OK. So the question is...

[Absaroka]

I wanted to expand on something I left out. I am happy being a man and suspect that if I woke up female some day I might quickly start looking into SRS to put me back the way I was.

There are a lot of "male" attitudes I like and "female" ones that irritate me. The idea of understanding and mastering physical objects is I think male and womens inability to do this irritates me no end. Just as we annoy women for not asking directions womens inability to read a map irritates me no end. Yes I know this is total stereotype.

As a kid I though that women had an unfair advantage. Ladies first and don't hit girls and that sort of thing. And I thought women had a completely unfair advantage in that they were portrayed as being able to lead men around by their hormones. That sort of thing still annoys me even as I enjoy having it done to me. Georgia's expression take no prisoner heels says it all and sometimes I want to feel that power.

Or lets move into the arts. I love Chicago style blues. Muddy Waters, Willie Dixon and the like. So does my wife but she is a musician. I don't like a lot of folk singers a la Joan Baez who she adores. We both love gospel music.

Many times back when they were alive I went to see foks like Muddy Waters. In White venues the audience was often predominantly male. In mixed venues there would be a lot of Black women but only a few White women. Those who were there however were often passionate about the music.

I think there is a different sense to how Muddy Waters expresses his emotions vs. Judy Collins. Both were geniuses and very emotional performers. But Muddy always struck me as so masculine. Judy so feminine. Judy expressing sorrow over trouble. Muddy promising more trouble in return. And both tapping into something deep in our psyche, Judy expressing something I would rather not feel. Passivity perhaps.

So where does that leave someone like Koko Taylor who was so fearsome that she intimidated all the men with her singing? Judy says this is how I feel, please understand. Koko says this is how I feel, deal with it. Not with words but with the music itself.

As everyone says this is a continuum. But to me in general I experience male musicians as more emotional than women, probably because they express more of what I feel.

If I ever met the woman I soemtimes fantasize about being I would either fall instantly in love or run as fast as I possibly could. Or more likely both. Other times I would really enjoy her as a good friend who I could talk to about whatever and she would know what I meant. So yes even the femme fantasy that I say is really just a part of the masculine me is pretty schizophrenic. But no one said this was simple.

Absaroka

[Curly(SO)]

Hi Georgia,

Masculine/feminine, to me, describes a surface-level, or slightly sub-surface level, set of behaviors. And to me, there is no feminine me without a masculine counterpoint - no masculine without a feminine counterpoint. It's like black v. white (the colors, not the people) - it is the stark differences between the two which make them visible. Femininity, to me, is a social construct, and is wrapped up in the sexuality/sensuality continuum. (OK... gg's, jump in here anytime, because I can feel a trip to Virginia's woodshed coming on...).

Briefly put, I feel feminine when I put on a pair of take-no-prisoners-heels, strut out into the world and there's usually some sort of saucy attitude going on with it. Do I feel feminine when hollering for the Dallas Cowboys to finally get their game going again? No. Do I feel female while doing that? Of course. I feel female all the time, every waking moment, and all of the sleeping ones too. Do I feel masculine hollering for the Cowboys? No, not really. It is, to me, neither a masculine/feminine thing. It's just me hollering for the Cowboys.

Feeling feminine, to me, has nothing to do with caring, openness, caregiving, etc. And I don't feel feminine when I'm cleaning the bathtub or doing the laundry. It is a fleeting thing, this feeling feminine - something that comes with the situation I'm in, how I relate to a man, whether he's a lover or a co-worker or a client, and no, I never *feel* feminine (or even think about it for that matter) when I'm relating to another gg. And I don't always feel feminine in every interaction with a man. It is a fleeting, flirtatious, way of approaching the world.

I so agree with you, that is exactly how I feel! You have summed up perfectly my own thoughts on femininity...I'd love to hear if other GGs also feel the same.

Love,
Curly.

[Gardenia_SO]

This is a great thread! Good question, Georgia. I can't really answer it, but it's fascinating to read through the reponses.

