Articulating the inarticulate

[Marlena Dahlstrom]

Hi Virginia, happy to try to clarify. By "feminine" men, I was thinking of a lot of things, both the external presentation and the inner feelings.

For the former, I'm thinking that if we could do the Ziggy Stardust/Eddie Izzard thing, i.e. being able to wear make-up, nail polish, "pretty" clothing en homme, would we still feel the need to present ourselves en femme? Myself, I probably would crossdress less, although I have to say there's probably times when I'd still want to add a wig, breastforms, etc. and present myself as a woman. Old habits die hard, but I have to wonder if I'd grown up in such a society, whether I would've become a crossdresser at all.

For the latter, a common refrain I've heard on various CD forums is the sense that we've got a feminine part to our personalities. For some, like myself, it's only a part and I'm happy being manly at other times. For some, they consider themselves more feminine than masculine and feel it's quite difficult to act in the "expected" masculine fashion. So if it were more acceptable to be a "girly-girl" in a male body, would those who feel more comfortable acting that way still feel the need to crossdress to express themselves? I expect some would, some wouldn't.

I'm rambling, so I'm not sure this helps.

[Absaroka]

Darla i love your comments. Especially the one about men being in touch with their feelings but they are not neccesarily feelings that women may be comfortable with. Sort of like the old "be more assertive with everyone but me" bind I sometimes find myself in.

I am also interested in where you got your figures about a third of men experimenting a bit with crossdressing and 5 to 10 % regular.

The comment that it is easier for a masculine woman than a feminine man rings true to me. And I think it does for many of us. I wonder however if masculine women might differ. I wonder if this might be because the problems they face seem more severe to them as women than they would to men and vice versa. For example the stuff we go through about how will society percieve our sexuality and so on, will we be labeled as faggots ( to use the offensive word because it's the negative stuff about being gay we are afraid of, being a punk or a sissy). A woman might say, well that's a given with being a woman, we so often have to consider how our sexuality is perceived. Now you know. After all how many of us reject a guy shirt because it is too slutty? On the other hand they may worry about being seen as cold, castrating, butch. All things we kind of think might actually be virtues in a man as long as we don't take them too far so we can't really understand how visceral that fear in a woman might be.

However as I said, speaking as a man I agree with your assessment. And I also agree that I can't escape my frame of reference.

Sorry for the language in this post. These are words I don't normally use that much but they certainly capture the stereotype we are afraid of.

Great posts and I have enjoyed reading them a lot.

Andrea

[Virginia]

Thanks Darla,
I kinda thought that that was were you were coming from. I will "ramble" a bit if you don't mind. I would imagine that there are not too many "girly men" crossdressers. Most of us, as you are well aware, are heterosexual, married males with families, above average intelligence, contributors to society (with a gift!). Semanitics aside, "girly-men" are more identified with gays and there is nothing wrong with that, but women, in general, seek out "manly men" for mates and for propogation of the species. Women, in general, seek that "hunter - protector" as a mate. I believe that some of us have certain feminine characteristic that women love, like empathy, caring, gentleness, without crossdressing -- they would probably be crossdressers, but that aspect of their "anima" just has not or will not manifest itself for whatever reason. Look at preachers/ministers, and you have to have a great leap of faith, but assuming that they are sincere in their beliefs, most are gentle, quite, caring, loving souls, but yet many are married with families. Do they crossdress??? I would bet the farm that some do (like my father-in-law, well confirmed only once a year on Halloween) but I digress, I think that we need to serve our fellow man as best we can; our new sisters who come on board and ask for direction, there is now a pletera of information now available and it becomes a matter of just finding what "works for you!"
Take care of that leg - they still look good anyway!
Virginia

[CJ]

Hi all,

Darla,

I know I might come across as a dog that just won't let go of a bone but, really, I'm just a kitten that won't let go of a piece of (loose) string... I'm still having trouble framing your comment that women have access to a broader range of social roles.

