Crossdressers-Haven.com

Hi all,

Well, go figure, I'm a moderator and I don't even know where to post this. Anyway, I'll try it here.

I know there are other threads on the subject of the upcoming TBS series (which, unfortunately, I think I'll be missing after all, as I don't get this station), but I didn't want to deal with mere scheduling issues.

Of course, I've yet to see the show, so I can't really judge how things'll turn out, but I was intrigued enough to go take a peek at their fan forum a couple of weeks ago (it appears they've now removed it); there were some very heated debates. Some (transsexuals, mainly) were afraid that this kind of show made light of their situation; others simply saw it as good fun. I didn't want to get into that kind of debate, before the fact. However, me being who I am, I was very interested in the social/philosophical underpinnings the message this kind of televised "challenge" sent out to its viewers. I wanted to post on that forum but I had to jump through so many hoops to do so (and, in the end, all for nothing), that I just gave up. This is the post I tried to send:

Hi all,

Aside from the (dubious?) entertainment value of the show; aside from the financial motivations of both the participants and the producers; aside from the possible psychological damage done to someone who was lured into participating into something under false pretenses; aside from the show reflecting badly (or not--we have to wait and see) on the lifestyles of transgendered individuals; aside from our ability (or inability) to see the humour in the situation; aside from all this, I wonder if the real issue will be addressed?

The real issue, to my mind, being the need to relax or, to some extent, cast off restrictive gender stereotypes. Just reading the participants' "mini-biographies" gives us a sense that these men are "true-blooded men's men"--they're athletic and fit, they work hard, they're good providers, they love challenges, they're go-getters and assertive, they're all this and more (or so the producers want to portray them as, anyway). Well, most of the women I know are also like this. A show whose main goal is to see whether or not a man can go from being all that to being soft-spoken, demure, alluring, domestically creative , sensitive and emotionally honest, and wear back-killing high heels while doing so is not doing any of us a favour, I think.

It's too easy to go from being "all the man you can be" to being "all the woman you can be." I don't mean too easy in the sense of going from one to other. No, the transition is damned hard; ask any transsexual (or even crossdresser). What I mean is, when will we ever tackle the much more difficult task of allowing men to behave in ways we now consider "feminine" and women in ways we now consider "masculine" without thinking there's something completely "off" about them as human beings?

In the end, what's so wrong about a man who enjoys staying at home, say, to raise the the kids, while his wife goes to work? What's so wrong about a woman being assertive or being sure enough of herself that she doesn't balk at facing challenges of her own? What's so wrong about men wanting to feel attractive or sexy to their partner by enhancing their appearance with cosmetics or seductive and sexy clothing? What's so wrong about women engaging themselves in difficult, physically demanding occupations (if they have the build and the physique, what's the problem?)? What are we so afraid of that we need to categorize this as a "womanly art" and that as "manly pursuit"?

I'll be watching the show, because I think the gradual transformation, in itself, will be entertaining and fun to watch. I just find it too bad that we put so much stock in the validity of the gender stereotypes expressed both in the "beginning state" and the "end state" of the whole process. As human beings, we're much more fluidly-gendered than we sometimes think we are. Unfortunately, a program like "He's a Lady" can only serve to make us forget this (whatever other merit the show may have).

Still, happy viewing, all.

Love,
CJ

I realize that all this has less to do with the show itself than it does with our own views of socially appropriate gender roles. Nothing I said above will be news to anyone here, but I thought that members of a more mainstream forum might have found something in there to chew on. Anyway, this "TBS Text" file has been sitting on my deskop for close to two weeks; I was about to delete it this morning and then thought that, maybe, it would make a good conversation piece right here, on the forum. What do you all think about the views I expressed in that message? Agree? Disagree? Would any of it have made sense to non-transgendered folks?

Love,
CJ

Hi CJ!!!