I agree with both Georgia and Curly... there are times I feel feminine and times I don't. There are times I feel like I should feel feminine (like when I'm getting gussied up for a party) and times society makes me feel masculine (like when I'm working out or watching football). I actually feel feminine or masculine because I'm doing things that are traditionally feminine or masculine.

I wonder how much of the feminine/masculine traits are actually the result of society's views on men and women. Women are raised to be compassionate, caring and open, while men are raised to be tough, logical and unfeeling. It's taught to us from birth.

Maybe this is weird, but I feel most "feminine" when I have cramps or I'm relating to another woman. Dressing in a feminine outfit sometimes makes me feel feminine, but I find that I have to be in the mood to feel girly. I tried on a wedding dress recently and because I wasn't feeling all that great, I felt more like a bull in a china shop than a girly bride!

I guess my point is that GGs and TG/CDs look at the definition of masculine and feminine in totally different ways.

[CJ]

Hi all,

Well, Georgia, now that you've sort of rephrased the question, it's a little clearer to me what you're looking for.

You ask: Has society so constrained males, as a whole (disclaimer, disclaimer) that they are not comfortable with poetry, with beautiful music, with whatever is defined as feminine in that odd boy-world ya'll were raised in?

My answer: No, society has not so constrained males that they are uncomfortable with poetry, beautiful music, etc. However, society has so constrained males that they are uncomfortable expressing their appreciation for poetry, beautiful music, etc.

How many times have I been teased, taunted, and beaten as a kid because I was good with words or at drawing and playing music? for being, in other words, a sissy? Too many to remember. How many times was I cast out of the group (whatever group there was) because of my ineptitude at physical sports and testosterone-driven mayhem? It still happens today.

If I lived in a world that encouraged men to talk about how they feel when faced with both the agony and the splendour of life, I think I would be far less gender-confused. I want what women have: by birthright, the expectation that I will not be condemned for relating "poetically" (rather than "rationally" or "mechanically") to the world around me. I want this. It's the only true desire I've ever had; it's superseded all else. And I burn, and I burn, and I burn...

But I don't live in such a world. At least not yet. But maybe my niece will. Or her children or grand-children.

Love,
CJ

[DonnaT]

Has society so constrained males, as a whole (disclaimer, disclaimer) that they are not comfortable with poetry, with beautiful music, with whatever is defined as feminine in that odd boy-world ya'll were raised in?

No, I don't think so. I'm quite comfortable with things regarded by some to be feminine, like music, art, romantic movies. Never got the hang of poetry, however.

Now, there may be pockets of society in certain locals, where boys may be uncomfortable, but as a whole, I don't think society has that kind of power.

[Sally]

Hi Virginia,

Don't get me wrong, I acknowledge all you say and if it all feels like a gift to you then it's right for you, that's all which matters. When I say that I personally don't regard 'it' as a gift, what I'm saying is that I believe 'it' is all just a part of me which goes to make up the complete me. It's the attitudes of other people which forced me into situations during my life which caused the traumas and down times I had to endure. If I had've been allowed to grow up and be free to express outwardly how I felt inwardly, then I would have been perfectly happy, but seeking peace and happiness I was pushed into taking steps to bring the outer appearance more into sync with the inner feelings.

It's only a man created illusion of what a female and what a male should look like, how they should act, how they should dress and the roles they play in day to day activities. Anthropologists have discovered that there have been people like us for thousands of years, it's not something which has recently evolved the last few hundred years or so. I believe that things such as empathy, caring, understanding, hugging etc are all qualities which everyone of both sexes harbour. But, the illusion of what a macho, beer drinking, girl chasing, crotch scratching male is supposed to look like and and how he's supposed to act doesn't include those qualities, and to many people it seems that males who exhibit those qualities are weak. I believe that we all have these qualities naturally and they don't come under the heading of 'gifts'. What I would categorise as a gift is the musical talents I have, because they come outside the usual physical and psychological qualities which go to make me a living human being.

