There is no such thing as crossdressing

[Justin_Case001 4,881]

I'm male, and I prefer to wear dresses and all manner of apparel typically deemed "feminine", or for women.  Given my style of dress, nearly anyone who saw me would label me a crossdresser, and that's fine--I take no offense.  However, I advocate that there's no such thing.  Clothes are clothes.  It doesn't matter who's wearing them.  The concept of gender specific clothing is purely a learned, environmental phenomenon.  You think it's part of our DNA to know that skirts are for women?  Of course not.  Everything that any culture believes about clothing, and which sex should wear what, is just due to what people grow up seeing and being told is normal.  The fact is that there is no rationale whatsoever for any clothing being sex-specific.  Take dresses for example.  It's a dress.  It's a one-piece thing with a skirt instead of pant legs.  It knows no gender.  What does it matter what it's covering?  The only reason we have any concept of "dressing like a woman" or "dressing like a man" is because of what society tells us is normal.  A Shyamalan The Village-esque isolation experiment could easily produce a generation of people believing that dresses are just for men.  In my opinion, the only thing that could possibly qualify as truly crossdressing would be wearing a garment designed for a body part you don't have.  I.e. support undergarments.  That's it.  (And even then, I don't care what people want to wear.  Wear whatever makes you happy.)  Other than that, I don't think clothing should have gender labels.  Although I concede that adjectives such as masculine and feminine are useful in describing clothing, as well as other things, I submit that we steer away from this idea of "men's clothing" and "women's clothing."  I also concede that it's still useful to have men's and women's departments in stores, as the fit of the clothes will be different, but what I'm advocating is that we throw out the idea that certain types, certain...genres, if you will, of clothing are just for one sex or the other.

 

Thoughts?

 

*EDIT*  It occurred to me that my main post could be taken to imply that I am in favor of complete gender neutrality, possibly to the point of not acknowledging the differences between the sexes.  This isn't the case at all.  In fact, you'll never meet a bigger advocate for noticing, appreciating, and celebrating the differences between the sexes.  Fair and equal treatment is the not the same thing as pretending that there are no differences.  I am merely calling for the lifting of apparel taboos, and for people to realize that a man wearing a dress is not unnatural, nor does it automatically equate to or imply cosplaying as a woman.  If a man is wearing a dress, then it's a man's dress.  We should not have to call it "crossdressing," though I'll reiterate that I don't take offense to the term, either.  Just wanted to clarify that.  Cheerio.

Edited July 15, 2016 by Justin_Case001

[DND 2,355]

I as well don't personally validate that deviation from a society's typical expectation regarding men and women's fashion/hygiene implies abnormal and improper attire. Go for what you like and feel comfortable with how you want to look! Sex is... well, just sex- there's indeed no biological construct in human nature that implies gender must comply to a certain appearance. All that focus on dresses on women, tuxes on men is only subjective preference- subjective preference that only heeds inherent cultural value in segregating and discerning men & women. Fixated attire isn't at all as important as we tend to treat it. Just makes it easier to spot the XXs and XYs and we don't need encompass that way of thinking day in and day out.

[Invincible 2,091]

I don't personally mind, but i think that just because it isn't a biological trait isn't a reason to say cross dressing doesn't exist. Social norms and acceptable behavior are both learned and enforced by society (or at least in some societies) - in some circles you would find people practicing a "dress code". Any deviation from the norms wouldn't get you outright stoned, but might be considered inappropriate in such circles and you may find yourself excluded. So there's that.

[DuskRain 193]

Oh I agree.

 

Everybody is taught at a young age that "this is for girls" and "this is for boys". People treat this rule like it is the one overpowering rule of society.

 

If society see a man doing anything relatively "girly", they freak out, because everyone was taught that a male has to be manly no matter what. All you ever hear is, "Man up", or "You can't do that, thats for girls!".

They treat it as if the person is sick in the head if they dont live up to this expectation.

 

On the other hand, girls have a BUNCH more leeway. Girls can pretty much wear whatever they want, and nobody will bat an eye. They can like whatever they like, and nobody will look twice. Its almost encouraged and praised now when a woman shows off more of here masculine side.

 

Society sees a girl that is working hard, wearing "male clothing" and doing a "man's job" (ie. Manual labor) and they applaud and cheer her on.

They see a man in a dress, and they shoot him down. They tell him that he is wrong and he needs to act "more like a man".

