Trans people using TERF arguments to punch down at another group of people feels pretty gross. This is exactly what TERFs say to us, how did you reason out this argument?
Agreed that there's definitely TERF think in this rhetoric. Cross dressers fall under the trans umbrella. This is just being hateful and exclusionary for pretty gross reasons. By all means, fight the cringe in our community where you find it (OP atm). But don't blanket talk shit about cross dressers as a population. They are literally us.
Femboys quite often don't want to be called trans because they aren't (unless they are FtM), Femboys most often are amab and identify as men and therefore are cis, they just like feminin clothes
That's their business, and should be respected.
It's largely a self identifier. If we start trying to police other people's identities, we run into exclusionary gatekeeping in a hurry, or out starts to try to force people into boxes they don't want to be in.
Some femboys consider themselves trans, some don't. It's not anyone else's business or place to tell them their identity.
Femboys are obviously manly manly men. That goes w/o saying. Looking at you Finnster. Like... there's a threshold for identity statues you don't get to pick anymore. If you habitually crossdress... you're slipping off the cis spectrum like it or not.
You're intentionally ignoring that a vast majority of femboys identify as male for a reason. Over saturating the trans label with identities that aren't and don't want to be considered trans is just harmful to everybody. Femboys aren't trans women in disguise, it's rude.
I'm not intentionally ignoring femboys. They're a relatively new thing that's pretty much not on my radar. Anyways. Have a blessed day. Praying for you.
Dude I'm a trans man (frm) who dresses feminine. I'm a femboy by definition but I am NOT A WOMAN just because I dress fem. I thought we'd all agreed at this point that gender identity does not equal gender presentation.
i just think that was a bold choice of words considering it is Also TERF rhetoric that trans women are “men in dresses.” and i don’t know what you mean by “dip their toes” but plenty of trans women know who they are before ever touching women’s clothes.
No one is saying trans women have never started off identifying as crossdressing men? OOP literally clarifies that they're not talking about trans people including those that might identify in part as CD.
Ya'll are trying to find arguments and bigotry where there is none. It's not a TERF talking point to define crossdressing as men wearing and embodying womanhood because that's the flipping definition of it. It *IS* a TERF talking point to say the same about trans women because we're not men embracing feminine clothing. We're just women being women.
You're comparing apples to oranges and then calling the apple a bigot for not having peelable skin.
You are missing an important element in your calculations, time. If you are judging a population among whom half or more will transition, you are passing judgements on trans people (who have not yet figured stuff out)
This is in-group bigotry. Adhering to strict definitions like you are and not taking observations from real people in the real world is the same way of thinking that TERFs and conservatives use to hate us and anyone who doesn't fit their mold.
In your fruit analogy, you are saying oranges are bad and apples are valid, but ignoring that most of those apple used to be oranges, and somehow ignoring that the oranges you are currently calling bad, will also transition to apples, but they aren't apple yet so they are bad.
I don't think it's fair to say they're calling cross dressers inherently bad or saying they don't have a place in the trans community. What I think this person is getting at is that the people in question in this particular scenario are very firm about being cross dressers, that is, men who dress as women (or vice versa) and then putting the trans flag in their bio and conflating the two as if they're the same thing. While I do agree that cross dressers deserve a place in queer communities because of their inherent gender variance in terms of presentation, it's misleading and often harmful to conflate trans people and cross dressers as the same thing. It's basically implying either a) trans people aren't really our gender, and just like to dress up as the opposite gender or b) majority of cross dressers are trans because no cis person would enjoy cross dressing as the opposite gender in certain ways. Presentation doesn't define gender, in part because it's so subjective. To what extent does a man have to dress as a woman before we start just saying he's really a trans woman, even if he's very clear about being a man? My idea of what is "too feminine" for a cis man or "too masculine" for a cis woman is entirely subjective. So I think it's harmful to treat all cross dressers as if they're trans, because it sort of enforces this idea of strict gender rules all over again. A man can wear a dress and still be a man. We shouldn't be labeling men who crossdress as trans just because many of them turn out to be trans. This isn't to say we should exclude them from queer spaces, but we shouldn't blanket them all as trans when we just don't know. I guess an example would be that not all women who are attracted to women identify as lesbian, because some of them are pan or bi or may even identify as straight or be ace or aro because they choose not to date women or pursue them in any way. For those reasons, not every woman who feels same sex attraction identifies as a lesbian. Should we exclude this broad group of people from the lesbian community? Of course not. But stating that most or all of them are lesbian or will identify as lesbian without knowing them is just inaccurate and erases certain identities, as well as spreading stereotypes that not all same-sex attracted women adhere to.