In regards to your competitive nature, well both men and women have competitive natures, it's just that some are more dedicated to the cause than others, and it's not really a guy or a girl thing exclusively. Take tennis players e.g. Maria Sharapova, Venus and Serena Williams etc. Those women hate to be defeated and when it happens it shows all over their faces and in their demeanour. They are all very aggressive towards defeating their opponents every bit as competitive and aggressive as their male counterparts are, e.g. Andre Aggassi, Roger Federra or Pete Sampras ever was, yet we've all seen these men and women outwardly cry in front of the world when they win a tournament. Being strong and aggressive doesn't mean that a person doesn't also experience feelings of empathy, softness, love or the need to let their emotions out by crying. Crying releases our emotions and pent up tension, anger or aggression, and crying is a natural human attribute which was meant to give a definite result to a situation, and it was never meant to be just a girl thing, it just became a girly thing included in the illusions of what men and women should or should not do. Having the belief that one can win is an ingredient of success. As you know, if you or anyone else steps onto the platform with a negative attitude then they're half way to being defeated, be they men or women participants.

Similar to you, I also like who and what I am, I don't have a problem with it at all, my problems have all been created by the attitudes of other people. If I'd been left alone to live as my senses told me then everything would have been ok. I hark back to the illusions which have been created down through the ages which specify the differences in the roles of men and women, men do this and women do that, men dress like this and women dress like that etc. These illusions are responsible for so many of our problems.
It's because of these illusions, and the need to conform to them so that the quality of my life improved which is responsible for me over the years seeking help to present more and more as a woman. Passing for me allowed me to move about publicly without being harrassed or belittled, but passing was never something which was a do or die thing, it has more to do with the safety issue.

I have absolutely no idea what a male or a female is supposed to feel like or how anybody else, either male or female, feels like. I only know how I feel, and everything else about female or male feeling are only things I've read or heard. Some I can say, yes I feel that at times, other things I have never experienced, so if some of those feelings are present within me and some are absent then does that disqualify me from being either a male or a female, or maybe I am somewhere inbetween?, but does it really matter in the end, does it make me a bad person, does it make me someone to fear? Absolutely not. What I can say though is that doing the things which history documents as being assigned to women feels far better to me that those which are assigned to men. In the beginning it wasn't essential for me to wear female clothes, although it did feel much better than wearing male ones, but now it's essential to me because wearing womens clothing makes me feel more in tune with what going on inside my head. I'll put it this way. If it was the norm for women to go around wearing big cardboard boxes and have one leg tied up behind their neck (heavens forbid, but I'm just giving an extreme example lol ) then that's what I would have to do, because that would then show the world my inner feelings, no matter what maley bits I may be adorned with.

In conclusion let me just say this. Back in my early twenties I suffered a collapsed lung which required an operation to correct the cause. Post op as I lay in hospital the nurses told me to lay a particualar way and this caused me much discomfort. Later when I drew this to the surgeons attention he explicity told me that it was important for me to get into a position which felt comfortable and caused me no pain. I can vividly remember him saying that if I lay in a particular position and it caused pain then it was harmful to me and he pressed the point that pain is our systems' way of messaging us that something is wrong, and we need to change that situation so we become pain free.
Applying that analogy to my gender preference, there is absolutely no argument as to which one causes me to be 'pain free'. None of us need other people to try and suggest what is right or wrong for us, no matter how many degrees or diplomas they may accumulate, when it's all boiled down, we're the only ones who really know.

It gets back to what I repeatedly say. If anyone is not of our ilk then they can never know how or what we truly feel no matter how many times we tell them. If I hit someone over the head with a pot I can say I know the pain they're feeling because that type of physical pain is something every man woman and child experience. But, if I tell someone that dressing and living as a woman feels markedly better than as a man, then unless they're of my ilk then they can never know the real feelings I experience either way, no matter what words I use. We can say it feels good or it feels right and it is right, but unfortunately for most people that's not enough, they look for more tangible evidence, so I find it easier to show them than try to explain the feelings. Trying to tell them brings lots of head nodding and blank faces, showing them brings wide eyes and lots of 'OH's and AH's'...lol....