 

Its all how we we raised. We were all brought up to be "socially acceptable". It just so happens that there is a worldwide belief that certain things need to be divided by gender.

But the thing is, there is no rule saying that things should be seperated. Its not a biological trait, its not in our dna, it just doesn't physically exist. There is no rule saying thay pink is for girls, and blue is for boys. But we were all forced to think this way.

 

I would love to change this, but unfortunately there is no easy way to do so. It is very hard to change an entire generation's belief with only a few people willing to question the rules of that society.

 

For now, if I even go outside wearing the things I want to wear, I would be rejected, shamed, and bullied.

Edited July 14, 2016 by DuskRain

[woodgazer 71]

Thoughts? My thought is that you're waking thoughts. And that I didn't have to think long about it to agree with you (which is not the same thing as saying everyone will). While some may be at risk for shaming/bullying/violence for wearing what they want, I think we need more good examples of people wearing what they want - a lot of phenomena take some getting used to.

 

(Also, DuskRain, about women's leeway when it comes to dressing as opposed to men's lack thereof - to me that's a great example of why we need more feminism!)

[DuskRain 193]

 (Also, DuskRain, about women's leeway when it comes to dressing as opposed to men's lack thereof - to me that's a great example of why we need more feminism!)

I dont dissagree, but can you elaborate a little bit more? This is kinda vague.

[woodgazer 71]

I dont dissagree, but can you elaborate a little bit more? This is kinda vague.

 

Oh my train of thoughts isn't apparent to everyone directly when I think it? Sure, though I don't want to hog the thread! What I meant was that men as well as women are limited by gender stereotypes, just like you said. And that feminism isn't only about empowering women, as a lot of people seem to think.

[weesh 690]

I think you should confidently wear any clothes you want to.

And others should be free of judgement from such petty things.

 

But there is a very simple definition of cross dressing that I think you are fighting against: wearing clothing typical of the opposite sex.

I'm not sure it makes sense to try and change that definition, or to try and claim that clothes that have hundreds of years of history suddenly don't.  

 

"The concept of gender specific clothing is purely a learned, environmental phenomenon."

Somewhat.  But how is that relevant?  Everyone knows a dress is designed for women.  that collective societal knowledge is a level of inertia that will be tough to buck.

Also, women tend to have curves that men do not.  to take pieces of clothing that takes those curves into account and claim it is gener-less seems silly to me.  

 

I have to ask...why do you want that to change?  What is the problem that you see from the term crossdressing?  

[Kyoshi Frost Wolf 41,309]

You know what I think? Rock on! You where whatever you want to and never let society bring you down over it. Just like oyu said, clothes are just that, clothes. They can be used strictly for warmth, or they can be used for style and expression. We can do with it what we will.

 

As Eddie Izzard once said:"They are not women's clothing, they are my clothes, I bought them."

[SynBassilicious Pony 322]

....................

Edited January 30, 2023 by SynBassilicious Pony

[Silver Letter 1,832]

I dont dissagree, but can you elaborate a little bit more? This is kinda vague.

I've spoken about this before but what the poster means is that when females have more leeway to dress with more "masculine" clothing while the inverse isn't true, it's anti-female. The reasoning behind this is because society is simply encouraging females to be more masculine because it doesn't value femininity. When males "dress as" females, society sees them as lowering themselves to something that's like an inferior status. We need more feminism to make society understand that "femininity" throughout society, even expressed by males, is a good thing too.

As far as the main topic is concerned, I agree. I think it's not logical to assign something like clothing to males or females inherently based on design, color, type, etc. Other than body shape, generally speaking, there's no such thing as male or female clothing. And it doesn't matter what society thinks for me. My freedom and liberty must not hinge on the ability of the judgmental (and frankly, brainwashed) masses to accept. We should all be able to dress as we see fit even if others don't like it.

[Shanks 10,816]

Gender specific clothing will never completely go away because there biological reasons that drive these preferences in addition to socialization. What I think would be far more productive is if we drove society more in a direction where we recognize that there are differences between men and women but that nobody is completely masculine or feminine and that it is okay to like certain things that go against prescribed gender roles and that includes what many would define as "cross dressing".

[Silver Letter 1,832]

 

 

Gender specific clothing will never completely go away because there biological reasons that drive these preferences in addition to socialization.

What is the biological reason for dresses?