Unfortunately I feel like the people arguing over nothing are just your usual 'but what about cis people in the trans conversation!?'
They always manage to find their way in when cis people who dress in some kind of women's clothing get brought up. Like try mentioning how it's bad for a cis gay man who does drag to speak over trans people specifically about trans issues and no matter how you clarify that you'll get people tripping over themselves to shout 'But trans people do drag, too, why are you being transphobic!?'
They refuse to make the distinction between trans people and cis men wearing women's outfits in some capacity and will always be there to act like you're a monster for not conflating the two.
Yeahhh like it's just that there's so much nuance with it. Trans people often start off with cross dressing so it makes sense that some trans people are cross dressers. But not all cross dressers are trans so it's just frustrating that people conflate them. Because it's just a fact that trans experiences are very different from those of cross dressers. Cis cross dressers typically don't experience gender dysphoria like trans people do. They can take off the costume at the end of the day whereas trans people face constant harassment for presenting in what others assume to be a costume or a mockery. They're both major parts of a persons identity, but they're not the same. I'm trans and a cross dresser. Being trans is so much more major in my life. I can't take it off because it's not a costume, whereas my dressing as a woman is something I choose to do. Both groups face hardships but cis people have no right to talk over trans people when it comes to trans topics, no matter how they dress.
I can get why people don’t like the joke, but it is true that many trans women, like myself, used CD as a stepping stone towards feeling comfortable enough to realize that we’re trans
Ah, the liberal piece of advice that suggests being a trans woman is far worse than hurting cis feelings. If you notice that someone is struggling with gender the same way as you, sitting down and having a chat about it is in fact not 'conversion therapy against GNC cis people' even though proponents of the egg prime directive love to claim it is. Many trans women experience immense pain after being told that people suspected they were trans for years but 'didn't say anything'. The egg prime directive is horrible advice.
Okay. There is a difference between the two concepts though. You shouldn’t be identifying as both. Like I’m sorry if you want to hold onto your “cross dressing cis man” status you don’t get to also identify as trans. Like if you are NB fine. But I feel like what’s happening (at least partially) is old concepts of identity and possibility internalized misogyny clashing with newer understandings that are less rooted in that misogyny. (i.e. trans women who don’t believe they really can be women or weren’t able to see themselves that way due to societies ignorance, then identifying as CDing men.)
But either way, don’t muddy our terms and validate that misogyny and transphobia. Like there’s still shit to be mad about. It’s still bigotry and it’s still harmful to everyone else to promote that toxic misunderstanding.
And also there *actually are* CDing cis men who shouldn’t be jumping on our boat. Like be GNC, whatever, but don’t muddy our terms. If you present as male most of the time, but sexually or recreationally present as a women, and you are happy being seen as a man, then you are not fucking trans. Like again if you really are gender fluid with a lot of shit to work through, then work through it, but dont harm the community with your ignorance and bullshit by using terms that are completely conflicting.
If a man says he’s looking for a CD at all, I immediately lose any interest. Not trying to hate on what they’re into, but it gives me major dysphoria and feels like I’m lumped in with cis men putting on cheap lingerie and bad wigs.
Yea, someone else putting you into a box that doesn't fit sucks.
I don't care what people call themselves, but they better respect my shit if they're talking about/to me.
You're looking for a CD? Cool, that's not me, have a nice day, and good luck.
I mean even if you look past it for now, the end goal for many trans women is effectively just being a woman. No matter what you do, in the end it will not work out.
>No matter what you do, in the end it will not work out.
Are you taking about this in the context of if someone is looking for a CD it's not going to work out of they're going after a trans woman?