Kind Regards and have a good weekend , Oh ok, it's still Thursday evening over there isn't it. lol...

Sally.

[CJ]

Hi all,

Sally,

That was a most excellent post! Most excellent! You've put into words much of what I also feel. Thanks.

Heh. Not to play devil's advocate (okay, maybe a little ) but this is what the women in my inner circle--mainly Marie and Carole--have been saying regarding the whole "you just don't understand if you haven't been there" approach: "It isn't necessary nor required that we understand you in order for us to love you as you are." At first, I was forced to admit that this made a lot of sense. I'm like that, as well; although I don't always understand why a loved one--friend, lover, family member, etc.--does the things he or she does, I love them anyway. But, then, the more I thought about it, the more I was plagued by a nagging doubt. This doubt arose from the fact that we don't love strangers in quite the same way we love people we've known for a long time. Put another way: yes, people who've known me for a long time love me as I am even though, once it was revealed to them, they can't figure out why I like (and need) to dress and pass as a woman. The fact is (and I have plenty of evidence in my own experience to support this), they will not (or cannot) come to love me as I am if we are both strangers to each other. They shy away; they stay away from the "abnormality" of gender variance. Put yet another way: as Daniel, I've made many friends who eventually got to know (or, at least, to know about) "Christina" but, as "Christina," I've never, ever made a single friend (that was not either gender-variant or already eminently trans-friendly, I mean).

You may be a Gandhi, an Einstein, an Albert Schweitzer, or a St-Francis-of-Assisi, for that matter... if you're gender-variant, forget it: you're condemned to live a very lonely life. Generally, people approach (and let themselves be approached by) other people on the basis of style, not substance. And this is where the "power of society" lies. This is what hurts. This is what kills. We can deny the "power of society" all we want, but we need only be a male who walks down a busy downtown street at noon dressed as a woman to appreciate the extent of that power.

I recently saw a 90-minute documentary called Gendernauts, filmed in San Francisco. Mention was often made in the film that San Francisco was the "Transgender Mecca." When I told Marie, half-jokingly, that I need to go live in San Francisco, she said, "What makes you think that you'll be a different person over there?" I answered: "No, I won't be a different person; I'll be the same person. But I'll be a person that lives in a city that has laws and by-laws in support and in defense of his identity, not a person who lives in a city where there are laws on the books that make it illegal for me to be who I am." This, to me, is the most frustrating part of people's inability to understand what it means to be gender-variant. In San Francisco, people don't get picked up by the police just because they're crossdressers or transsexuals (something that's happened to me twice, here, in Montreal). I told Marie, "Do you know how much it hurts, how humiliating it can be, to know that you're a good person, an upright person, a "productive member of society," and yet be treated as a criminal because your gender identity doesn't meet accepted or expected standards?" It hurts like bubbles hell, it does! And, no, I still believe that non-gender-variant people don't know how much that hurts and how humiliating that is. It's not part of their experience. Carole tried to counter this by saying that it happens all the time that law-abiding citizens are mistakenly arrested by police. True, true. But with this difference: such people are singled out because of what the police think they've done, not because of who they are. There's an assumption on the part of the ignorant that a man dressed as a woman has to be trying to impersonate a member of the opposite sex in order to commit some sort of fraud. How Neanderthal is that? How Cro-Magnon? How pea-brained?

Society has power. It has power to shape and to mold our identities and it has power to punish those whose identity ill fits that mold. And, yes, I totally understand that "society" is also us, is also me. And therein lies my "salvation," so to speak: in my own life, in my personal and immediate circle of friends, family members, and even acquaintances--through both work and leisure--I will do all I can to make others see and feel just how much of an occasion for celebration it is to be who they are, to revel in their own uniqueness, to not be ashamed of their own individuality, to go forth and conquer their own fears about their self-expression. Yes, even in the face of the "power of society."

