't say I know any trans people, but I would give them the same chance I give anyone. If you are a decent trustworthy worthy person you are ok with me. Nothing else really matters.

  4. #79
    Banned Read only
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    4,410
    Quote Originally Posted by Lydianne View Post
    We also need not to confuse attractiveness with passability... we probably shouldn't go there.

    - L.
    Exactly!

    You may be prettier than some GG's but all GG's are still more feminine than any of us GM's will ever be.

  5. #80
    Girl about Town Jodie_Lynn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Catskill, NY
    Posts
    1,181
    Quote Originally Posted by Michelle Vinova View Post
    My employer offered an optional seminar to raise awareness about LGBTQ. Discussion on gender, sex, pronouns, challenges, etc.

    The speaker was a transfemine non-binary person from an Los Angeles LGBT organization.

    This individual (they) clearly thought of Crossdressers as excluded from LGBTQ.

    During their presentation, Drag was described as only for entertainment and not part of gender identity.

    And then when later asked specifically about cross dressers inclusion in LGBTQ, their response was that CDs do it for sexual reasons and not part of their identity. So No.

    I know some of you will say who cares about whether or not we?re in the LGBTQ community. And here we go again with the labels. ..But I was pretty surprised by the explicit exclusion. Particularly when gender fluidity was part of the conversation.

    What do you think? Are we in or out and why?

    Forgive me for quoting your entire post, but there are several things I wished to address in it.

    During their presentation, Drag was described as only for entertainment and not part of gender identity.

    This is true. Look at Benny Hill, or the cast of Monty Python. They often dressed in drag, for a role in their shows. Or take the movie "To Wong Foo..." Swazye, Snipes and Leguizamo dressed in drag, for a role. Or imagine a costume party where some guy shows up in a cheerleader outfit, unshaven, with beachballs in a bra. Is he a crossdresser, or doing drag? Would they be classed as crossdressers? Would ANYone point to Wesley Snipes and say "Hey, look! It's the crossdresser!"?

    And then when later asked specifically about cross dressers inclusion in LGBTQ, their response was that CDs do it for sexual reasons and not part of their identity. So No.

    I don't agree that the ONLY reason for crossdressing is sexual, there are a multitude of reasons, but sexual fulfillment IS a part of it, for many.

    Is crossdressing part of your identity? When going for a job interview, do you agonize over going as "male self" or "female self"?

    Lets suppose that you are at work, and for whatever reason, a CD that you know is there, en femme. Would you go and greet them? Duck away, or pretend not to know them? Why, or why not?

    Ever been turned down for a job, or a loan, or an apartment, because of how you presented? Ever freaked out, while driving en femme, because you came to a police checkpoint? Ever have a panic attack at work, because you missed a speck of nail varnish?

    Crossdressers, and I am NOT degrading them or negging them, don't live the life. They ( and this is a total generalization based on years of reading posts here! ), don a disguise. They take clandestine trips out. At 3 in the morning. On a deserted road, take a selfie, and tell how bold they were. They might meet with a group of like minded people, showing up at the venue, in drab, changing into their glam self, and changing back on leaving.

    They tend to have very specific preferences for garments. "I ONLY wear Vanity Fair panties, in peach!", "I love how open bottom girdles make me feel soooo femme!", or, "I love to flounce and swish around in my ultra-feminine 1950's skirts and petticoats!" "I never wear jeans or slacks in girl mode!" Again, I'm not knocking CD's; you do you and more power to you!

    BUT, CD's can shed that disguise at a moments notice, and present as "normal" to the rest of the world. And let's face reality, a lot of CD's (not all, and I don't have stats, so don't ask! ) DO get an emotional or sexual thrill from dress up.

    So, in my opinion, if you feel that crossdressers belong on the LGBTQ+ spectrum, then builders of model airplanes should be on the aeronautical engineering board. Or that by saying "Hey, I sat next to a POC on the bus, so that proves I'm all about equality!", means you support BLM.
    Before you can love another, you must first like yourself

    I Aim To Misbehave

    Labels belong on BOXES, not PEOPLE!

