Problems at home

[skirtingtoday]

I found this web page recently which could apply to a lot of home problems. What do you think?

For me it seems to consider skirted/dressed men as transvestites which is more that most of us here consider they are. To me a TV is one who not only DRESSES but ACTS like the opposite sex.

http://www.vernoncoleman.com/andwhydosome.htm

[Stu]

I think there are two very discrete issues here. If a man finds some kind of psychological fulfilment in dressing as a woman, or experimenting with some alter ego, then that's fine - the human mind is immensely complex and crossdressing is pretty harmless, so long as partners and close family members are understanding and not getting hurt. However, I guess like the majority of the guys who come here, the very LAST thing I would want to look like, whether in a skirt or trousers, is a woman. My issue is an ideological as well as a pragmatic one. It is ideological in respect of the fact that the present cultural norms are inherently unfair and, this time, it is males who are disadvantaged by illogical social restrictions on a whole range of very basic garment styles which should be available to both sexes. It is pragmatic in terms of both physical comfort, and offering diversity in choice of styles.

To me, a "transvestite" is the precise opposite of what this cafe stands for - a transvestite is a man who uses his dress style to adopt a feminine persona, while I use clothing to express my own persona, which I like to think is principled, pragmatic and wholly masculine.

Stu

[crfriend]

For me it seems to consider skirted/dressed men as transvestites which is more that most of us here consider they are. To me a TV is one who not only DRESSES but ACTS like the opposite sex.

I see the thrust of the guy's thesis, but I feel that he sticks to the "conventional" notion of "crossdressing" and doesn't touch firmly on the fashion, style, or other aspects of the notion -- and in so failing does little service to the man who wants to rid himself of "trouser tyranny". Just once, I'd like to see a well-written piece that keeps the focus on the clothes proper and leaves sexuality (perceived or otherwise) explicitly out of the mix.

One of the reasons that the term "crossdressing" (and it's tarted-up identical-twin "transvestism") isn't particularly welcome here is the overloading that the term has acquired over the years, and that is specifically the "attempt to pass" on the part of the practitioner -- i.e. "role-playing". That facet immediately draws the attention of the casual observer thereby contaminating the vision of this forum which is to get skirtlike garments accepted as an option for men in the modern Western world. If we cannot divorce clothing styles from gender or sex then we might as well give up and put our pants back on.

[GerdG]

- a transvestite is a man who uses his dress style to adopt a feminine persona, while I use clothing to express my own persona, which I like to think is principled, pragmatic and wholly masculine.
Stu

Stu, I very much like your description.

[skirtingtheissue]

The crossdressing community in the US considers "transvestite" to be an outmoded term to be avoided. I was once a member of Tri-Ess, who have their own online forum. I discovered that I was not one of "them" (I don't role-play, want to look like a woman, use a "femme" name, or do anything feminine from the neck up), though in a very strict technical definition some might call me a crossdresser since I wear some women's clothes. I don't consider myself one.

I identify much more closely with the Skirtcafé community. I like the masculine idea of wearing a kilt or skirt simply because it's unbifurcated. But I also like a slight feminine touch, in the skirt and possibly elsewhere, because I can't deny there is something feminine inside me. The "Freestyle Fashion" board addresses this side (to quote, "Discussion of fashion elements and looks that are traditionally considered somewhat "femme" but are presented in a masculine context.") That's me. I like such fashion elements, worn by me, clearly looking like a guy. I like pushing the envelope of what a guy can wear. For example, whether wearing skirt or pants, I sometimes wear a gold necklace with single pearl. It's me. It has nothing to do with relaxing after a stressful workday by adopting a feminine alter-ego. Let alone "attempting to pass".