You wrote, in your original post on the subject: GGs with "masculine" personalities can take advantage of the broader range of acceptable roles available to GGs. Now, in your reply, you spoke of how masculine women may have a bit of an easier go of it than feminine men. That sounds right to me, too. No controversy there. But I'm not so much interested in comparing the experience of masculine women and feminine men as much as I'm interested in comparing the experience of men and women, period. Just plain, non-TG'd men and women. I don't know, maybe it's just the way you worded the sentence in red, above; plainly, you're talking about women in general--not just "women with 'masculine' personalities". It's been my experience (or, rather, the experience of most women I know) that it just isn't the case that they have access to a broader range of acceptable roles (think, for example, "glass ceiling"). Even merely sexual roles (let alone social ones) are usually ascribed to women by the dictates of living in a man's world (to say nothing of men themselves).

Yeah, yeah, I realize this a more or less feminist perspective. But, well, I have to be honest here and admit that when men (yes, even woman-identified men) start talking about the experience of women (such as, for example, their range of acceptable roles) without--as you, yourself, admit, Darla--ever having lived in the skin or in the life of a woman, it always sounds to me as though there's something a bit, uh, "off," somehow. And, yes, of course, I've been guilty of doing the very same thing, too. I won't hide it.

I'm just wondering how you can support the statement that women have a broader range of available acceptable roles. Are you saying so intuitively, maybe?

Anyway, Darla, I don't want you to get the wrong impression here; despite my sometimes quibbling nature, I always find your posts enlightening and entertaining. A good combo. It's always a pleasure to witness a true wordsmith at work.

Love,
CJ

[Marlena Dahlstrom]

I am also interested in where you got your figures about a third of men experimenting a bit with crossdressing and 5 to 10 % regular.

They're figures that I've commonly heard thrown around, although I've never really heard them sourced. On of these days I'd like to track down the figures. Lynn Conway in her article on the prevalence of TSs, mentions that between 1 in 50 to 1 in 20 men are estimated to be part-time "intense" CDs -- whatever that means (her only description that they're "males who engage in frequent (private/club) crossdressing"). I did hear mention of one study in England or Scotland that found 1 in 8 male accident victims were found underdressed. http://www.hemingways.org/GIDinfo/prevalence.htm cites an 8% figure, but says the source is unknown.

An extract from Amy Bloom's book on CDing, "Normal," http://members.aol.com/wobsuk/bloom.html cites several experts who put it around 3-5%, although an inherent mushiness is acknowledged. A Tri-Ess rep is quoted as saying that the figure is often inflated (beyond 5%) in her opinion, because CDs want to pump up their numbers.

The 1 in 3 experimenters figure has cropped up in various places, although I can't find them offhand. Hemingways puts it at 25% but doesn't cite a source. This includes things like dressing for Halloween, etc.

Unfortunately the research on CDs is pretty thin, since the vast majority of research on TG issues focuses on TSs.

The comment that it is easier for a masculine woman than a feminine man rings true to me. And I think it does for many of us. I wonder however if masculine women might differ.

I didn't say it was easy, only more acceptable. I'm basing my thoughts in part on transman sociologist Aaron Devor's book, "Gender Blending," which looks at a group of women who were so masculine that there were mistaken for men. Women, not just butch women, do definitely face pressures to conform to their gender roles as well.

But (as I think I said to Virginia) because of the still unequal role of men and women in society, taking on men's characteristics is seen as aspiring for greater status and power (even if someone doesn't think women should have them), while a man taking on the characteristics of women is "disturbing" because its seen as forfeiting masculine priviledge.[/quote]

[Marlena Dahlstrom]

I'm still having trouble framing your comment that women have access to a broader range of social roles.

Not a problem. Perhaps the sentence was phrased badly. Women obviously face pressure to conform to people's ideas of their "proper" gender role (which varies from person to person). And all the things you've mentioned about the glass ceiling, etc. are all too true.

As you've pointed, I've got very little experience as a GG. But I can observe what I see around me -- and I see that tomboys are tolerated/accepted/encouraged and sissyboys are horrifying to most parents. In a similar vein, hang out in a public space and you'll see some very femme women and others who are clearly intentionally unfemme, in both apparence and behavior. If it were just as acceptable for men to wear make-up as it is for women not to wear make-up, then why aren't we wearing mascara to work? Or that it's acceptable for women to talk about taking time off from their careers to raise kids with the (unfortunately all too often unfulfilled) expectation that they can step back into the fast-track, whereas a man saying the same thing raises eyebrows.

