There is no such thing as crossdressing

[KatieBelle 302]

I'd like to believe that this is true, but I don't think we're quite there yet.

You're completely right about how the differences in men and women's clothing are learned. I think there's actually a name for this, pink-blue something? For another example, look at children's toys aisles.

[DuskRain 193]

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.

Ahh, I see. That makes sense! Thanks for clarifying.

[Discordian 6,015]

The very fact that there are widely accepted definitions of what is and isn't gender specific clothing means that crossdressing does exist.

 

Now whether someone should be judged for that is an entirely different subject but what counts as men and women's clothing respectively is easily identified. By design and by commonality you can easily tell what is and isn't made for a specific gender, even if it's easy enough to hit a very large grey area with some types of clothing like pants.

[Silver Letter 1,832]

The very fact that there are widely accepted definitions of what is and isn't gender specific clothing means that crossdressing does exist.

 

Now whether someone should be judged for that is an entirely different subject but what counts as men and women's clothing respectively is easily identified. By design and by commonality you can easily tell what is and isn't made for a specific gender, even if it's easy enough to hit a very large grey area with some types of clothing like pants.

I still think one can make dresses tailored for men or women. Society thinks dresses are for women only but as usual, society is wrong.

[Discordian 6,015]

I still think one can make dresses tailored for men or women. Society thinks dresses are for women only but as usual, society is wrong.

Oh absolutely. I wasn't trying to say that it was concrete and couldn't change but entirely based on the idea that you can look at a dress in a clothing store and understand that it's made specifically for women (and 99% of all people will have the same perspective) means that crossdressing in its most basic definition does, in fact, exist.

[Emiko Gale 199]

I wish you could say that to the smelly homeless guy I bumped into at the bus stop who thought I was a cross dressing male.

 

But darn...I guess that might be right because I am a woman who wants to wear a tuxedo one day...And hopefully at my own wedding, but I am not sure if that counts as cross dressing.

[Justin_Case001 4,881]

Oh absolutely. I wasn't trying to say that it was concrete and couldn't change but entirely based on the idea that you can look at a dress in a clothing store and understand that it's made specifically for women (and 99% of all people will have the same perspective) means that crossdressing in its most basic definition does, in fact, exist.

Certainly.  I won't argue that it exists in at least some sense.  Otherwise we wouldn't be here to begin with.  I tend to pick an extreme stance for my topics and argue for the way I think things should be, rather than how they are.

 

Just for the heck of it, I'll also reiterate that I'm not calling for all clothing to be merged into one gender neutral department in stores.  Certainly not.  No, we'd still have men's and women's in that regard.  But rather, I'm advocating that any type of clothing can be for either sex, and that a man wearing a dress shouldn't be considered crossdressing from a certain point of view.

 

 

But darn...I guess that might be right because I am a woman who wants to wear a tuxedo one day...And hopefully at my own wedding, but I am not sure if that counts as cross dressing.

Well, you know what I'd say: Nope.  Not "crossdressing".  Why call it that?  You'd just be a woman in your own tux, which would be awesome.  I hope you do it, too.  I find this very interesting as well, because I want to wear a big, fancy, medieval dress to my own wedding.  But first I'll have to invent a way to travel to parallel universes where I might have a shot at even getting a date.  That's a little joke.  Probably not a very funny one. 

[Knightgem 158]

I admit there's nothing wrong with it. The only time I will ever properly do it, is on Halloween, cause then all kinds of bizzare and weird things get done. I personally don't celebrate Halloween as a "trick or treat" sort of thing, but more of a remembrance of the people that have been. Anything from family and friends to the guy who I spoke to once on the way home from work that one day(besides the point).

As a Brony, the norm is already broken, might as well just run with it. Who knows, it might catch on and just like the fandom of this show, spread like wildfire. The norm must be broken and it starts with the first hoofstep

Edited July 16, 2016 by Unicornecious

[\/ 651]

If some article of clothing has space for male genitalia, then it's probably designed for men, and that's fine. If a shirt is tight-fitting and is shaped to fit some breasts, that's probably designed for women, and that's fine. But skirts, dresses, leggings, socks, gloves, shoes, hats, etc. that aren't specifically built around the physical anatomy of a specific type of human are fair game for anybody to wear. If it fits comfortably, why not wear it?

