Our own Julie Slowinski writes a wonderful post every Friday for my blog.
Today's is worthwhile reading for all of those out there trying to figure themselves out.
https://kandis328772669.wordpress.com/
I am so pleased to have her write for us every week!!
Visit Kandi's Land (http://www.kandis-land.com/) daily! Nothing but positive and uplifting posts!
Pictures and stories of every time out: https://www.flickr.com/photos/131254150@N06/.
Great article. LOL but it is no less confusing about how one defines themselves. My favorite part was Julie just telling us she is sticking with crossdresser. I believe I will too. Thanks for sharing
Teri Ray Rural Idaho Girl.
Well Kandi, Julie did a fine job on that article and discussion. It really tends to put a good deal of what is often confusing into a more sensible context. Labels in an extremely variable and highly individualistic environment are always a problem because the nature of the environment itself makes creating labels next to impossible if the expectation are that it be inclusive of some population. That perspective tends to support the somewhat naturalistic view of let everything justify itself and forget about labels.
For example, a jar labelled "Connectors" that contains bolts, nuts, and screws is not all that useful if you are looking for a specific kind or size of connector. But dividing that collection into bolts, nuts, and screws in separate bottles helps. Then subdividing them further by size is even better. Problem is you end up with an awful lot of bottles if the population is highly diverse. It can be just as much work finding the right bottle as it is sorting through one bottle with all varieties to find the right size. If you access your collection frequently then having them in separate bottles with different labels could save time, but it also allows for eventually mixing sizes in each bottle by putting trial selections back into the wrong bottle.
I guess the message is that in a closed system, randomization (entropy, in physics) eventually wins. However, labels allow us to talk about things, even if they are randomized and so we love to out labels on things because we love to talk about things that interest us and we need to distinguish those things from other similar looking things. That said, when it comes to those who don't seem to be able to fit the nice categories based on something essentially immutable such as sex which is 99% binary, using labels that are dynamic is useful. Thus gender fluid tends to create a better image of what happens than non-binary which is more fixed and less dynamic. In this sense, crossdresser is a bit like putting all the bolts, nuts, and screws in one bottle labelled connectors. In some ways it is far more clear than other subdivided classifications except that not all people who are gender variant crossdress. Oops, sorry about that, but it does show the difficulty of applying labels to much of anything.
Julie contributed a wonderful piece to your blog and, if nothing else, provokes a great deal of thought about the always messy subject of Labels.
Thanks, good read. I have the perspective of being a senior citizen who is just now beginning to understand myself. I am a small town person and all the labels only confuse me as I was indoctrinated and raised to not accept what I have realized that I am. That has made it a bit more of a challenge to have to unravel a lifetime of indoctrination.
At the end of the day the old saying that people can call me anything as long as they don?t call me late for dinner. The young kids are more open about these things than us old folks so it will get better for the younger generation.
Interesting piece. The muddiest part of this conversation is the term “crossdresser(s)”. I’m not sure how many in this community are aware, but that term has a very specific definition in the wider LGBT community, and that is “a person who dresses as the opposite gender for sexual gratification”. Most of you would say that you only dress to express yourself, for fun, or to relieve stress. These basically all boil down to you expressing some part of yourself, no matter how small, that identifies differently than societal expectations of your gender. This puts you in the trans/bi-gender/gender fluid/etc. category. You don’t have to need or want to transition in order to be transgender. That’s the thinking in the larger community by and large anyway.
What I think is interesting is that there is a set of this community who is very resistant to be considered part of the LGBT community. I’ve never really understood that, and I have to wonder if there’s some sort of latent homophobia at play there.
Kandi,
Julie does write a good article , the subject of labels can become heated at times , why ? I question more now .
The whole process of deciding what we are needs those boxes , how can we find oursleves without guiding labels , the more we delve into it the more the labels become blurred . I found I searched for the right label to define myself so I could explain my needs to others . When you have to explain to people close you need some sort of plausable explanation especially if you are in need of further help through therapy .
After going through that process I realised that becoming Teresa was the only way of finding a balance , in the process of comfortably accepting myself I found I had less and less use of labels . The people that matter to me are the ones I meet in everyday life , labels to most of the public mean very little . they either accept what you are or they don't no matter what label you personally choose to use . After three years of being full time I can't remember the last time I had to explain myself with a label .
Perhaps we should consider other members of society don't approach us and tell us about their sexual preferences or their gender situation so why do we feel the need to say to them , " I'm only a crossdresser " or " I'm a transwoman " or simply " I'm trans " or " I'm non-binary " . If they accept you from what they see and are comforatble with that then where is the problem ? I certainly haven't encountered one .