It's admittedly intuitive observation, but in part it's been informed in part by transman Aaron Devor's work http://web.uvic.ca/~ahdevor/ whose spent his careers studying FTM issues.

[Georgia(SO)]

Oooh, oooh, oooh, can I play too?

Just some random thoughts on the random thoughts preceeding my random thoughts...

1. Percentage of men who cross-dress. I have no hard facts to back this up, but my guess is that the number of men who actually don the clothes, who actually acknowledge (if only to themselves), is a fairly small percentage of those who think about it. I may be dipping into stereotypes, but it seems that the men who do CD are often fairly high powered, high *manly men* type souls who are willing to live some of the life on the edge. (Think the army guys, Hoover, the macho types that no one would ever guess have a closet full of dresses.) It occurs to me that the incidence of actually putting the clothes on is more related to whether that person has a daring personality. For 'xample, I dated a guy who once told me "If I was a girl, I'd wear silk all the time...". At the time, it peaked my interest, and sounded remotely like there might be panties in his drawer. But, this particular fella was a pretty quiet soul without a whole lot of sense of adventure in him. Therefore, I doubt he actually would ever make the step of dressing...just a bit too adventurous for him, I would think. My point (and I think I had one) is that there have got to be a metric butt ton more guys who actually think about it than actually do it. Not just closeted souls, but the ones, like my old beau, for whom that would be just way flashier than he would be comfortable with.

2. Women and available roles. Yes, it probably is true that today women have a broader range of available roles than men do today. For example, it's fairly acceptable for a mother to work outside the home - it's still less acceptable for a man to be a stay-home father. (Could we please fix that before my kids become daddies???). OTOH, certainly in the generation who is now in their 30s, it is quite acceptable for a man to be sensitive, empathetic, caring - even (for lack of a better term) poet soft, while it still really isn't acceptable for a man to wear a dress.

I really don't think that "feminine" characteristics (i.e. empathy, etc) have a lot to do with people's perception of CDing. Certainly males with feminine personality characteristics are not a turn-off for many women - we really are not looking for Thor, ya know... Perhaps the writer who mentioned that the act of dressing involves men *putting things on* as opposed to women dressing down is part of it. I realize that ya'll don't feel like you are faking it when you dress, and that dressing expresses an inner woman, but to the rest of the non-TGd world, it *does* look like you are faking it. Fake boobs, fake eyelashes, fake nails, fake hair... A woman who dresses masculinely doesn't have to fake anything like that, unless of course, she is going to go all the way, and I would assume that she would get hit with the same level of distrust that ya'll get hit with. I can only speak for Western societies, as that's all I really know (American at that), but as a society we don't particularly care for things that look fake...

3. Yes, women are still considered the second sex. So, it confuses the hell out of everybody why a *man* would want to step down to being a woman.

4. I can't really buy into the argument that strict social rules for each gender *cause* CDing. If that were true, you would have had a huge number of FTM CDers in previous eras. (Ok, yes some women CDed in order to fight in wars, etc., etc.., but that's not what I'm talking about.)

Further, in societies such as the antebellum south, men were able to embrace a number of cultural nuances that we now consider to be somewhat unmanly - high interest in literature, art, philosophy, etc., etc. (Think Ashley in Gone With the Wind). Men's clothes were ruffled, with jewelry and all that, but there were still CDers. It seems to me, from the outside looking in, that the lure is to appear as a woman in whatever role is dictated for women at the given moment in the given society. I assume that in different societies, if men wore green and women wore orange, CDs would absolutely *have* to wear orange.