To answer Skirtingtoday's query, I don't think the article adds much to our discussions of skirts. In providing a "teaser" for his £9.95 book, Coleman is emphasizing the secretive nature of crossdressing, the fear that brings, the joys some guys find in "something soft, silky or frilly", and the duality of a male/female conflict within some guys... the act of dressing being "a temporary respite from the responsibilities and demands of being male." It's a dressing-up hobby. That's not what WE are about. Some of us have admitted to owning some frilly skirts that have not and will not be seen in public, but that's not our main source of happiness or excitement.

I'm not sure what to make of Coleman. He seems to be a prolific writer who writes on many subjects but probably isn't a trained expert in most of them. By the way, the study he mentions dates from 1995.

[pleated]

That article was from 2004. As well as the one promoting his book he has three other articles on "cross-dressing/transvestism" from 2003 and one from 2006. (He does self-identify as CD/TV in one or two those earlier articles)
I only looked at obviously related (by title) articles but did not see anything to show that his ideas on men wearing dresses or skirts has evolved in any way or even that he is still interested in the subject.

[STEVIE]

How many times have we heard it said that a guy should be more "in touch with his feminine side"?
At some point in my life, I was so "in touch", that I gave it a name. At home, that created a hell of a friction and by home, I mean paternal and marital.
At some level, I was aware of the duality and decidedly uncomfortable, so how could I expect a reasoned reaction from other people.
Over the past two years or so, I have been enabled to reach a singularity with my "other side". The skirts etc., I can more enjoy without the pressure of trying to "pass". Something, which is futile for most guys anyway.
My point is that I had to go through that to reach where I am now, a more rounded and complete individual.
It was all part of the journey which we all make in our own unique ways. I can't say that it was all good, or bad, it just was.
For anyone who reads this, I can only add good luck with your's!
Steve.

[crfriend]

How many times have we heard it said that a guy should be more "in touch with his feminine side"?

And, like Stevie, how many men have caught vicious amounts of flak for trying to do so?

I suspect there's actually much more to it than just a "feminine side", although men are raised to suppress supposedly "feminine" traits roughly from birth; it's more a matter of self-acceptance of one's own whole self. The BBC ran a good story on the topic the other day called, "In defence of narcissism" which very pointedly illustrates that if one cannot accept himself he cannot accept others around him. I had suspected that for a number of years, but this was the first time I actually saw anything like it in print.

I do not believe that it's a matter of "gettting in touch with one's 'feminine side'" -- whatever that may be -- but rather of accepting the whole and, crucially, not suppressing parts of it. This does not mean that one needs to "carry his heart on his sleeve" -- any more than women do -- but rather have a level of self-awareness and self-acceptance that will broaden the range of tools that one has at his disposal as he goes through life. In short, if we cannot -- or are not "allowed" to -- accept half of ourselves how can we ever accept others? Is it necessary that guys, at least in stereotype, stink at relationships? Do we do it to ourselves, or is it done to us -- frequently by those closest to us?

For anyone who reads this, I can only add good luck with your's!

Thanks. The jury is still out on how I'm doing with mine, but I am richer for the journey and more of a man for it as well. I now know that there is no shame in empathy or emotion, and those can be extremely useful and powerful tools used wisely.

[Dragearen]

Femininity/masculinity are very culturally defined terms anyway, and have very little to do with one's sex. Just thought I'd throw that out there.

Some other statistics and such that may be helpful for the conversation at hand are:
1. Almost all "cross-dressers" are heterosexual, married men (and, arguably, quite a number of teenage girls as well).
2. Most people who have experimented once or twice with homosexuality are, in fact, religious extremists and fundamentalists.
3. Transgender, transexual (lumped together into trans or transvestite) and cross-dressing are three very different ideas. Transgender is someone who acts like the opposite GENDER (a socially constructed and defined modal personality that is usually tied to one's sex). Transsexual is someone who has undergone surgery to become the opposite SEX (a biologically determined body structure). A cross-dresser is... Well, just someone who likes to wear the other sex's clothes. Also very culturally defined.

Currently I see at least American society as being very hypocritical right now. A man is criticized for being feminine by homophobes and other people who view it as "strange" and "unnatural", and a man is criticized for being masculine by more radical feminists and people who are convinced that they're being a "misogynist."