I too have been a bit cautious how this show will come off. I expect it will be played for laughs, as I think that will be the level most people who get off on these reality shows can accept the concept, but I could be surprised. We have a culture used to suspending disbelief at shows on the tube and in the movie theatres, so maybe...? However, my more pessimistic side will probably win out. I anticipate a reaction from the conservative religious right, which may be the reason for a sponsor backing out that Donna T referred to. And the Jerry Springer type crowd may find it a disappointment. I have friends that will never see it, as they consider most reality shows "dumb" and "a waste of time", and I am usually in full agreement. I can usually find something productive to do during most of them, like washing my hair, cleaning my nails, or picking my teeth! So, I am wondering about the audience, as I have before, and whether it will make it all the way through the season. Will be interesting to see. I expect a higher initial viewer number, then it will drop off. I will likely watch a few of the shows to see what will happen, especially the first few, and I will be listening to my coworkers and friends for their reaction, you bet. Do you suppose there are enough CDs that might find it a fantasy fulfillment that it will be a success?

I'm dubious the deeper implications of gender roles will really be raised at all. It is even hard to find that in most documentaries, and to expect it from a "reality show" that has to appeal to a mass audience used to being spoon fed their entertainments is probably unrealistic.

I can fully understand the TS attitude you mentioned, as it can be hard enough to gain acceptance during RLE without being potentially demeaned by a show like this. The Springer show and Riki Lake have not been at all kind in their efforts to "entertain", and have definitely affected many folk's perceptions of TG people. The small audience for "Soldier's Girl", "Normal", and "Boys Don't Cry" is likely telling as well. Time will prove, but it will definitely be interesting from a sociological and psychological view point. I wonder how many papers will get written about the results?

Love,

i don't think the show or the viewers will take it to that level, i think it will just be laughs.

Hi All--
I'll answer your question in a moment, CJ.

I don't see it being about laughs, so much, not after the first show or two. For one thing, the viewers will get used to seeing these guys in drag, over and over, and those viewers that stick with it will start "accepting" the characters. This happens with any novelty concept; the novelty part wears off. Plus, these guys are competitors. They're going to get a certain skill level going, and that will probably fascinate the audience.

And there'll be the cliches of reality TV. Guys will be addressing the camera, giving those sincere speeches about how they now realize how hard it can be for their wife, sister, girlfriend, blah, blah, blah.

I don't know whether they'll start bad-mouthing a guy that they think "likes this too much." Somehow, I wouldn't expect ANYONE to bring that up. Since they'll be doing their best to win, that subject is not going to make anyone comfortable. There's no one who would appear above suspicion, for one thing. They've got to get into these roles, or they won't be around to have a shot at winning.

CJ, I just don't see a demand for gender reform, with most people. They may suffer from the consequences of rigid gender roles, but it's so ingrained in us that people don't even see it.

As a young man, I didn't like all I had to do to "be a man," necessarily, but I didn't see anything about being a woman that seemed better, necessarily. It was a long evolution from there to here, for me. And I had to fail in some spectacular ways in order to see past the high-octane world of male competition.

If I'd had succeeded like I planned to, I doubt Anita would have ever emerged. I would have been winning at the male game, and I would have wanted to keep playing for a lot longer than I did. I would have had too much to lose by bringing something like public CDing into the picture.

Mind you, I didn't start going out as a woman because I felt like a loser! Don't get me wrong, here. I am successful at the things I do now, and I could have lost a lot by coming out. It didn't happen, and I'm grateful for that. But how much flexibility would I have had being successful at a national level? I just don't see guys willing to take a chance at what I do, when they get to that status.

My point is that a majority of men are like I was. They may be getting beat up out there in the competition, but they don't see any other way of doing it that appeals to them. So they keep going out to battle. There is no profit in relaxing gender rigidity, for them.

Yes, I might learn to love a gender-fluid world. But I know that right here and now it bothers me when I can't identify someone's INTENDED gender.
If I have a knee-jerk reaction to this, then I can't expect better from John or Jane Q Public.