Wow. I realize this sounds like a rant. Sorry. Maybe it's more of a simple vent. A little aggressive, maybe, but a vent. (I guess there's a male still lurking inside me somewhere, eh?)

Love,
CJ

[Georgia(SO)]

Wow. I finally had time this morning to sit down and read all of these posts carefully. Thanks for being so open.

I am with CJ's friends on this - it is not required that I understand this in order to accept it. After all, I have no idea what it would be like to be tall enough to reach the top shelf in the kitchen, but have no trouble accepting that my guy (and all 4 sons) are. I don't truly understand what it is like to be an African-American in the South, but I certainly accept that it is different to being a red-headed freckled Celt child. And I certainly accept that some parts of life are more difficult for them, and that other parts of life are more difficult for me. Acknowledging differences between individuals is not the same thing as judging which of those differences is "better, higher, more right, etc."

Can we love someone without truly understanding where they are coming from? OK. CJ's got a point. It's helpful if you understand *some* of where they are coming from. For example, if your beloved is of a totally different religious belief than yours, you *should* ask questions about why they believe what they believe and be willing to explain why you believe what you believe. It's not likely to change anyone's mind, but it is important to sorta get a read on where they are coming from.

But, nobody ever totally understands where anyone is coming from. That's because all the psychosocial aspects of each individual person is individual. Whoever said Life is like a complex math problem was absolutely right. What makes me be me is some combination of biological/birth/nurture/peer group/experience kind of thing. And I can explain it to my true love or my true friend for the rest of my life and they still aren't going to completely get it because they are filtering the data through their own complex math problem. Total understanding of another human being is never possible. So, no, I don't agree that we can't love without truly understanding.

More than that, I find people fascinating. The stuff that goes on in the average human brain is just amazing. The way in which individuals interact within their own society, and the "rules" which any given society has made for itself, just keep me looking and asking questions.

It's late Saturday morning and time for a nap now...

hugs to all ya'll-
-g(so)

[Jessica_Karen]

Wow, Georgia...I just spent the last hour(?) going over all these posts! Maybe more, but what an hour! You see how we struggle to answer your (deceptively simple) question: what does it feel like?

Of all the posts, I think CJ and Virginia came closest to expressing what it feels like for me, to be transgendered. I feel sometimes male, and sometimes female (or as CJ might say, sometimes masculine, sometimes feminine.) I think you get the distinction.

I spent most of my adult life suppressing the feminine side...at least its outward expression. But I can remember the moment when something "tripped" inside me and that feminine part of me asserted itself, irrevocably. I was watching a short film: The Red Balloon, in a class at the University of Washington. (I know...I'm dating myself. *sigh*) A young boy finds a red balloon. He is delighted, and brings it home. In the morning, he goes to school, but the balloon escapes from his window and follows him. At school, the other children see it, and they pursue it around the playground, throwing stones at it until, finally, it is destroyed. He (the boy) is devastated. But at the moment it "dies," balloons all over Paris break free of their bonds...from the parks, the playgrounds, the street vendors, all break free...and they fly across the city to the little boy, who sits weeping and alone. They descend upon him, and he grasps eagerly at the strings, until, finally, he has so many in his hands, that they lift him and carry him triumphantly across the city, far above the mob below, and away into a glorious sky.

Read the red balloon as a metaphor: the thing the boy dreams of. (After all, it's easy to imagine, right? Every child dreams of a red balloon.) We all have dreams...and often they are destroyed by the ignorant mob around us. But in this case, the dream is triumphant. Oh, how we wish our lives could be so.

I had never wept at a movie before that moment, but I wept now. Since then, I have been unable to stop. The baby is born: I weep. The dog dies: I weep. Elizabeth marries Mr. Darcy: I weep. And when poor, crippled Smike perishes in Nicholas Nickleby's arms...I'm a train wreck...all the more so because I saw it coming.