Thanks Kandi,
I enjoyed reading Julie post this morning, keep them coming
Good article from Julie.
I've spent a lot of time over the years thinking about what 'label' describes me. Like any other deterministic labels, few seem to fit. I have determined that I am neither a man or a woman, yet, I am both a man and a woman. Transgender feels like the best fit to me. Probably because I see it as an overarching inclusive grouping, like Julie. I feel that there are other 'sub-labels' such as 'cross-dresser' or 'non-binary' that I can associate with myself to some degree, but the don't seem to describe me completely. One problem with labels is that different people have different images of what each label means. So when I might describe myself with one label to clarify myself to someone else, they may be thinking something else. I originally thought I was a 'cross-dresser', simply a person with a Y chromosome that prefers to wear clothing marketed to women. However, I came to find out that some others, including the American Psychiatric Association's DSM associates sexual gratification with the classification of 'cross-dressing'. I dropped that label since it doesn't bring the same image to mind for some others that it does to to me. I'll stick with transgender.
I like labels as they help guide me to better understanding. I believe very few are fixed in concrete because as mentioned above people can get pretty wound up about defending their own definition, or why when they look, act, talk and walk like a duck, they want o be labeled a canary. In general, I let others waste their time on all that. These are our group issues over labels. The general public could care less and definitely do not need all the details unless they ask for them. I tell everyone I am "Trans" or "Transgender", and that works fine almost 99.9% of the time. Very few delve deeper and it is never about the label but rather where I am in my transition, or sometimes the Why's and How's of it.
I think you are correct, as look how many Crossdressers seem to go out of their way to make sure we all know that they are not Gay.Originally Posted by Micki_Finn
I have been doing a Zoom with a group of CD/TG every week since the pandemic and I swear every single time one of the CD's ends up sharing some of their porn collection. I guess so we all know that they are not Gay? I'm honestly not sure why else...
Last edited by Robertacd; 01-29-2021 at 09:09 PM.
I think this is true. I am particularly put off by the rather popular meme that says, ?Just because I dress like a girl, that doesn?t mean I?m gay.? Seems like it should be pretty obvious, at least to those in the community, that these two things are independent. More importantly, does it even matter? Rather than deny this stereotype, seems like a better approach is to question why the stereotype is even a problem.
Well said, Micki. Labels and the definition of those labels is messy business. I especially like what you say about those who are gender variant in some way but refuse to identify as LGBTQ. I think it goes a lot deeper with most than latent homophobia. To me it goes to realizing that they don't fit the expectations with regard to the assumed sex-gender link that we think is there but actually is not or is far less than we traditionally think.
I think it is mostly the fear of being on the "them" side of an us-them contrast and conflict. In other words, fear of not conforming and having to show another side of yourself that has likely been hidden and a secret for a very long time.
That said, if one has the idea that gays regularly crossdress then the homophobia card is probably a major factor. However, that is still a part of an us-them contrast which leads some to think of you as being a part of a less than desirable group.
The truth is though the majority of gays are only interested in males for any kind of deep relationship (and of course lesbians for females). Gays, by definition, have difficulty relating to females romantically and sex with a female is not something that interests them. And often those who crossdress are viewed, correctly, as being, at least in part, women. Gays often have good relationships with gay accepting women, but that does not extend to romance or sex. Once again, labels really get messy and, in my opinion, the best approach is to forget the labels and simply accept people on the individual level. Conformity to an assumed higher definition or category is not important at the purely individual level. When you are interested in a person it is not likely to be on account of them being a card carrying member of some labelled group of people. It is because you have some commonalities as well as some interesting differences. Some degree of "chemical compatibility" that forms the foundation upon which to create a relationship of some kind. At the insect level, your pheromones smell nice. Might also be a part of human to human attraction.
GretchenM,
While I agree with your assumptions I wonder if you are being too specific on the sexuality side .
My chosen labels if I use any are more to do with my gender situation and not my sexual needs and preferences . The debate about comfortably fitting in with the LGBTQ communtiy could be a possible red herring and something that has been chewed over on the forum many times . Personally whether I support that community or not has no bearing on everyday life . If we're honest with ourselves most of us have a phobia over something .
The debate about labels and where we fit is more to do with internal politics , some use them to help guide themselves and others and others use them as verbal weapons , I'm finding it harder to understand why it's necessary to attack another just because they don't comply with the majority . I found falling back on my gut feeling is often the best option .