[Flutter's lover <3 8,205]

I have feminine clothing as well as masculine clothing.  I say wear whatever the hell you want.

[ConcorDisparate 385]

They need to either get rid of tampons altogether, or market them towards all genders equally.

 

I don't really understand your point there. I know it concerns man and woman, but what about money ? Isn't a lucrative business meant to make money ? Who would throw money in such a project, hoping to sell tampons for men ?

 

 

Even tampons are sexist, since they're primarily aimed at girls.  It's ridiculous.

 

 

And how can targetting its audience be a form of discrimination? I am okay with that idea, but don't go half way then. Apply this to every target aucience : gamers, gardeners, animals. They all suffer from discrimination, too.

 

I am 100% okay for such causes, but there is ONE thing that is unbearable, it's hypocrisy. Would you mind precising your thoughts ?

Edited July 14, 2016 by ConcorDisparate

[Plume 922]

Intriguing! I would say yes - the notion of crossdressing still exists, but more for the people who feel more comfortable having a label that encompasses them or supports them in what they do, if you will.

 

Personally, I agree that clothing should just be clothing, but at the same time, with this much history I doubt it will be easily changed. Even so, I feel like fashion is beginning to pander towards more gender-neutral clothing as society changes.

[LHfunk 422]

 

That's a bit overdramatic for what I have to say but I wanted to use it so I'm using it.

 

Anyway, my objection is to the notion that there isn't such a thing as crossdressing. There is clothing designed specifically for a woman's body type, and clothing specifically designed for a man's body type. If a man wears something specifically designed for women, it is crossdressing. Now, the sort of crossdressing you're talking about is just a man wearing clothing that society associates with females. That technically does not exist, because the clothing itself is not designed for a man or a woman specifically.

 

Think of it like this: There is a blue team and a red team. The blue team wears blue shirts, and the red team red shirts. A blue person can wear a red shirt, and that would be crossdressing. However, there are purple colored shirts that range up and down the purple spectrum. Certain shades are associated with the red team, and others the blue team. If a red person put on a purple shirt associated with the blue team, it wouldn't technically be crossdressing, since purple is not designed for either the red or blue team.

 

I say technically not crossdressing because society still considers crossdressing, even if it really isn't. In the end, it's your views that matter. So enjoy your clothing choices!

 

EDIT: This does make me feel better about wanting to get a Nepeta jacket that's for women though. It's a pretty neat jacket, and includes about half of what you need for a Nepeta cosplay. All it's missing is her gloves, shoes, shirt, and makeup (which SHE doesn't have but what you'd need for a cosplay).

Edited July 15, 2016 by LHfunk

[GenderIsAnIllusion 2,177]

​Yes there is. Culturally there are men and women's clothing. Its not wrong to cross-dress, but it does exist.

[Shanks 10,816]

What is the biological reason for dresses?

Men on average tend to be fairly visual sexually speaking, so it is probably a way to play a bit on that. Since humans started wearing clothes they eventually evolved to wear the clothes themselves can be used to help them attract a mate. I am not saying it was consciously done, but the subconscious can be quite a powerful thing.

[Lil Pip 775]

SynBassilicious Pony, on 14 Jul 2016 - 12:40 PM, said:

It's awfully sexist how some clothes are supposedly for females and others are for males.  Anyone should have the right to wear or not wear whatever they want.

 

There's nothing wrong with men wearing dresses or bikinis or bras, and I don't understand why society unfairly forces only girls to wear bras and similar stuff.  Women should have every right to not wear bikinis or bras, especially since men aren't even expected to wear those.  This is why we need feminism.

 

Even tampons are sexist, since they're primarily aimed at girls.  It's ridiculous.  They need to either get rid of tampons altogether, or market them towards all genders equally.

Adding on that tampon bit makes it seem sarcastic, besides why would a guy need tampons?

[Meson Bolt 2,648]

Well, I have some opinions, but I'm not very tactful with them, so I'm just gonna say this:

 

I'm jealous that girls can wear pretty much whatever they want.

[Justin_Case001 4,881]

On the other hand, girls have a BUNCH more leeway. Girls can pretty much wear whatever they want, and nobody will bat an eye. They can like whatever they like, and nobody will look twice. Its almost encouraged and praised now when a woman shows off more of here masculine side.

 

Society sees a girl that is working hard, wearing "male clothing" and doing a "man's job" (ie. Manual labor) and they applaud and cheer her on.