[honk friend 1,978]

I think it's pretentious to tear down what has been culturally established for centuries just to challenge a label

Women's clothes are women's clothes because they're fitted to a woman's body, there isn't such a thing as men's panties because panties are designed without accommodations for a dick and balls.

The pink and frilly nature of women's clothing is cultural but I'm sick of people treating cultural gender differences like they mean nothing, a world without culture is quite a boring one and a person without and culture to react to is, again, quite a boring one

[Justin_Case001 4,881]

I think it's pretentious to tear down what has been culturally established for centuries just to challenge a label

Would it be a safe assumption that you've never had a strong desire to wear clothes that are typically deemed socially unacceptable, and felt that this desire reflects a deeper need to express and embrace your true identity?  Most people will go through their lives without ever knowing what this feeling is like.  What I'm arguing is not meant to be pretentious.  It's meant to challenge closed-minded views and advocate acceptance.  I do apologize if my OP had a pretentious tone, though.

 

 

I'm sick of people treating cultural gender differences like they mean nothing, a world without culture is quite a boring one and a person without and culture to react to is, again, quite a boring one

I don't think I ever said or implied that culture and/or cultural gender differences mean nothing.  I want it to be understood that gender-specific styles of clothing are purely learned and environmental, and that there's nothing wrong with dressing outside of these norms.  But I certainly don't claim that culture means nothing.  Of course a world without culture would be boring.  I'm not disputing that at all.  The problem is when culture imposes unfair and arbitrary rules on us that people are ostracized for if they break.  Different cultures, including cultural styles of dress, make the world more interesting, but that doesn't mean that anyone should be forced to adhere to these arbitrary rules.  Appreciating culture, including gender differences, is fine.  Dictating how others should live and present themselves is not.  As for me, I'm not going to waste my life living in the box that my society has built for me and die full of regrets that I never did what would make me happy.

[honk friend 1,978]

Would it be a safe assumption that you've never had a strong desire to wear clothes that are typically deemed socially unacceptable, and felt that this desire reflects a deeper need to express and embrace your true identity?  Most people will go through their lives without ever knowing what this feeling is like.  What I'm arguing is not meant to be pretentious.  It's meant to challenge closed-minded views and advocate acceptance.  I do apologize if my OP had a pretentious tone, though.

 

 

 

I don't think I ever said or implied that culture and/or cultural gender differences mean nothing.  I want it to be understood that gender-specific styles of clothing are purely learned and environmental, and that there's nothing wrong with dressing outside of these norms.  But I certainly don't claim that culture means nothing.  Of course a world without culture would be boring.  I'm not disputing that at all.  The problem is when culture imposes unfair and arbitrary rules on us that people are ostracized for if they break.  Different cultures, including cultural styles of dress, make the world more interesting, but that doesn't mean that anyone should be forced to adhere to these arbitrary rules.  Appreciating culture, including gender differences, is fine.  Dictating how others should live and present themselves is not.  As for me, I'm not going to waste my life living in the box that my society has built for me and die full of regrets that I never did what would make me happy.

Nobody's forcing you to adhere to a cultural dress code by calling you a crossdresser, you ARE wearing clothes designed for and fitted to the opposite gender, you ARE a crossdresser. A label isn't ostracization, it's just something to simplify language.

You're allowed to enjoy and take part in certain aspects of what culture has defined as being female, just know that the associated label is harmless

[Zyrael 1,471]

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.

 

I agree. But not everyone does, in fact most people don't. And we often adjust our terms to suit the norm. Men still mostly wear "clothing for men" and women for women. There would have to be a major change for us to start dropping terms like "crossdressing"

[Denim&Venöm 18,687]

I mean, girls are wearing dudes clothes all the time. Don't hear that being called cross dressing. Should be fair to the reverse.  

Edited November 8, 2016 by Denim&Venom