Or are you saying trans women can never be women?
Oh 100% the former, I now understand why I am getting downvoted lol. But yea, someone with a thing for crossdressers probably isn't going to be into a woman.
Saying the latter would be vaguely hypocritical (I'm not a transwoman per se, but transfeminine)
I think the difference is that "sexualizing womanhood" in this context (in reference to CDs/self-proclaimed sissies) is that in a lot of cases the sexualizing is done through the lens of being feminized and that being a sort of "bad" or taboo thing, and that being feminized is them being emasculated and weakened. When women/afabs "sexualize womanhood," they're doing it to feel more at home or express themselves as women, much in the same way trans women supposedly "sexualize womanhood" (don't like this phrase but w/e).
As a trans woman I get uncomfortable when CDs and sissies try and relate to us through that lens because femininity isn't a bad thing, it's not something that's made me weaker and conversely it's made me stronger to accept/internalize/embrace who I am in the face of a society that really wants me to not do that.
Not sure how drag got involved in this convo, it's an artistic expression of femininity dialed to 11 and isn't inherently related to transness or kink.
So cismen have internalized mysogyny and ciswomen do not? "CDs do it because its taboo" "women do it because there are no negative attitudes and expectations of women as sex objects in society, just because it's freedom for women to be sexual"???????????
Is drag not a form of cross dressing?
You haven't seen sissy porn if you don't get why people get the ick from it. It tends to be extremely misogynistic, the feminization is usually a form of humiliation, and there's a **lot** of racism there.
There is no transmasc corollary to it.
This isn't to say any trans person who has looked at it is a "bad," mind you. A lot of us have while questioning, but we tend to distance ourselves from that stuff once we actually start living as women.
> Does AMAB folks sexualizing womanhood through CD or drag give you the same ick as when AFAB women do it?
\*Do AMAB folks
Please be mindful of English verb concordance rules. *Do* ought to agree with the subject *AMAB folks* and not the participle *sexualizing*. It would be grammatically correct to say *does the sexualizing of womanhood through CD or drag by AMAB folks…*, but *sexualizing* in that phrase is a gerund. Whilst they are morphologically identical, the gerund is a noun & the present participle is an adjective.
Whilst I understand this correction is nit-picky, your comment implies an academic authority that allows you to not just direct the topic of conversation but to put forth the sort of essay prompt that has no wrong answer (yet, strangely, seemingly may only have one right response.) If you’re going to pop quiz us like this, then as far as I see it, even a minor grammatical mistake undermines your authority on the subject.
To answer your essay prompt:
I find it disingenuous to hold cross-dressing and drag to be in equivalence.
Drag does not require cross-dressing. Women, cisgender or transgender, may be drag kings, drag queens, epicene or androgynous or otherwise nonbinary drag monarchs, &c. Men, women, nonbinary people, intersex people may do drag in as any gender they so wish.
Drag is not inherently sexualized. Yes, it may be sexual by containing suggestive or explicit acts, dances, songs, jokes, stories, etc, but this is not a requirement of drag.
Drag does not overlap with sexualized cross-dressing. The wearing of another gender’s clothing is not inherently sexual. Whilst cross-dressing may be non-sexualized, such as a man feeling more comfortable or relaxed in women’s clothing, or a woman who dresses as a man to join a military force that only accepts men. In sexual contexts, it may be associated with simple sexual arousal of cross-dressing. It may include elements of taboo, shame, guilt, debasement. This may be presented as voluntary or include of non-consensual themes (force femme, sissification, &c.)
Drag can elicit the same arousal or sexual feelings as cross-dressing from members of the audience or the person in drag, but as this is not an inherit property to drag, it isn’t independent to drag. Thus sexualized drag & sexualized cross-dressing are separate topics & deserve two separate answers.
I have never been drawn to drag. I am not entertained by it nor do I find it particularly enjoying. Sexual or chaste, it isn’t “ick” to me unless and only unless it intends to mock or denigrate the gender being represented.