As a "male" I grew up believing that this propensity for tears was a weakness. Indeed, I believed that life would be oh, so much simpler and better if I felt no emotions at all. I wanted life (mine) to be rational. That was the ideal. But, that moment when the switch tripped, watching The Red Balloon, made going back to a life of rationality only, an impossibility. (And, trust me, I tried.) I kept my secret tears well hidden.

In later years, I became better and better at shutting down my emotions...anything painful...I simply dismissed. I refused to feel it. I got so good at it, that I found myself amazedly watching myself whenever something really devastating had happened. I could simply tell myself, "Oh, well, it doesn't matter." And it wouldn't. But, of course, there is a price to pay for this: an ever restricted emotional life...a kind of growing deadness, a grey numbness that prevented pain, but also prevented joy, as well. When things were bad between my wife and myself, she would say, "Well, if we break up, at least you'll be able to dress whenever you want to, if that will make you happy." I had to tell her that I couldn't imagine ever being happy again. It was gone. It was an empty word, nothing more.

It was just at that darkest time, that Karen reasserted herself. I hated my life. I knew something had to change. I found this forum...and others like it, though this seemed the one where I was most comfortable. People talked about dressing as if it was "okay." (Amazing!) They talked about "going out." (I was stunned...going out? Instantly, I knew that this was something I needed, too.) Suddenly Karen...and the importance of being Karen...overwhelmed me.

I know all this is way too long an answer to your question...and I'm getting back to it, I promise. Here it is, as best I can put it: Most of the time, I am "male" or "masculine." I have the male body...though there are many times I wish I did not. But more than that: I have a "male" brain...and habitual "male" ways of thinking and "being" in the world, and much of the time I wish I did not. But Karen is always there, too. Always. And she can weep without shame. It is only when I become her: dressed and out, that I feel whole, and at peace. Do I wish I could be her always? Yes. Can I? No. Can I ever imagine the same kind of pressure to revert to my male self, as I feel now, to be Karen? No, because she embodies an entirely different way to looking at and living in the world. Her values are the values that I most cherish: loving, touching, caring. She notices things my male self would ignore. She knows the significance of little things my male self might notice, but pretends are not really there. She reaches out to people who are in pain and hugs them. She has friends to share her secrets with. (My male self would never dare.) She loves without wanting anything in return. She sees beauty in the world, and embraces it. She loves her life, and glories in it: sun or rain; laughter, love, or tears.

Do I feel both genders at once? Yes, I do, and I slip, sometimes almost unconsciously from one to the other. But just as I always feel Karen's presence in my mind, I always feel constricted...when I am in my male mode...always aware of what I cannot say or do. If I could integrate the two, then I am sure I would, but for now, I am grateful for my second gender. I know what happiness is, again. Without Karen, I don't know what I would do.

[Anita]

Hi Georgia--

If I'm hearing most of you right, what you are saying is that the *male* you is always under some stress to step outside of the assigned gender roles and can't, as a male in our society.

I wasn't a crossdresser after the age of 17, and "forgot" all about having done it. I kept running up against the wall of what men were allowed to do, and to feel. I knew I had a lot of traits that we as a society call "feminine," but I felt that I had to use them in a male context. There wasn't any other place to put them! I had never heard of ordinary men like myself going out dressed as women. I only knew about drag queens and transsexuals, and I was nothing like either of those groups at the time. They were a curiosity to me, back then.

There is a severe limit to how much any man, anywhere, can express what a majority of people would call "feminine" traits. I pushed on the wall as hard as I could, but I still identified as a straight male, and kept trying to make it all work inside the rules that I knew inside and out.
We may eventually chose to ignore them, but we all know what they are.