I'm not smart enough to know why more men need to dress as women than women need to dress as men. But there must be something that is not specific to a given society, or to a given era. After all, CDing has happened forever and in all sorts of societies. Ergo, it's gotta be something internal in ya'll, not external in the society itself. Whoa wait - that didn't come out right. I didn't mean that as sounding like something is wrong with ya'll - I mean, the drive to CDing must be an internal force within the individual as opposed to a generic or general reaction to outside societal forces...

gotta get back to work...
-g

[Virginia]

Geprgia, I can only assume that you are taking certain liberal liberties with some of the things you wrote. First we know what we as Cd'ers do in order to enhance our appearance, but a lot of women do pretty much the same, padded bras, hair enhancements, plucking eye brows, we both wear make-up, artifical nails vs. salon nails. We both use the same items to enhance how we look.
As far as "second sex." Women are what most of us/CD'ers seek to imulate, not only the appearance, but some of us seek to allow the characteristics that we admire, to manifest themselves in us and to become a part of us now and forever. I can only speak for myself, but I strive to climb the mountain that women reside on. Those who think that women are the "second or weaker or ???" sex - THEY AIN'T GOT A CLUE!!!!! Women are awesome to me and I am in awe of what they have done, accomplished, and strive to accomplish. When I dress to go out these are the things I take with me that not only am I an ambassador for "us," but that I am presenting as a woman and I want to be treated as any woman would want to be treated, with respect!!!!!
Love ya,
Virginia

[CJ]

Hi all,

In support of Virginia's view of women:

Social analyst and ecopsychology pioneer Theodore Roszak says, "As women come more and more into their own, the qualities that we have long assumed were exclusively and stereotypically theirs will come to be more widely acknowledged. Institutions now grounded in harshly competitive market values will give more and more place to care, cooperation, and mutual aid. In the century to come, we can expect our cultural style to be steadily reshaped by the other half of the human race." In fact, this reshaping has already begun. We find hope in all the ways women are stepping into leadership all over the world and in the men who are evolved enough to honor the feminine in themselves as well as in women. from It Starts with Mothers: Let a spirit of compassion and nurturing guide us
—By Nina Utne, Utne magazine
November / December 2005 Issue

Of course, I cannot help but feel that I need to add that "honoring the feminine in themselves" implies, for men, something rather less prosaic than wearing fully-fashioned seamed nylons or being cosmetodextrous (uh, "good with makeup"). It implies a major "re-orientation" of their values. And values don't require any specific wardrobe or look.

Georgia,

Like you (and basically everyone else here), I can only rely on my own intuition when it comes to the reasons for the existence of a (more or less universal) impulse towards transgendered or gender-variant behaviour in some people. I don't know why we do what we do; I don't know why we are who we are; I don't know how many of us there really are out there. For me, those aren't the important questions and I'd rather let those people who'll devote much of their time and energy to sociometrics or biology suggest some answers. My main concern is, given that there are people such as myself out there, what then? where do we go from here? how can those such as myself live in the world in a manner that will minimize psychological and emotional tensions for all involved and in a manner that will best promote the mental health of all involved? It's a tall order. It's what I think we should focus our efforts on. People bandy (often distorted) statistics about in the hopes of legitimizing their views or experiences. But to what end? So that they may be a part of this thing called "society"? They already are. So that their needs may be acknowledged and validated, along with their rights as individuals? Maybe. Unfortunately, laws are no guarantee of good behaviour on the part of those who bear us ill will. Plus, the fact that a law exists doesn't mean it's morally defensible. So the answer must be somewhere else. And I think it's here--and I'm going out on an intuitive limb, here: we (gender-variant) folks have a strong desire to see our experience recognized in the culture in which we live so that we may stand on firmer psychological ground when relating to those who are dear and near to us.

Put plainly: I'm so incredibly tired of being considered a weirdo, a pervert, an anomaly, a freak, a monster, a criminal, a nut case, a degenerate, a psycho, a curio, fit only to be either laughed at or put behind bars. I'm none of those things. And the higher than average suicide rate (and incidence of mental illness) in the transgender community has to do with the fact that we're made to feel, continuously, throughout the entirety of our lives, exactly those things. Here, social issues come into play: tolerance, justice, social ethics, politics, religious beliefs, etc. But I, for one, am not too concerned about such things... except insofar as they influence those people in whose emotional orbits I travel--my past and future SO's, my family, my friends and colleagues. Hence, I care whether or not the culture that gave me birth and "in which I move and have my being" is ready (or not) and willing (or not) to accept me as its offspring. But (and it's a biggie), I care only insofar as social attitudes and mores will determine whether or not I can live my life as I was meant to live it and still be able to love--and to be loved by--those who matter to me.

