What is it about a dress?

[Della]

Robyn Katie's "No Clothing Differences" post got me thinking, and I wandered off on a tangent here.

Consider the connection of clothing to gender expression. What is the difference between society claiming a male can't wear a dress because he wasn't born female, and a male wanting to wearing a dress because he thinks he should have been born female? Why does an article of clothing matter to anyone? Yeah, I can kinda-sorta see how that's related to the original "No Differences" question, if I squint real hard. Or maybe I just like waving a red flag. I say there is no logical difference.

A "male" putting on a dress to become more "feminine" is using the same logic as society saying he can't wear a dress because he isn't "female". Both sides are confusing symbol with substance. Society could be labelled unjust for wanting to deny a man the right to wear a dress. He's not harming another individual, or himself. He's not corrupting motherhood (or fatherhood). It's just a dress; what's the big deal? Well, you could put the same question to the cross-dresser. How does a dress make him more female? There's nothing magic about the dress. He won't be able to get pregnant while wearing it. It won't help keep hair on his head. It's only important because of all the power society has given to the dress, the same power that says "girls only". If everyone wore a dress, the male wouldn't use it to "become feminine".

So are both sides equally perverse in their delusions? No! The factor that trumps logic and gives the man the right to wear a dress is the basic right of self expression. He can be fickle in the presentation of his body, or be confused in his interpretation of its chemistry. The individual has the right to change his appearance, by growing a beard or wearing a dress.

But who likes to see both a beard and a dress on the same person?

I believe the problem is the human tendency to put names on things. It's really hard to use a discrete label (male, female) for something that has a continuously variable range (sexual identity).

[Christina Huffman]

I agree with most of your post. It's always interesting to note what is considered masculine and feminine varies greatly between cultures and over time. For example, a hundred years ago pink was associated with boys, and blue with girls. It also reminds me of how people always bring up kilts when discussing this question. The only thing I disagree with is, if I'm reading the post correctly, you seem to define "real" womanhood as the ability to get pregnant. I don't think that's what you're trying to say, but I think we TG folks need to be careful not to fall into the same traps.

[Willie W]

But who likes to see both a beard and a dress on the same person?

Excuse me, but have a beard and I wear dresses. And I have no problems with it nor does my spouse.

[Della]

you seem to define "real" womanhood as the ability to get pregnant. I don't think that's what you're trying to say ...

My gosh no! I was trying to show the fallacy of extrapolating from a symbolic representation (the dress) to a specific characteristic (pregnancy). I probably should have just stayed with the "hair on his head" example. But even that could be taken as an assumption that all male CDs are bald, and want more hair. The point is that wearing a dress does neither makes a male a danger to society nor does it make him female.

Excuse me, but have a beard and I wear dresses. And I have no problems with it nor does my spouse.

Please do not take offense. I was just trying to point out that even a member of a marginalized minority (myself, and probably a lot of other CDs) can hold onto some of the same stereotypes that caused their own marginalization. I can't think of a better word than "marginalization", both "oppression" and "out-caste status" seem a little extreme. Anyway, I admit, it was a little disconcerting when I did first meet a beard in a dress. There really was no justification for my feelings. That person was very interesting, and never tried to drink my blood. Although couldn't confirm it, I believe that person was just trying to shake up people like myself. More people doing the same would break down some stereotypes. Let's see pictures.

There is a double edged nature to using clothing for more than protection from the elements. If we CDs see some special quality in clothing of the "opposite" sex (see above, it's a spectrum not a dichotomy), it's only because society has brought us up that way. And we really can't be too surprised if we are accused of misappropriating society's symbols.

[Virginia]

Wearing a dress, kilts, beards, baldness, all interesting positions, however, I would think that presenting oneself in the "opposite gender" as defined by society is one thing. The problem arises when one actually presents in public and so-called "straight" society is afforded the opportunity to judge us.

As a transgendered individual I would not judge any one's appearance in public, up to a point, but I guy in a beard, in a dress, or someone bald in a dress and definitely a man, well, I would of course have to do a double take and then try and rationize in my own mind "what is he trying to say to society?"

Are there limits to what we, let alone, society will accept as far as appearance go? Well legally, as long as this person is not hurting themselves or anyone else, I guess we can still present however we wish, again within the confines of the law.

What we choose to do within our own homes, well that is freedom but the old adage, "your freedom ends where my nose begins," comes into play when perhaps, PERHAPS in tread on my sensibilities, or that of society. No you probably won't be arrested for having a beard, wearing a mini-skirt, carrying a purse, but you will sure draw some of the wrong attention.

It has been my philosophy that whenever any of us dress and go out we are serving as ambassadors for the rest of our sisters, who may not be dressed or those who are closeted by choice. When we read articles about "crossdressers" robbing banks or other criminal activities, that reflects badly on all of us.