  6. #81
    Senior Member DianeT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2017
    Location
    France
    Posts
    1,454
    I personally couldn't care less about labels. Being called a heterosexual dude who likes to dress is fine with me, transgender is fine with me, everything goes as these tags are just revealing how the beholder is seeing or trying to understand you, and not what you are.
    The need for a brand name for a group takes a meaning when this group has battles to fight (e.g. for equal rights). If you want to marshall its members, make them realize the wrongs they endure, you need a team name, an identity. If LGBTQ people and transvestites consider they are all being treated unfairly and consider themselves sisters and brothers in arm, maybe they can add a letter to that long acronym, or consider the + does it, and like a member dear to my heart said in her post, try to find what unites them and will make them stronger together rather than spending time arguing about what divides them.

  7. #82
    Banned Read only
    Join Date
    Sep 2016
    Location
    Phoenix, Arizona
    Posts
    230
    First, in the interest of mutual understanding, I want to point out how often misunderstandings happen on message boards like this one. I'm referring to Megan's post about GLAAD's supercilious dismissal of anyone who doesn't fit their definition of "transgender" as "a bunch of heterosexual dudes that like to dress up," Was Megan really echoing the same contempt of crossdressers along with that crowd? Or was she drawing attention to the same disgust I feel at such exclusionary hypocrisy from some outfit like GLAAD? I hope she'll return to clarify that. Please be careful how we interpret another's words, and try to give them the benefit of the doubt!--even "doubts" we may not think of at first blush, as I confess I didn't myself. More on that crowd later.

    Quote Originally Posted by Robertacd View Post
    Not a box, an inclusive umbrella that covers everyone from fetish crossdressers to post-op transexuals.

    The only reason I can think of why so many here do not want to be included in this umbrella is transphobia.
    Thank you for this post, Roberta, which is a good starting point for discussion. I certainly agree with your concept of "T" as an umbrella, in which we all ought in principle to be included. What I have a problem with is that second statement.

    Although some people "hate labels," I think labels are generally useful anyway. The real value of labels is that people are simply different from one another and want to be understood for "who they really are" and "what they're really like." "Different" doesn't imply "better" or "worse"; just "different" in ways that others often don't understand. It reminds me of a Web site somewhere about an entirely different topic--Myers-Briggs personality classifications--accompanied by a publication called Please Understand Me. The point of course is that people don't always "understand" others who for various reasons think, feel, or act differently from themselves, unless they're educated about it.

    So under this T "umbrella" there's a burgeoning list of subcategories like "LGBTTTQQIAA" and whatnot, which can be found (among other places) on a Web site with the delightful name of "ok2Bme.ca,", a philosophy I thoroughly sympathize with. This ever-growing alphabetical sea serpent is not only compendious, but cumbersome besides, so no wonder people shorten it to "LGBT+," or sometimes "LBGTQ+." Still, I think the reason for its growth is not so much that anyone doesn't want to be seen as "like those other people" we get confused with," more that they want their own individuality to be understood.

    Sometimes this leads to needless objections by hypersensitive people, such as some who insist "I am not a 'transsexual.' I am simply a woman now." Or those who want us to know that "in our culture, which is different from yours, when somebody has both a feminine and a masculine soul in the same body, we call it 'Two-Spirit.'" Point acknowledged, but from a gender perspective it's still a "distinction without a difference," and when we bring "different cultures" into the mix as well, we only multiply the existing number of labels.

    Despite all this, there is a reason why "B" is the third letter in "LGBT," and I'm sure it's not because "bisexual" people are "looking down" on anyone who's purely gay or lesbian. It's just because they want to be understood for themselves, that they're different from others, that they swing both ways and son't belong as "straight" [b]or[//b] gay.

    It all reminds me of that ancient but classic comic song a group called the Southlanders did a lifetime ago, back in 1958 when so much music was just plain lighthearted fun: "I Am A Mole":

    I'm not a Bat or a Rat or a Cat
    I'm not a Gnu or a Kangaroo
    I'm not a Goose or a Moose on the loose
    I am a Mole, and I live in a Hole!

    It's appropriate for some of us who crossdress. Even if we don't live in a "hole," we can be "deeply buried" in the closet!

    So with apologies, that's where I don't believe "transphobia" is the reason why some people may not want to be included under an umbrella titled "transgender," which, if it's taken to mean their gender identity is primarily female, does not properly describe them.

    It's also a practical matter of how we're understood by others--especially those we treasure the most: our wives, partners and girlfriends. We wouldn't want them to fear that we're gay and might cheat on them or worse, leave them for another man. Just as important, we wouldn't want them to live in groundless fear that the "man" they loved and married is going to disappear forever and abandon them by morphing into a woman.