I also didn't get satisfaction from being a "sensitive man," as we have discussed. Being able to be just a little gender-fluid was something I did, but it didn't really appeal to me. I needed to go to extremes to find any satisfaction. In this world as it is now, it's a lot easier to cross WAY over gender lines, then it is to just cross "a little bit."

I hope some of you hung around for the end of this.
thanks,
Anita

Hi all,

Thanks for the replies.

Carolynn, you wrote: I'm dubious the deeper implications of gender roles will really be raised at all. It is even hard to find that in most documentaries, and to expect it from a "reality show" that has to appeal to a mass audience used to being spoon fed their entertainments is probably unrealistic.

I agree. Unfortunately. I guess that's why these programs are called "shows," and not "thinks." Oh well.

Anita,

As usual, you never shy away from going into detail (thank goodness for that! This makes us sisters in more ways than one. ). You know, this whole issue of gender role rigidity is like a bee in my bonnet. I often hear crossdressers clamoring for the right (which we seem to believe women have) to wear whatever we please. Well, I'm wondering just how caught up we are in gender stereotypes because, in fact, even when we are given (or have taken) this very right, we tend to dress or to present in a very narrow and stereoypical range. The shortest skirt, the highest heel, the sheerest blouse, the tightest corset, the most glamourous makeup: women just don't dress like this all the time (nor even most of the time). You can bet your best guitar that this is exactly the kind of look they'll have these TBS guys go for. In doing so, they'll be exchanging one "self-presentation prison" for another. And the message sent is that there are absolutely no reasons to even question this state of affairs. What gives?

I understand what you're saying, Anita, and I agree with it; people are a lot less comfortable around someone whose gender self-expression is ambiguous at best than they are around a person who's rather more clearly a man or a woman (regardless of his or her actual true sex). In my own life, my inclination is to resist this kind of shackling. I do dress androgynously on occasion and I have worn a touch of makeup while out and about, as well (okay, not often, but I have) and I'll tell you, the reactions are so much stronger than when I'm in full femme regalia. It's like people see me (when I'm being Christina) and, if they read me, they'll go, "hmmm... oh, okay, I get it, he's supposed to be a woman." All is then well with the world again. But when they see someone like, say, Elizabeth, who makes no bones about appearing as anyone (or anything) other than "hirself"--neither masculine nor feminine--oh boy! the turmoil they must feel (even though, as Elizabeth says, they remain civil and polite).

This kind of thing, this rigidity we seldom question or examine, bugs me some. I know that it isn't all crossdressers who go for this stereotypical appearance (just as it isn't all women who do so as well), but enough of us do (yes, I'm no exception here) that it makes me wonder if there's something we're not getting, you know? I know all this "belongs" to me, by the way. I'm certainly not out to change the world, but, still, a part of me believes that, should we ever manage to, at the very least, encourage a truly free-form gender self-expression, much of the pain and anxiety and stress and suffering I see in those around me and which I've felt in my own life would be lessened by a whole lot. After all, we live in a culture that prides itself on allowing (and, yes, encouraging) people to express a broad spectrum of political, philosophical, spiritual, social, and psychological views. Why, then, when it comes to gender (not sex, gender) must we content ourselves with only two ways of being, masculine or feminine (again, regardless of our sex)? It makes little sense to me. Then again, there's much in this world that makes little sense to me, so that's not anything new.

Okay, I'm getting off the box, here. Sheesh! I can't shut myself up, sometimes.

Again, thanks for the replies, gals. I love this kind of stuff.

Love,
CJ

Hi Christina--
I fully agree with you that freeing up gender would transform a lot of pain, stress, and suffering almost overnight. We would ALL be amazed, I think, even those of us who suspect this might be the case.