It's been a long a trying day,

Love you all,

Virginia

[April Rose]

Awhile back I posted on a site called "chris' atrium" which was a fashion freestylers site. This was by and about men who like to wear skirts, dresses, hose and other clothing traditionally reserved for women, while presenting as frankly male. Many of these guys had beards, and would appear this way in public. As often as not they would report no problems doing this, or fewer than they had anticipated.

Consistent with this site most of the biggest problems were with spouses and family. As usual the people closest had the hardest time accepting.

[Sally]

I agree that what adults do within the confines of their own home is nobody else’s business, as long as it doesn’t contravene the law, but for what I believe are valid reasons, I do have some reservations about the message being sent to the community in general when someone goes out in public dressed in a manner which may be seen as a destabilising force by people, especially parents.

I believe it’s reasonable to suggest that the majority of us have a vested interest in making the road ahead easier for those coming behind us, because those of us who dared cross the boundary and venture out onto the public stage over the years know full well how debilitating the angst of the community can be towards us at times, and although I’m well aware that most of us do what we do with the best of intentions, it’s the incorrect perceptions of the community which can do our cause harm, and it’s those incorrect perceptions of the community which have to be erased if we’re to educate the community that we’re no threat, and that we’re only following the course which was mapped out for us beyond our control.

Over the years I’ve had many a lively debate with people who would walk down the street at a Mardi Gras dressed in a tu tu with blonde wig and sporting a full black beard. Even though I personally knew those people and knew them to be good people, I questioned their intentions and the message they were sending to the tens of thousands of men, women and children who lined the parade route, but many times the answer was always along the lines of ‘who cares about them or what they think’. My answer was always along the lines of, well we should definitely care what messages we may send, because we’re the ones who are TG and asking for acceptance, and we wish to be left in peace to live in the opposite gender to that of our birth.

I believe that the majority of society has the perception that people are either men or women and there’s no in between, and that’s including the Gay community, because most of the Gay community prefer to live in the mode of their birth gender. People don’t like to be rushed or pushed into anything, they prefer simple choices, complicated issues confuse them and clouds their thinking, and I believe that presenting the community with a picture of a half man half woman is way too confronting for most people, even though the intent of the person may be completely innocent. I do believe that in our case perception and attention of the wrong sort can be detrimental to the bigger cause, and I also believe that even if a man dresses as a woman and walks down the street and is easily read, the fact that he’s made the attempt to fulfill the picture of a woman is more acceptable to people in general, than the confusing picture of half and half, the challenge is too great.

I intend no disrespect to anyone in what I say, and I personally know men who wear a beard and a dress, and as a person I hold them in high regard. For many years I’ve given my time and efforts into trying to educate the general public about us, but I do believe that it’s a two way project in that if we want them to see our side of the issues then we also have to open our minds to theirs, and act accordingly, because actions speak louder than words.

It’s a long difficult battle and each small piece of ground gained is invaluable, but it’s also a fact that we can lose ground too if we become belligerent or immune to the feelings of others.
I know that we’re all different and we do what we do for varying reasons, but it all gets back to what we’re trying to achieve at any one point in time. My cause is simple. I wear dresses, grow my hair long, take female hormones etc because I wish I’d been born female, I know I’d have been much happier throughout my life as a female, I’ve felt that way from very early childhood and I try to achieve that wish to the best of my ability. I believe that over my life I would have eventually done whatever it took to move into that female mode, and yes, I know it’s just a dress and it’s not the be all end all, but that dress signifies something special, but if it wasn’t a dress it would have been something else, life’s like that.

Kind Regards,

Sally.

[CJ]

Hi all,

The truth is, these days the sight of a bearded man in a dress and heels is apt to cause the same kind of kerfuffle a coiffed and lipsticked woman wearing tie and trousers did back in the 1930s.

Just be patient, my pretties. All in good time.

Love,
CJ

[Robyn Katie]

Great question, Della. Of course we're not the only ones confusing symbol and substance. The people who react with disdain or laughter to our appearance also are.

But then life is symbol confused with substance. What is there about a wedding dress, or a little white ball hit over a stadium fence, or for that matter a flag with 13 stripes and 50 stars, that gets people all choked up?

What is intriguing is that a woman in shirt, pants, tie, you name it, is not seen as pretending to be a man—at least, not without a lot of effort on her part to look butch. A woman in man's clothes is a woman and no one thinks twice. So she's not succeeded in confusing symbol and substance for those who look at her.

(Not sure why; these are deep waters! Can it be that women's essence, innate womanhood, is proof against change in appearance, while men's is not?)

Whereas a man in a dress is in the soup immediately. At first glance, on his first step outdoors, he is a target. Except for priests and monks, of course, and one or two other special categories. Indeed church attire specifically tries to desex the man—I seem to recall reading it was adopted as a means of showing the cleric was not a warrior and therefore presumably not fair game. But no one thinks church attire equates to a dress.

All this is very much based in socialization.

But I suggest that it goes deeper than stereotype or symbol, perhaps only because we learned this stuff at a pre-verbal stage. I can't explain the lure of a dress completely to myself with symbology.