    If your mileage is different, if crossdressing led you to understand that you are truly transgender, that's fine. But the point I'm making above all is that I believe most of us who crossdress, for whatever reason, do sympathize with and support those who are truly "transgender" (whatever exactly that means) and struggle with it, since we've struggled with related issues ourselves. The bogeyman of "transphobia" is only a "threat" as far as transsexualism leads uneducated members of society to misunderstand the rest of us who crossdress, which frankly doesn't bother me one bit.

    What DOES bother me is the lack of reciprocity. How some members--not all--of the "trans" community "look down" on us as "mere" crossdressers, when we don't look down on them! The universe of gender is a horizontal spectrum, not a vertical "hierarchy" where some are "superior" to others. If some people are "further along" that spectrum toward the feminine side, that's fine, but it doesn't make anyone "better" or "worse" than anyone else--any more than men are "better than" women, or vice versa. The sexes are just different, that's all, and we're both necessary to the world. It's about as stupid as asking "Is a bolt 'better than' a nut?" If we're ever going to put anything together and build anything worthwhile, we're going to need both bolts and nuts to join them. Otherwise the whole thing is going to fall apart, and we're left with nothing.

    Unfortunately that is not the attitude of some people in the community, and I sometimes wonder how this relates to Heinlein's depiction of humanity in Stranger in a Strange Land. His hero, raised on Mars and previously unacquainted with Earth, "never laughed" before--until he saw monkeys in a human zoo. How one monkey, bullied and deprived of his banana by a bigger monkey, immediately reacted by picking on a smaller monkey and taking his anger out by bullying him too. For the first time, the hero laughed until he couldn't stop, at the comedy, the tragedy, and the absurdity of it all.

    How many male-to-female transsexuals have forgotten how they and their sisters were rejected, despised, and looked down on with contempt by a gang of females calling themselves "radical feminists," or "womyn," to distance themselves from any dreaded suggestion of "men" in the proper spelling? It didn't matter that the MtoFs in question were just as much "women" in soul and spirit as the genetic females who were shrieking about their so-called "oppression." It didn't matter that transsexuals were battling far greater difficulties of their own., worse than any "cisgender" person, male or female. It didn't matter if transsexuals were entirely in sympathy with the political goals of these "womyn." It was oh, no, you were 'born male,' so you 'enjoyed privilege'"=the biggest load of garbage I ever heard, about some myth of so-called "male privilege"--"so you can't come to our 'womyn's' music concerts, because they're for 'womyn born womyn' only, and because you were 'born male,' you're not 'one of us."

    What a load of snotty, "superior," objectionable females! "Eww, you can't be a member of our club, because you "don't belong"! They're like a gang of immature, cliquey high-school girls playing their wretched "exclusion" games on other girls. Isn't it time they grew up?

    Yet we find exactly the same attitude among some other "girls"--mind you, I'm not saying "all," just some---who, being "transgender," are pulling the same snotty, contemptuous attitude on crossdressers at large, who, because they're not truly "transgender," are in some sense "not as worthy as us" and "don't belong in our club." Heaven knows what these garbage attitudes are based on: some sniveling idea that "our struggles are greater than your pitiful little struggles," or some assumption of female privilege: that "you're not as good as us because you're not as fully female as we are!"

    At any rate it's disgustingly objectionable, and it's exactly what Micki and JuliaGirl spoke of when Julia quoted that contemptuous line about "a bunch of heterosexual dudes,,," I've heard this crap myself. When I lived in Massachusetts I was a member of the Tiffany Club for crossdressers, though some members were fully transgender. Yet on the Web back then I've heard a snotty bunch, who ought to have known better, dismissing the group as "just a men's club."

    The same attitude is present anong "persons" like the "non-binary" one who gave the lecture Michelle described in her original post. As somebody remarked, he, she, or it "has an agenda"--and it is not one of "inclusion." All this nonsense about "inclusion" is nothing but hypocritical crap--as is all this petty nonsense about pronouns as well. It's nothing but an excuse to pick on others and create divisiveness. Just as it's ironic that some transsexuals dismissed by "womyn" should show the same dismissal to "mere" crossdressers, I find it ironic that a person calling itself "non-binary" cannot stretch its understanding far enough to encompass other and finer distinctions among humans. What does "non-binary" mean anyway? Only that we don't have to belong wholly to one of two poles--"male" and "female"--and there's whole spectrum of possibilities in between. Some are feminine in nature despite the sex they were born in, and want to transition entirely. Some just need to express their female side socially, much of the time. And some of us just need to "dip our toes in the water" of femininity, whatever our reason, "sexual" or otherwise. Some swing between the two, while other just can't make up their minds. "There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in [his, her, or its] philosophy!