They see a man in a dress, and they shoot him down. They tell him that he is wrong and he needs to act "more like a man".

Tell me about it.  I've been tilting at this particular windmill for years.  And this phenomenon right here is the sole reason why men are looked down on or criticized for crossdressing.  Then, on the opposite side, females "crossdressing" in men's clothing is barely even acknowledged as being a thing at all, because it's already normal for women to wear pants and shirts.  Really, in practice, it's as if "crossdressing" only goes one way.  The double standards know no bounds.

 

 

 I have to ask...why do you want that to change?  What is the problem that you see from the term crossdressing?  

Well...I'd say it's because the term comes with a strong connotation that it's wrong or abnormal in a bad way.  The term often carries with it the idea that people shouldn't do it.  I want that to change.  That's part of it.  Also, I want people to realize that the desire to wear a particular type of clothing (e.g. dresses) is not a gender specific phenomenon.  I've met many men, of varying sexual orientation, who say they want to wear dresses.  Some do, but most don't due to the fear of ostracization.  I want people to realize that a man wearing a dress does not equate to the man cosplaying as a woman, or something of that nature.  Dresses could well be for men, too.  There's no reason they can't.  Dresses could be designed for a male figure.  (And in fact, the dresses I own are perfectly androgynous and fit a male figure very well.)  Sure, it won't be popular with the majority, but so what?  I believe that if society was completely accepting of unconventional styles of dress, then there would actually be enough of a market for men's dresses to warrant making and marketing them.  So, in conclusion, although the term "crossdressing" is sometimes benign, I want the taboos lifted, and I want everyone to realize that wearing clothing typically intended for the opposite sex is not unnatural, nor does it automatically equate to pretending to be the opposite sex, or anything like that.  I hope that answers your question.

 

 

Even tampons are sexist, since they're primarily aimed at girls.  It's ridiculous.  They need to either get rid of tampons altogether, or market them towards all genders equally.

I really liked the rest of your post, but this part confuses me.  Sarcasm?  I mean....what possible use could males have for tampons?  Unless.....wait....was your whole post sarcasm?  Hmm.  That seems to be the most likely conclusion.  I hope that isn't the case, and I apologize if I'm wrongfully accusing you.  If it is sarcasm, then I feel a little sheepish, as well as disappointed, but I respect your right to disagree.

[Blackshirt Brony 415]

All clothing is not created equal. If you wouldn't wear something because it's "too large," then you shouldn't wear clothing of the opposite sex. The general physique of the average man is in fact very different from that of the average woman, and there are certain things which are actually pretty inconvenient for someone to wear if they aren't of the intended market.

 

These "gender-specific" areas exist because men and women are separate beings with innately different needs in regard to what is comfortable and what is practical.

 

For the most part, we don't pass laws against men wearing womens' clothing.

Edited July 15, 2016 by SpiritoftheRadio

[woodgazer 71]

 The general physique of the average man is in fact very different from that of the average woman

You'll find by far greater differences within the respective "man" and "women" groups of people, than between the "average man" and the "average woman". Don't you think a 190 cm person would feel uncomforatable in clothes that were made to fit a 160 cm person, more so because of the size, than of what gender the clothes were made to target?

[Justin_Case001 4,881]

If you wouldn't wear something because it's "too large," then you shouldn't wear clothing of the opposite sex.

This makes absolutely no sense.  Of course I'm not going to wear clothes that don't fit....y'know, because they don't fit.  Why should that mean I shouldn't wear a dress that fits me perfectly?  What you're saying is that if I wouldn't wear something that doesn't fit, then I shouldn't wear something that does, regardless of who it's intended for.  That's completely illogical.

 

 

These "gender-specific" areas exist because men and women are separate beings with innately different needs in regard to what is comfortable and what is practical.

Yes, men and women typically need athletic support in different places.  Other than that, there really isn't any difference in need or comfort or practicality, other than the fact that the cut of clothes needs to be different to accommodate different body types and shapes.  This is why I said that it's fine to have men's and women's clothing departments.  What I'm advocating, again, is that there's no reason to claim that certain types or styles of clothing, skirts or dresses for example, should just be for one sex.  How is a skirt any less comfortable or practical for a man?

 

 

For the most part, we don't pass laws against men wearing womens' clothing.

For the most part?  Which garments are illegal for men to wear?