Yes, people are much more comfortable with Christina or Anita then they are with my friend John, who goes out looking like a bearded lumberjack from the waist up, and dresses in minis, hose, and heels below the belt.
But even something as innocent as a little makeup on a man is enough to shake people up.
As soon as I, Anita, start talking to people, I can see they're relieved that I'm playing the role fully; it lets them know how I want to be treated.

And that comes full circle to your being bugged by all of this; must they always need to know, EXACTLY, what gender is in front of them?

I still think we're talking about a deep biological need, a DNA imprint that insists that survival depends on knowing exactly who you can mate with, and who you can't. Nature does not want you to waste one second on pursuing anyone who won't serve to help you create a child.

And we've got thousands of years of developing our intellects, so we don't just act on THESE instincts. But they're under there, and messing around with gender is anti-survival in the ancient parts of our brains. I'm not surprised that people have such a hard time with it.
A

I saw a preview for this show, and it looks funny. While some of these guys might be closet CD'ers, they aren't going to let it show. They are going to pretend, or not, to not get into to it too much. The public doesn't accept CD'ers, except in the case of someone openly gay. If they are openly gay, and CD, then they are just that way. Straight and CD'ing is not accepted, and I don't think ever will be. So, these supposedly straight "manly men" will get dolled up. amd do what they have to to win. Most, or all, of them are going to feel really uncomfortable. If there are one or more that don't, they will probably win. The public's view is that this is all a joke. These guys don't like it, they don't want to do it, like a Fear Factor thing. That is what makes it interesting to watch. If you put a bunch of us on TV(no pun in the abbreviation intended, well...ok maybe a little), and let the public know that we are all CD'ers, there would be a very small audience. The public is very shallow. They do not think deeply about how people feel. They don't think period. I came to this board only a short time ago, and I read a lot before I posted here. I have to say, what got me hooked and posting, is the level of intelligence, feeling, and insight I saw here. I think you are all very special people, and know it or not, you have all helped me a great deal. So I thank you.

Hi Laura--
Glad that you've gotten so much out of the board. It's a great place, and I can imagine the work that goes into making it that way, too.

You're thinking that people would not be interested if the concept was known CDs, doing much the same thing. I might have agreed with you once, but I've come to see reality TV shows as a whole world unto themselves.

I'm not much of a TV watcher, but I am surprised at how I can begin to identify with the people on them, even when I don't like the concept! This irritates me, that I can be taken in so easily, but it happens. And if it happens to critical ol' me, I KNOW it happens to the average viewer.
Anyway--I think you might be surprised at how many people would follow the CDs on this board, if we were filmed going out for some challenge. It's still an adventure out there when I go out, and if a crew were filming me, they'd see unusual things. Maybe even more than I notice myself.

What I'm talking about isn't exactly acceptance. It's the word I used above: fascination. And the more they saw of us, the more they would admire the courage shown. We are normal people, with good social graces, and it would really open eyes. I hope that some reality show in the near future DOES use real CDs. At the end of 10 weeks, or whatever, I think there would be a level of acceptance gained. That's the half-full glass view.
A

I'm just going to repeat what I said on another board, after watching the show:

No, I do not think that this show will shed any light on TS/TG issues at all. That is NOT what they are setting out to do. They are just trying for humor and an alleged affort to get guys to "better understand what is like to be a woman."

There doesn't (so far anyway) seem to be any TG accepting aspect to the show. After all, there were many comments with the underlying message that is it ok to dress up like that for money, but none of the guys better actually enjoy it, and that is rather scary when/if the guys actually DO look good as women.

One approach I would like to see is a follow-up on these guys, say a year or so down the road. They come across as macho-knuckle-dragging, kill or be killed hetrosexual males. What effect this "competition" may ultimately have on them - well, some of them may have been (like some of us) supressing a crossdressing tendency up to now and this becomes an "excuse" to finally begin dealing with it allbeit, an easy way to adjuct to it - a lot easier than a lot of our sisters had.
I intend to keep watching it as I found some of it really funny and entertaining.
Virginia