    The same goes for any attempted definition of "transgender" such as the one Megan quoted here, by GLAAD or any other organizaion. Who gives a damn what they think? They're only about gay and lesbian stuff anyway, with an agenda of their own. As important as that may be, what they hell do they know about gender issues, which are entirely different? But to be charitable, maybe they didn't even think about us! Nobody has to buy their definition of what "transgender" means.

    We're surrounded by a bunch of wretched "clubs," and some of them want to exclude us. If they do, well, screw them! Groucho Marx famously said that "I refuse to join any club that would accept me as a member." But that was a joke of course, and why would the rest of us want to join a club that wouldn't accept us as a member? If it won't, it's full of rotten snobs anyway, so who wants to socialize with them, when we've got better things to do with our friends and with those who love us?

    Yes, we do belong under the "umbrella," whether it's titled "transgender" or something else. If we're "mere" crossdressers, we have the right to create our own "umbrella" definition of what it all means. I know that alphabetical sea serpent is getting a bit long already when "LGBT" was extended to include "Q," meaning those who are "Queer," or better still, "Questioning" their sexuality or gender identity. If those Qs can get themselves added in spite of its length, there's still room for us to plant a firm stake in the ground at the end of it with a big X for us CROSS-dressers.

    How does "LGBTQX" sound? We won't get heard if we don't SHOUT! Though I'm not gay myself, I've never forgotten that delicious quote from a man named Robertson Davies, who famously groused that "The love that 'dare not speak its name"--itself a quote from Lord Alfred Douglas--"has become the love that won't shut up!" No doubt the drumbeat of insistence on gay acceptance ticked Mister Davies off a bit, but "marketing" oneself relentlessly is the only way anyone retains recognition in an always competitive world. If that other lot thinks we're not "part of them," the least we can do is push for "LBTGQX" as a legitimate title that we belong under that "umbrella," no matter what the umbrella itself may be called.

  8. #83
    Senior Member Tracy Irving's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Location
    SE Wisconsin
    Posts
    1,875
    Quote Originally Posted by Robertacd View Post
    The only reason I can think of why so many here do not want to be included in this umbrella is transphobia.
    Except that there is this other reason...

    Quote Originally Posted by Robertacd View Post
    Makes perfect sense for people who dress just for sexual reasons to not be included.
    and a whole bunch more that I can come up with without batting an eyelash. Additionally, there are some great comments earlier in this thread.

    I made my own umbrella. It is a happiness umbrella and all are welcome. It is for everyone who has found their own happiness as well as those still searching.

  9. #84
    Senior Member DianeT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2017
    Location
    France
    Posts
    1,454
    Quote Originally Posted by Marianne S View Post
    What a load of snotty, "superior," objectionable females! "Eww, you can't be a member of our club, because you "don't belong"!
    I can tell you obviously suffered from some attitudes, but you are heading to one more rant against feminists (no short supplies of that in these forums) and denying of male privilege (like most males at birth you enjoyed it so you couldn't see it).

    Quote Originally Posted by Marianne S View Post
    Yet on the Web back then I've heard a snotty bunch, who ought to have known better, dismissing the group as "just a men's club."
    So they're calling you names Why do you even care?
    Last edited by DianeT; 06-19-2020 at 02:23 AM. Reason: Smiley

  10. #85
    Banned Read only
    Join Date
    Sep 2016
    Location
    Phoenix, Arizona
    Posts
    230
    Male "privilege"? There is no "male privilege" to speak of. The whole concept is nonsense, a mere invention, pure duckspeak that unthinking persons keep parroting. A "privilege" is a special advantage conferred on someone by people, by society in general, that less "privileged" persons don't have. The main advantages men have are what Nature, not "people," conferred on them. If women are jealous of that, they should blame Nature, not "men" or "society," and stop abusing the meanings of words like "privilege."

    When the Titanic went down, people didn't call for "MEN and children first," did they? That's one example of the real meaning of a "privilege." People who buy this stuff about "male privilege" should open their eyes to some reasoned discourse based on facts. Like Warren Farrell's classic "The Myth of Male Power," or Jack Kammer's "If Men Have All the Power, How Come Women Make the Rules?"--a highly readable book.