Crossdressers are often deathly afraid of self-revealing to their SO's precisely because they're also afraid that their SO's have "bought into" the "traditional" wisdom regarding men who--again, for whatever reason--pass themselves off as women. Make no mistake: many of these men (and I'm definitely one of them) feel they must either be afforded the opportunity to present as women or they'll perish. And when I say "perish," I don't necessarily mean death; I'm referring to emotional, psychological, and even spiritual, wilting and desiccation.

How can the busy, busy, botanists all around me think the beautiful flower I am is so noxious and dangerous? It's beyond me. Maybe they're afraid of the marvelous colours? I'm 44 years old, and for forty years out of those forty-four, I've struggled against being taken for (and labeled) a weed; I will not let myself be uprooted from the only garden I've ever known without a fight. And, for me, that fight takes the shape of exposing others to the wild prettiness of my own soul; I will not hide any longer. Those that don't like it can go make themselves a dandelion salad.

Well, I guess I've gone rabid again. Sorry. I just feel this incredible need to get some of this stuff out of my system once in a while. This may not be the best place to do so, but there it is. My main point (because, I did have one, you know) in this post was only that, like the environmentalists of my youth regarding the environment, I think globally but act locally when it comes to gender. I have no statistics to back me up; only a strong suspicion that more men dabble in femininity than is generally supposed and that this is well and good. I'm also motivated by a strong desire that such genderplay not be swept under a carpet of shame, that it be visible to the world at large. Only in this way, I think, will it ever become possible for men to one day "honor the feminine in themselves" in much the same way women already do so in themselves.

Love,
CJ

[Virginia]

Awesome CJ absolutely awesome!! I wish we could stand on the proverbial mountain and shout it to the world, but here you preach to the choir so to speak!! The way we get the word out is dress and go out GOD BLESS YOU ELIZABETH!!!!!
Can you imagine, can you imagine where we would be with out the internet - this site and others like it???????????? What if it did not exist and some force whatever you want to use could take each or us individually and magically visit each other as to where we would be with out each other here. Probably closet dwellers most all of us! Totally ignorant that we have sisters not only here, but all over the world. Would I have gone to the Roanoke Pride meeting and stood toe to toe with the "powers that be" in that organization and asked that they consider allowing a crossdresser of all things to come to one of their events??? You have got to be kidding - I may be "tough" but not having the knowledge that my sisters here have given me I would been hidding under my bed at even the thought of doing something that brazen!
We are making inroads, I have no doubt and I still think that we may be "a" not necessarily "the" next stage in human evolution.
With apologizes to GOD I think SHE will forgive me!
Go Forth and Multiply!
Virginia

[Absaroka]

Iliked the comment that there is stuff that's really pretty important and then there is the stuff that is not so important.

In the example of important is stuff like men feeling as if it would be looked at oddly if they take time off to raise their children. Or questioning the whole competitive thing. Or women being allowed to serve in combat positions in the military. Important issues where the underlying assumptions themselves may not be clear. Men working in day care centers is still something that makes some parents uncomfortable for another example.

Then there are the less important issues. Like men wearing mascara to work. As opposed to the important issue of people being rejected based on their appearance.

Best be careful what we hope for. I would say that from it being okay for men to wear mascara to work it might be only a short step to men being required to come to work properly made up. A burden many women struggle with. It would be a great leap sideways and not progress in any way because the real issue is not perhaps what we wear but the idea of dress codes in the first place. And dress codes of some sort seem to be ubiquitous in most societies.

I am reminded by the comment a feminist made about burquas. She said miniskirts and heels were also oppresive the moment they became required, even without the force of law behind the requirement. Of course Western women face ostracism and job loss if they violate most norms, not having acid thrown in their face. I'm not equating us with the Taliban by any means.

On the other hand 16 year olds in revealing outfits and boys in bags and rags at the high school is not something I think should be allowed. I have to ask myself why and I am not sure of the answer here.

Lots of self contradictory ramblings here.