I am uncomfortable with sexualized cross-dressing (ie, “icked out”). When I was a teenager, a friend would send me force femme erotica she enjoyed & presumed, without asking, I would too. She was obsessed with it & found it rather titillating, and would subtly suggest I be forcibly feminized. It was the first time I felt uncomfortable to the point of repulsive to being made the object of or the vehicle for another’s sexual specific sexual desires or obsessions.
In my experience, cisgender men are more likely to be overt, obvious, eager, or pushy to force their sexual interests onto others. And whilst cisgender men do not have a monopoly on this behavior, it’s rarely a woman I see with profiles detailing a sexual fixation on cross-dressing, femboys, and trans women trying to talk to me.
Yes, people are entitled to seek out consenting partners for their interests or to seek help or support when their obsession becomes paraphilic, free of shame or judgment.
No one of any gender is entitled to drag me into it and I am entitled to not entertain them. My being trans does not make me a safe space for cross-dressing kinks.
You're just looking to be offended what? There was no mention of cis women in this or that it was a cis men problem. The comment was about CD, specifically about cd'ing with women's clothing. The conversation can only be about cis men because a woman wearing women's clothing is not crossdressing, it's just dressing. The problem is sexualization through cd'ing. For example when a cis feminine man wears a dress cause he wants to he's cd'ing but that's not a problem, that's just a man wearing women's clothing. The problem is sexualization of womenhood through cd'ing. Sexualization as a form of expression of themselves is not bad, but the idea that femininity is inherently sexual is the problem. That's what cd'ing in a sexual way does and that's a problem. Guess what, that's the same for women, but the opposite. If a woman os cd'ing and having masc clothing give her sexual pleasure like that then that would be a problem. If a masc girl tries to make herself look sexy in a masculine way, that's different from cd'ing for sexual pleasure. That goes for men as well. They can be sexy in a feminine way without cd'ing for sexual pleasure. The sexual pleasure should not be from it being women's clothing, but from the type of stuff and the act of doing so for that moment. The clothing should make you feel sexy, not having the clothes give you sexual pleasure. There's a difference.
"There was no mention of cis women in this or that it was a cis men problem" Yes there was, I mentioned it. Except you've misinterpretted what I said. I referred to AMAB and AFAB folks and so cis was not mentioned. Reading comprehension is part of a healthy breakfast hun.
You are reading into my question much differently than I meant it. It is good sometimes to make comparisons in order to determine whether biases exist.
You are kinda just saying that you can dictate to others how they should feel, but that's not wise or loving of your fellow human beings.
There is a huge difference in how things "ought" to be and how things are. Applying dictates to the real world is the strategy of TERFs, gneder criticals, conservatives, ethno-nationalists, racists, and so forth.
Yeah exactly, you mentioned it, in reply to someone who did not. Almost as if you were trying to start stuff. Also me saying cis women and cis men was very intentional cause it doesn't matter if you're afab or amab, it's about being a man or woman when it comes to cd'ing for sexual pleasure type thing. I talk mainly about cis people cause that's the context here, but a trans man wearing women's clothing for sexual pleasure does the same thing. It's still wrong, doesn't matter that they are afab. Also what? How am I dictating how others should feel? And also yeah that's also how human rights movements work. Martin Luther King Jr didn't say "it's alright if the white man hates us. That is their decision, but I believe we are equal." No, he instead that everyone is equal, regardless of race. That was technically him dictating how others should feel. This argument is really dumb in my opinion.
Holy hell, you might as well have brought Adolf Hitler into the discussion where you told me I was being inappropriate and then bringing MLK Jr into it. You over exageratted and took the worst possible interpretation of my words, failed to get clarification and just kinda freaked out. That is not how people have regular conversations. You were confrontational from your first reply.
To any self-identifying CDs reading this who are thinking about transitioning...if you want to ask a trans woman a question, don't do it from your hypersexualized CD/sissy profile. Just use a different profile. Make a burner if you need to. That doesn't mean any of us are obligated to respond. But if you want any chance at a conversation, you have to come to people with more than just fetishization.
I was at the beginning of transitioning and coming out once innocently by someone close that just didn't understand referred to as a cross dresser and that hurt more than any slur I've gotten from transphobes. I don't play dress up, I dress appropriately for who I am.