Basically it comes down to needs , do you want a lasting realtionship or do you just want sex ? Being slightly cynical you could say sex will usually come at a price , a good relationship is for free irrespective of your chosen gender or theirs .
The fear you mention could partly be down to wondering what price you will eventually have to pay .
Last edited by Teresa; 01-30-2021 at 09:56 AM.
I find these recent comments reflect a conversation I had with a younger GG and a guy who had been married with children and grandchildren but divorced and then remarried a male partner , they are both members of my art group . ( Obviously this was before lockdown ) . The lady was trying to get her head round his situation and mine , so I pointed out that the one big difference was the guy's situation was hidden unless he chose to divulge it , (which he did on one occasion by saying , " My husband is meeting me for lunch !" ) . I then went onto say that being TG can only be shown in a visual way , appearing in male mode and telling people isn't the reality of the situation . They didn't associate me with being gay but I did say carefully that I wasn't because it was usually the first association and they both said it hadn't crossed their minds .
As I replied in another thread we often assume too much and often wrongly , being gay is no big deal anymore , gender issues are following very close behind . I will add the guy isn't a member of the LGBTQ communtiy , he says he doesn't need them as he's perfectly happy with his decisions and I added I felt the same way about being TG . The great thing is we all share the same love of art , it's a great leveller both in gender and sexuality .
Last edited by Teresa; 01-30-2021 at 02:24 PM.
This thread had me doing a lot of self reflection. If you had asked me 5 years ago if I identified with the LGBT community I would have said no for sure, but at that time I had never been to any LGBT clubs and had not really met anyone who was openly gay, Tran, etc. My working knowledge was very limited then. The one thing that sets me apart from a number of crossdressers is that I have no guilt about crossdressing, not that I can dress in front of everyone. That being said, Micki mentioned something that got me thinking. I actually grew into the LGBT community in my own mind once I began spending time with and speaking with many people in that community. I have to say it has been a great learning experience not to mention a lot of fun. If people want to label me, that is fine because I am comfortable in my own skin so to speak. It does not matter to me if I am in a club and someone assumes one thing or the other. It only matters how they and I interact with each other. So far, I have been openly accepted so I feel like I am part of the community regardless of how I am perceived by them.
My only point. If I had limited myself to excluding myself from the LGBT community, I would have missed out. Just something to think about. As I learned, nobody is going to bite you if you go into a gay club while crossdressed. If you have never given it a try, you might be pleasantly surprised. Granted many will never want to venture out and that is understandable as well.
Definitely thought provoking. Thanks.
Sandi
Labels? We don't need no stinkin labels. I know who I am and what I am. I am a comfortable loving person that enjoys being in both camps. Just not at the same time.
Call me anything you want. It will not have an effect on me. I will answer to you.
You might not need a label, but everyone else referring to you does, after all your given name is nothing more than a label. Labels exist so people can converse and understand what each other is talking about. Isn't it much easier to say someone is gay than try to describe? Now add the rest of the gay/trans alphabet!
Somehow labeling can be very important in a group level. Specially if this group share a relevant amount of pains, needs, backgrounds, anxieties, joys, interests... and so on. It helps a lot if you feel inappropriate or just suffering for being true to your feelings to find a group of people similar to you... without labeling that would be a lot harder. We are social animals, grouping is unavoidable and therefore also labeling.
The messy part is generalization.
Last edited by char GG; 01-31-2021 at 09:45 AM. Reason: Not necessary to quote the post directly before yours
Kandi and Julie: I liked your posts on the "Kandi Land" site, and I checked out the youtube video Julie mentioned. I learned quite a bit from it. Based on my very limited knowledge, "Crossdresser" was a man who likes and admires women and their clothes and other items. I realize there are many facets to this and they do somewhat change the meaning. But I am not sure if and when these terms and labels will change and evolve as more discussion and research is done.
Thanks, Suzih
Suzih,
A crossdressers or transvestite ( it is the same thing ) bacially means wearing clothes of the opposite sex or gender , the basic interpretaions has no other connotation .
On paper I could be labelled a CDer but living full time male mode feels like crossdressing now as I don't wish to be seen as a man .
The problem is new labels keep popping up , some within the community don't recognise them so it's obvious the general public won't , what they think is more important to me now because I'm out there in society as Teresa .
Kandi's blog is amazing, but it will take you a long time to go through it as she is one of the most prolific bloggers I follow.
The only label I actively avoid is transgender, because I am not a woman, and it would be disingenuous to those who are genuinely trans women and men if I were to use it.
Posting Permissions