Andrea

[Georgia(SO)]

Virginia,

You said

Geprgia, I can only assume that you are taking certain liberal liberties with some of the things you wrote. First we know what we as Cd'ers do in order to enhance our appearance, but a lot of women do pretty much the same, padded bras, hair enhancements, plucking eye brows, we both wear make-up, artifical nails vs. salon nails. We both use the same items to enhance how we look.

Yes, I do speak from certain stereotypes when I try to illuminate the reactions of the average non-TG'd person to TG'd behavior. Please understand where I was coming from when I talked about the "fakery" involved in CDing. The previous posts on the thread appeared to be wondering why men who present as women are less acceptable to society in general than women who dress in a masculine manner. Let me try to say this very carefully. This is not a *judgement* of behavior. I only meant that people, in general, are less comfortable with folks who put on fake this and that than they are with people who dress down, as it were. In fact, among many GGs (including me), padded bras, fake nails, hair enhancements, etc. on women are eschewed. Many of us, in fact, are very hard on genetic women who use such enhancements. (I have no idea why makeup and tweezing eyebrows is acceptable, whereas a padded bra or fake nails is ... uhm... looked at with disdain. But it is...) I don't mean to be rude, but we gg's are awfully hard on one another.

Secondly, you said

As far as "second sex." Women are what most of us/CD'ers seek to imulate, not only the appearance, but some of us seek to allow the characteristics that we admire, to manifest themselves in us and to become a part of us now and forever. I can only speak for myself, but I strive to climb the mountain that women reside on. Those who think that women are the "second or weaker or ???" sex - THEY AIN'T GOT A CLUE!!!!!

Oh geez, I didn't mean to say *I* think we are the *Second Sex*. I meant that society still is primarily patriarchal, although it is changing slowly during our lifetimes, and that this overall societal view can be at the root of some of the problems people have with MTF TG'd people.

I really wish that we could reach a point to where society is neither patriarchal or matriachal - hope for a day when it is just people-archal.

I probably stuck my foot in it on that post and for that I apologize.

CJ-
Ya know, sometimes you bring me to tears ...

Put plainly: I'm so incredibly tired of being considered a weirdo, a pervert, an anomaly, a freak, a monster, a criminal, a nut case, a degenerate, a psycho, a curio, fit only to be either laughed at or put behind bars. I'm none of those things.

I can't imagine what it would be like to spend a lifetime being thought of as wierd. (Actually, everybody thinks I'm wierd, but it is a way different kind of wierd... ) I can't imagine what it would be lilke to spend a lifetime being told there is something inherently wrong with who I am.

So, what can I, as a non-TG'd SO of a somewhat closeted CD do to help? I know what to do to promote racial equality. I know what to do to promote religious tolerance. I know what to do to promote sexual orientation tolerance. The best I know to do is to do all those things with respect to TG'd people - it's just that I don't run into people I know are TG'd very often.

I'll tell you what ya'll have done for me, besides give me a whole pile of new friends... Prior to joining this group, I did think that CDing was a choice you made - roughly akin to a fetish - and while I didn't think it was "wrong", I certainly didn't understand why anyone would want to do it. I now realize it is more than that - it is a part of your personality, just as being a writer is a part of mine. I think Elizabeth said it best in one post or another when she said (rough quote...) "She doesn't just come alive when I put on a dress. She is always there."

CJ, I truly hope I didn't offend you. I certainly didn't mean to - I agree so completely with you...

I don't know why we are who we are; I don't know how many of us there really are out there. For me, those aren't the important questions and I'd rather let those people who'll devote much of their time and energy to sociometrics or biology suggest some answers. My main concern is, given that there are people such as myself out there, what then? where do we go from here? how can those such as myself live in the world in a manner that will minimize psychological and emotional tensions for all involved and in a manner that will best promote the mental health of all involved?... It's what I think we should focus our efforts on. People bandy (often distorted) statistics about in the hopes of legitimizing their views or experiences. But to what end? So that they may be a part of this thing called "society"? They already are. So that their needs may be acknowledged and validated, along with their rights as individuals? Maybe. ....I'm going out on an intuitive limb, here: we (gender-variant) folks have a strong desire to see our experience recognized in the culture in which we live so that we may stand on firmer psychological ground when relating to those who are dear and near to us.