  11. #86
    Senior Member DianeT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2017
    Location
    France
    Posts
    1,454
    Quote Originally Posted by Marianne S View Post
    A "privilege" is a special advantage conferred on someone by people, by society in general, that less "privileged" persons don't have.
    You take the "male privilege" term literally, when it is just another name for discrimination against women. It is a constant that persons who don't suffer certain discriminations (males here) deny that they exist for others (women here). A young boy taking for granted and normal that he can keep watching TV on the couch while his sister has been called to help setting the table will typically deny any male privilege once grown up, despite the abundance of such examples in ordinary life.
    Anyway it's an old debate and I don't expect to convince you.

    -- EDIT --
    As for the male power "myth", anybody can write books cherry-picking facts to demonstrate this or that, but the numbers are stubborn :
    https://www.unwomen.org/en/what-we-d...ts-and-figures
    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gend...s_of_directors
    So much for a myth.
    Last edited by DianeT; 06-19-2020 at 05:15 PM. Reason: Added a few reads

  12. #87
    Aspiring Member ShelbyDawn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Austin, TX
    Posts
    682
    Oh, my this thread has taken some interesting turns since I last looked at it. I am glad it has stayed civil.

    As to the question Are "WE" LGBTQ? I'm not sure it can even be answered. "WE" are as diverse as the people the acronym represents. For the thousands of us in this forum, there are that many reasons times two why we do what we do, we are fetish dressers, transgender men and women, purists(only full attempts to pass are good enough for me) and dedicated MIAD's, we are casual under dressers, drag enthusiasts and a million more variations of what we do. Do we all fit under the LGBTQ umbrella, no. Do many of us, perhaps even the great majority, I would say yes but that is just my opinion. Should we, as a collective, be accepted, I honestly do not know.

    What I do know is that you as an individual have every right to claim your spot if you want it. For me, I have had experiences that indicate a more than passing interest in more than one letter in the rainbow, to the case in point, in the famous 'pink pill blue pill' threads, I am decidedly in the pink pill camp, unfortunately my reality will never support that choice, If I cold only be 18 again, LOL.
    Does my being a forever frustrated trans woman exclude me since I will never start down that path or is it enough to just have the desire? Again, I don't know.
    I am Me and Me is OK!



    Shelby

  13. #88
    Aspiring Member StephanieCLT's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    609
    In disclosure, I haven't read through the 86 responses to date, but I had to respond to the comment that "CDs do it for sexual reasons and not part of their identity."

    In my opinion, that is a na?ve, and disappointing for in the LGBTQ world, comment. There are many reasons why we crossdress. Sexual reasons is certainly one for many people, but to make that a general comment lumping all CDs into that category is unbelievably immature.
    Letting the girl in me out.
    More pictures here: https://www.flickr.com/photos/165304654@N04/albums

  14. #89
    Member manemami's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    pune india
    Posts
    333
    What I think in my opinion LGBTQ Community is a umbrella which covers people who want to express their inner side freely. We crossdressers need to express our feelings through our clothes.

  15. #90
    Senior Member Maid_Marion's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2018
    Posts
    1,912
    You may want to adopt the label to fight job discrimination based on the latest Supreme Court ruling.

  16. #91
    Aspiring Artist Kelly DeWinter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Wherever there is a Sale or Macys, but mostly Baltimore MD
    Posts
    3,368
    Quote Originally Posted by Marianne S View Post
    Male "privilege"? There is no "male privilege" to speak of. The whole concept is nonsense, a mere invention, pure duckspeak that unthinking persons keep parroting. A "privilege" is a special advantage conferred on someone by people, by society in general, that less "privileged" persons don't have. The main advantages men have are what Nature, not "people," conferred on them. If women are jealous of that, they should blame Nature, not "men" or "society," and stop abusing the meanings of words like "privilege."

    When the Titanic went down, people didn't call for "MEN and children first," did they? That's one example of the real meaning of a "privilege." People who buy this stuff about "male privilege" should open their eyes to some reasoned discourse based on facts. Like Warren Farrell's classic "The Myth of Male Power," or Jack Kammer's "If Men Have All the Power, How Come Women Make the Rules?"--a highly readable book.
    Marianne

    I believe you misunderstand the concept of "privilege" and it's conjunction with a noun
    Privilege - is a special right, advantage, or immunity granted or available only to a particular person or group
    Noun - a word used to identify any of a class of people, places, or things.