All in all, I agree with the idea that we should strive to implement suppressed aspects of our personality, not necessarily try to be either "feminine" or "masculine", just be genuine.

[STEVIE]

Dragearen,
Point number 2, I must take exception to.
Where, exactly, did that little bit of "wisdom" originate?
Remember, there are lies, damn lies and statistics.
Steve.

[kiltedBob]

I too disagree with point # two. Bob in Oregon

[Milfmog]

I'm not sure that I disagree with statistic 2; but that is simply because I have not seen any evidence one way or the other, it certainly flies in the face of intuition. Perhaps Dragearen would like to provide a reference to support that contention?

Although point 1 is more in keeping with generally accepted wisdom, I have never seen that supported by specific evidence; however I do not feel the need to challenge that, possibly because it agrees with my prejudices?

Statistic 3 is of course not a statistic at all; it is a set of definitions and conclusions drawn from those definitions.

If we disregard the three numbered points, I am broadly in agreement with the main thrust of his post; that the concepts of masculinity and femininity are largely a societal invention.

Have fun,


Ian.

[Dragearen]

I'm not sure that I disagree with statistic 2; but that is simply because I have not seen any evidence one way or the other, it certainly flies in the face of intuition. Perhaps Dragearen would like to provide a reference to support that contention?

Although point 1 is more in keeping with generally accepted wisdom, I have never seen that supported by specific evidence; however I do not feel the need to challenge that, possibly because it agrees with my prejudices?

Statistic 3 is of course not a statistic at all; it is a set of definitions and conclusions drawn from those definitions.

If we disregard the three numbered points, I am broadly in agreement with the main thrust of his post; that the concepts of masculinity and femininity are largely a societal invention.

Have fun,


Ian.

On point #1, doing a quick search found this site. http://www.cornbury.org/node/3 Not the same source, but it serves.

Unfortunately I couldn't find my reference for point #2, as it's kind of a hard topic to research. It also may not be entirely true throughout the nation, that may be an Alaska specific statistic. I really don't remember, sorry. Also what I'm talking about is not people in the closet, rather people who are very religious that decide to experiment. And usually don't do it again.

I guess I should've labeled them as points rather than statistics, since really only the first two were. Basically my message with all of this is - does it really matter? I mean, construct your own identity, sure, and you may have your own boundaries. But for society, does it matter?

[crfriend]

I guess I should've labeled them as points rather than statistics, since really only the first two were. Basically my message with all of this is - does it really matter? I mean, construct your own identity, sure, and you may have your own boundaries. But for society, does it matter?

Probably, yes, they should have been labelled as "points", but it's also worth recalling that "statistics" can be bent in many different ways to line up with the presenters' views. For instance, if one polled the guys here, how many would report wearing skirts on a reasonably frequent basis? How about if one polled a high-school (secondary school)? A prison? The general public? One would find that the returned numbers would wander all over the place and not be significant. However, the mere presense of places like this, and the existence of the comparative plethora of "orthodox" crossdressing fora points up that there is, indeed, an undercurrent of interest in general western society.

Now, for the question of (to paraphrase) "Does it really matter to society?", I would have to assert yes. It matters precisely because it is different. Even though many of us wear skirts on a very regular basis, it's worth noting how infrequent our encounters are with other guys so attired save for planned meetings. I can count one in my lifetime, or just perhaps two -- no more. This labels me as a societal anomaly and, while I seem to be able to make my way in the world, I must remain aware and careful. Society, like a pack of bullies in the schoolyard, can be a fickle thing and can lash out in unexpected ways -- especially when times are difficult. So, yes, it does matter to "society" what those who may not adhere to the "norms" may wear about their nether regions.

[Milfmog]

Dragearen,

Thanks for the Cornbury link. I've not come across them before and the site may reward some further reading when I get a chance.

Have fun,


Ian.