I post the thoughts that I post in some lame effort to help with this. I see ya'll often wondering why society thinks this or that, and sometimes I'm not sure that you see it from a non-TGd point of view. Sometimes the comments on this forum about "How Society Sees Us" don't match my experience of "How Society Sees You". I figure you can't fight society's (or your SO's) viewpoint if you are seeing society's viewpoint through fogged glasses. (It's a lot like me trying to understand how men think. Chances are I'm going to guess wrong...) Therefore, I throw out my intuitive impressions of how the non-TGd world sees TGd folks, hoping that it will hope you to know which battles to fight and which to just ignore.

Perhaps I'm really out of line here. I dunno. I do know I certainly meant no offense and hope you will accept my apology.
-g, with hugs

[Kathy]

I have been following this thread since it started. I must say that it has been one of the most insightful and thoughtful discussions I have witnessed in a long time.

There is little I can add but, Georga(SO) made a comment that rather struck me...

But, this particular fella was a pretty quiet soul without a whole lot of sense of adventure in him. Therefore, I doubt he actually would ever make the step of dressing...just a bit too adventurous for him, I would think.

Um, Georgia, you just described me! To call me an introvert would be something of an understatement and my idea of an adventure would be to pick up a book by an author I had never read before. I'm the guy who sits in the back office writing the computer programs while allowing everyone else to take the credit because I don't want to be singled out.

But, yet, I do dress. I make no effort to present as a woman in public but I do wear femme slacks, tops and heels while out doing my errands.

So, I'm wondering, where someone like me fits in your picture?

Love,
Kathy

[Loretta Ann]

Hi Georgia,

I only meant that people, in general, are less comfortable with folks who put on fake this and that than they are with people who dress down, as it were. In fact, among many GGs (including me), padded bras, fake nails, hair enhancements, etc. on women are eschewed. Many of us, in fact, are very hard on genetic women who use such enhancements. (I have no idea why makeup and tweezing eyebrows is acceptable, whereas a padded bra or fake nails is ... uhm... looked at with disdain. But it is...) I don't mean to be rude, but we gg's are awfully hard on one another.

You bring up a very good point. On one hand many CDers lay claim that they are attempting to emulate women, then turn around and use the kind of fake stuff that by far and wide most women do not use.

Especially the long nails, Sorry girls but the only women I have seen with long nails are those in pictures. And most women (in every day life) wear very little make up. False eye lashes... I have only seen one woman who wears them regularly, And it is easy to tell that they are fake. I do not find that attractive.

Some of the actions of (some) CDers appear to me to be on the out side of realty, and in fact are not a true representation of their claim. A very large part of it I believe matches their fantasy, as opposed to any direct emulation.

This is not a *judgement* of behavior. I only meant that people, in general, are less comfortable with folks who put on fake this and that than they are with people who dress down, as it were. In fact, among many GGs (including me), padded bras, fake nails, hair enhancements, etc. on women are eschewed. Many of us, in fact, are very hard on genetic women who use such enhancements.

A lot of that pressure comes from men. A woman who uses the fake stuff will attract a certain kind of man. And that man is usually not the type that can give the woman what she needs in a relationship. Said another way the woman (or man) who presents an inner beauty is more likely to attract a more secure kind of person more able to provide the desired elements of a healthy relationship. Where as the person who uses fake stuff to attract others is more likely to attract the fakes.

Perhaps I'm really out of line here.

I don't think you are out of line at all. I think you are bringing more of a proper picture of what it is really like to this place, and I welcome it.

[CJ]

Hi all,

Georgia, with Loretta's last comment in her post above. I agree 1000%! You are so not out of line it's not even funny. Uh, yeah... something like that.

And, please, let me be the one to apologize if I made you feel that I was offended by anything you said. I definitely wasn't, Georgia. Trust me on that! I was just mouthing off as I sometimes do and you happened to be in the path of my silk scarf.

Your input here (and elsewhere on the forum) has been a true Godsend. As has been that of many other GG's as well. The forum--aw, to heck with the forum!--I, me, CJ, would be much the poorer without that input.

So, please, please, continue. Don't mind me (now this is where I'd blame my recent mood on PMS if I could ).

Love,
CJ