    Put them together as in "male privilege" "white privilege" "gender privilege" or "chef's privilege" and you DO have a meaningful phrase.

    Take Chef's privilege as an example if Gordon Ramsey walked into your kitchen and said "I'm going to cook you the best meal ever , you would confer him the privilege of using the most expensive ingredients to cook for you, whereas if a McDonalds 'chef' offered to cook, you would not let him near your truffles or expensive wine.

    The richness of language is that it is robust and changeable to fit the needs of the moment to help people discuss things and to communicate (and yes, it does not mean every one agrees on what they are discussing)
    Kelly DeWinter
    Find Kelly at:
    Kelly's Blog
    Flicker
    [COLOR=#2e8b57

  17. #92
    Member MaryAnn1963's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2020
    Location
    Mid West
    Posts
    183
    " comment that "CDs do it for sexual reasons and not part of their identity."....

    sorry, but I'm not sure that I would want to be connected with a movement as narrow minded as that. This certainly IS part of my identity!!! Currently it seems to be the GREATER part of it. if they were as understanding as they say they are, they would know more about us.
    The Pink Fog is thick with this one....

  18. #93
    Lady in waiting Peggie Lee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    San Luis Obispo County, CA.
    Posts
    224
    The LGB part is about sexual preference and TQAI are about identities including non binary also call gender Queer these are about how you like to express yourself.

  19. #94
    Senior Member April Rose's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Location
    Massachusetts
    Posts
    1,095
    I don't really care where I stand within the spectrum of LGBTQIA. I stand in solidarity with them and in gratitude to them for the courage and hard work that has liberated so many people, and made America a better, freer society. The recent supreme court decision is just the latest hard won victory for under represented people.

    United we stand, divided we fall.
    I am a vessel of the goddess. Let me express my calling to a feminine life through nurturing love and relatedness.

  20. #95
    Senior Member TheHiddenMe's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2016
    Location
    Metro East area near St. Louis, Missouri
    Posts
    1,764
    One word: Yes.

  21. #96
    Member HelpMe,Rhonda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2019
    Location
    Mid-Atlantic
    Posts
    416
    We CDers may not be to the speaker in the OP or to some of the trans community but put on your prettiest outfit and wig and go out and ask the general public what they think and I think there won't be any hair splitting.
    Last edited by HelpMe,Rhonda; 06-20-2020 at 06:46 PM.

  22. #97
    New Member Cdsissymtl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2020
    Location
    Montreal, QC. 🇨🇦
    Posts
    8
    In my case, I?m bi. The CD part it?s more of a sexual aid, a fetish to look better when meeting a guy.
    I do understand that for some of you, it means so much more.
    Here in Montreal, the LGBTQ has an extra + at the end (LGBTQ+) to include the rest.

  23. #98
    Member HelpMe,Rhonda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2019
    Location
    Mid-Atlantic
    Posts
    416
    I'my happy to be a +

  24. #99
    Member DianaPrince's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2018
    Location
    Southeast PA
    Posts
    161
    I think we are.

  25. #100
    New Member MissAlexisRae's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2020
    Location
    Kissimmee, FL
    Posts
    24
    I think it's completely dependent on the individual, which is why CDs are not usually included in LGBTQ+. For straight-identifying men who identify as men and nothing more, and wear "women's" clothing (IMHO clothes are clothes), then I'd say those people are not LGBTQ+, but that's only my opinion. Myself, I don't identify as 100% male or 100% female, so I'm technically transgender, and part of the whole alphabet of options. There are members of the community, usually lesbians but not always, that think trans people shouldn't be included at all.

    The gatekeepers of the LGBTQ+ community will let this debate rage for whatever reason. It's been happening since Stonewall, so I don't see it changing any time soon. Identify how you want and screw anyone else that says otherwise.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  


Check out these other hot web properties:
Catholic Personals | Jewish Personals | Millionaire Personals | Unsigned Artists | Crossdressing Relationship
BBW Personals | Latino Personals | Black Personals | Crossdresser Chat | Crossdressing QA
Biker Personals | CD Relationship | Crossdressing Dating | FTM Relationship | Dating | TG Relationship


The crossdressing community is one that needs to stick together and continue to be there for each other for whatever one needs.
We are always trying to improve the forum to better serve the crossdresser in all of us.

Browse Crossdressers By State