My sisters all said, "Can't you just express whatever-it-is as a sensitive man? Why do you have to go to such an extreme!" My answer to them was that I tried for 30 years, and you can't just go "a little" beyond the wall. You've got to blast it out, go far beyond it, and then start to move back toward it from the territory you just opened up. I have better gender balance now, but only because I can approach the wall from the far side, too.

When women got angry in the 60s and 70s, it was the same thing. People said, "Why do you have to be so angry; burn bras, and do such extreme things?" Why is it coming out "all of the sudden"? And it was because there was no way to create change by gradually expanding the boundaries--there was a wall there, and it had to be blasted.

That the *male* you is not happy as a male. Ever?

I still feel OK as a male, but I do not have the enthusiasm for the role that I had as a younger man. The rewards that I was supposed to get from suppressing tenderness and emotion didn't really materialize like they were supposed to do. Maybe I wasn't ruthless enough to cash in.
All I know is that I begin to get disillusioned with playing out the strictness of the male role that I was taught.

Does that mean that the female you is the dominant personality - the (for lack of a better word) *real* you and that the male part is just the package you came in?

I'm not that far down the transsexual road, and that sounds like what you're describing there. Yet at the same time, I feel at times that I'm playing at being a male now, and I'm doing "male drag." I guess I'm aware of how much both genders do "performance" in order to fit in where they're supposed to. I'm just glad I've got two stages now, so to speak, and not just one.

Or is the *real* you a very definite mix of the two?

Sometimes it seems to be.

Or do the two genders sit kind of side by side within you and you sorta slide from one to the other?

It seems more like that. There's only so far I can "blend" the two when I'm not wearing the right uniform, so to speak. I can use some of my male assertiveness as a female, but to use male aggression would just seem inappropriate and out of character.

And people might say, "How can a man who dresses as a woman in public talk about not wanting to seem "inappropriate?! But I'll let them say that. To finish up...

And, while I hear lots of you say that you get antsy and miserable when you need to dress, do any of you ever get antsy and miserable while en femme and need to return to en homme - not because of any
outside forces but because it's time to be in guy mode again?

Sometimes I need to get back home and unwind and not have to "act" in a way that is physically unnatural for me. Odd combination, that. Some of my movement and gestures are "naturally" feminine if I let them be, and others are definitely male. So to be consistent in either role, I'm always having to remember to do some things, and not do others.

By that definition, it's still easier to be out as a man, because I've practiced the do's and don't's of that role for a lot longer.

CJ wrote:
In San Francisco, people don't get picked up by the police just because they're crossdressers or transsexuals (something that's happened to me twice, here, in Montreal).

And that's why I've said that as crossdressers, we break two of society's rules, not just one. Don't cross gender, we all know; but the other "rule" is that one does not go out in anything that could be seen as a "disguise."
As you are saying, CJ, society believes that altering appearance is always a sign of criminal intent--what else could it be?

Karen wrote:
They talked about "going out." (I was stunned...going out? Instantly, I knew that this was something I needed, too.) Suddenly Karen...and the importance of being Karen...overwhelmed me.

There are many strong posts here, and I have been moved by reading them. Yours made me wonder how my life would have been different if at 35, I had read of men "going out." I was hitting the gender wall hard at that time, and saw no way around it. It would be another fifteen years before I got a glimmer of what might be, and even then, I didn't know if anyone else was doing it.

[CJ]

Hi all,

Great post, Anita.

No, I don't think it's "altering appearance" that's associated with criminal intent (in the minds of hoary lawmakers); however, "impersonation" is, and, although the books will say, "impersonation with the intent to commit fraud," I get the feeling our friendly neighbourhood police officer often shortens the phrase to: "impersonation... fraud." I mean, let's face it, a man dressing up as a woman can't possibly be up to anything good, right? Gotta keep those pervs in check. Gotta lay down the law. And, by God, the law is normal.

Anyway, such is what I imagine the internal dialogue to be. I wish it weren't and I hope it isn't. But I only have police actions, not thoughts, to go by, unfortunately.

Love,
CJ