Unless you might call it a variation on fetishism? In fetishism a shoe, a skirt, a wig, you name it, becomes a stand-in, then a replacement, for an actual woman. But I think what we do is even deeper than that, deeper than learned behavior, into the territory of instinct.

Trouble is, I don't know how to say it. And I haven't any very good way of substantiating the point. I just feel it. Not in the way I feel symbols, which are powerful but not as compelling, and emphatically not in the way I feel stereotypes, which are at a much shallower level.

Deeper. Way deeper. Goes into the nerve endings—feel of lingerie for instance—grace of movement—passionate power, drawn maybe from the phenomenal power of women to create life not just in the form of babies, but in every minute detail of their being at all times ... bringing delight, astonishment, the miracle of flowering to guys who wouldn't know how to BE if being came up and bit them ... but women are showing them that, unconsciously, 24/7 ... now if that's not instinct, what is? ...

All that's in the clothes somehow, and much more I haven't been able to dig out yet.

I'd love to be able to say what I'm talking about, but I'm gaga at the moment.

I'll think some more.

Love, Robyn Katie

[Absaroka]

Robyn referenced this in another post and it got me thinking.

An awful lot of this has to do with sex and agression. Men are percieved as sexually agressive. I'm not talking about rape or assault, just the fact that we are thought of as initiators. Often this is true. Many men have different feelings about sex than many women. No absolutes here, but lots of truth in generalities.

With that in mind lets ask why this guy might be wearing a dress?

Womens clothing is often more overtly sexual than mens. Most men don't do the equivalent of flaunting their cleavage. And the "man in the dress" is probably not thought of as wearing a frumpy housedress. He's stereotypically wearing something "feminine" i.e. mildly sexy.

Why? Is he trying to appeal to other men through trickery? Pretending to be a woman in an effort to have sex with men? This is for many a very threatening idea, and you know how "real men" deal with threats.

Or maybe he's pretending to be a woman to sneak into the ladies room to peek. Another form of predation.

Or maybe he just gets a sexual thrill wearing the dress. This is tantamount to public sexual arousal, or a form of exhibitionism. He's just broken the nudity taboo without disrobing.

If we discard all these reasons and probably some others that I forgot, we may come to the idea that he really thinks he's a woman. And although the road will be hard, many will treat him with more compassion than they will a crossdresser, imagining how much they would dislike being born into the wrong body. Of course then he is no longer a man in a dress, he is a woman in a dress stuck with a mans body.

But I think a lot of folks still think that MTF transexuals are really doing it so they can have better sex. And that upsets them.

Look at Iran, who thinks the way to deal with homosexuality is SRS.

Zari

[Wendae]

Zari I think your questions about perceptions are probably what a large proportion of the population thinks. There is a lot of good stuff here in this post as to how we all precieve things. Interestingly many of us seem to have the same reservations about how we need to present our selves in public. I think we need to pass without drawing attention to ourselves, at the same time what we do at home is our own business and not detrimental to other folks trying to happily pursue their lives without public outcry and humiliation. I guess stealth mode seems to be the way to go.

[Gillian]

I some times think that the biggest problem is the mindsets that get formed within a society. These mindsets can become very rigid over time and create "boxes" where people live. These boxes keep us within the confines of what society is precieved to be. I grew up with the statement that you didn't talk about religion, politics, or sex, what is left to talk about, that is worth talking about? A society is meant to be a living, breathing entity, and without good healthy discussion it gets stuffed into who ever is in control's "box". I believe that it is time for another society reformation so to speak. Women in the 1920's experienced something that we are seeing the results of today. The liberation of men is something very badly needed. At times I wonder if the desire to dress up is the envy of seeing the feminine liberation. Men don't show there emotions is a lie. They just show the angry,cold, and violent side. Men lost the father figure in the industrial revolution, and women were left to fill the void. I think that many of us want to show the soft, gentle, and caring side, and we don't know how, unless we see the feminine. No absolutes, I am just wondering. I love to wear feminine clothes, for some reason I find it very calming, it helps me find some sense of peace. So what is it about a dress? Do we want to break out of our paradigms? The first thing to do in getting out of the "box" is to get talking. This is why I joined this web site. A comment of a tie and trousers on a woman in the 1930's is true. Prejudice is only reversed through education and open dialogue. Who in 1920 would have believed that Barak Obama would ever be an American President. Interesting that the democrats picked a black man over a woman, but that is another story. Clothing is an expression of ourselves and whether we do it publicly, or privately is up to the individual. We just need to be honest with ourselves and ask, am I doing this for sexual, political, or religious reasons!

[Stephanie_Gael]

If I can be as succinct as possible in answering this complex question: I wear a dress to give outward expression to the inner, dominant, feminine side of my person.
If women, i.e. the largely softer, more caring, tender sex preferred to wear trousers, then I probably would also.