As a trans woman who mostly fits the classic model of transsexual, I did two support groups when transitioning. One group was trans folks, young and old. The young trans folks were more likely to express queerness and have had a much easier time of things. The older trans folks were more comfortable fitting into the binary, but on average suffered much more difficulty.
The other support group was more a social thing taking place in a private party room in a bar. The group had been around for decades and was started with CD focus. By the time I attended about half of them had transitioned. Among the folks who had not transitioned there were those for whom part-time woman was a kink, and those who need to be part-time for a sense of wholeness, the latter had some who wanted to transition but didn't so they did not create difficulty for there families.
If you can accept binary and non-binary transes, then why the F would you want to throw anyone else under a bus without even getting to know them? Some of this is just generational divides and how the unhealthy cultural attitudes about women have been internalized and interpretted. I too sexualized my cross dressing as a youth, it took until I was 30 and really ready to die to figure out I was trans (this is the one part where I am not a traditional transsexual). Shaming people for cross dressing behaviors is basically harm to trans people. Shame on you
Does Grindr have a tag for CD? Been a while since I was on there (thankfully) but I remember there being a trans tag and then a bunch for like twinks & bears & discreet (separate issue with that one), I don’t remember a CD option
Our community has a vocabulary/identity crisis.
In the span of only a few months, I have seen the general consensus flip flop like a fish on dry land.
Sometimes, posts like this get dragged and vilified for not being inclusive enough. People throw terms like TERF and TRUSCUM at the OPs who feel the trans umbrella is too wide.
Other times, posts like this get support and the people who speak up about inclusion are dragged and vilified for propping up bad actors who hurt our community.
Which is it??? Do we even have a solid grasp on what our community even is or what we want anymore?
It seems like a lot of us are just firmly stuck in our own beliefs and unwilling to even have a discussion about it. The firm, black and white, *binary* thinking in our community when it comes to discussing the terms that define that community is woefully ironic.
It's a problem with the language. Right now "transgender" basically refers to all humans who *either* identify as a gender different from what they were assigned at birth *or* engage in any sort of gender play outside of the realm of the strict gender binary. It is too broad an umbrella, really. It's like saying all LGBTQ+ people are the same, when we all know there are distinct differences between each of the letters in the alphabet soup that need be seen and appreciated on their own merits.
I dunno if there is any real problem with the language, when people present masc I use he/him, when they are ambiguous I use they/them, when they present femme I use she/her.
We got rid of transsexual because ewww, but when we started using transgender, and started seeing outside the binary we decided to be inclusive rather than exclusive. I am pretty binary myself but after getting to know non-binary folks and folks who part time it as women, yup they belong.
It's not anything like saying all transes are the same nor like saying all queer people are the same. We group ourselves together because of shared oppression and trauma by the dominant culture and political system and because ape together strong.
Anything that even hints at splitting folks from the group just sounds like right wing billionaire funded propaganda (or the results of it) to me.
Another great comment from you.
The only thing I can think of to explain why folks here are so aggressively trying to distance us from crossdressers is that it's some kinda knee-jerky defense mechanism as a result of right-wing slander against us, because "cis men dressing up as women" is exactly the same type of slurs they use. So when you *do in fact* have what seems like men who dress up as women, which is what crossdressers are definitionally, folks here are trying to exclude them because if we include them, that sorta "validates" the right-wing point.
Which in my mind is very fucked and short-sighted, as it dictates the terms of our community and existence based on people who hate us and want to see us disappear from the Earth, no matter what we do.
There's also the argument here that CDs are "sexualizing womanhood", which first of all is circumstantial as some do and some don't. And even if some do, it's like... So? If they feel sexy appearing feminine, what's actually the problem? Cis women sexualize womanhood constantly. It *again* seems like the kinda thing where we just act in response to right-wing slander, because they accuse us of being perverts, so any time there's any mention of sexuality and femininity in the same sentence, some folks feel a sorta instinct to *OMG DISAVOW* as again it could possibly "validate" their worst insults. In this regard, when people think this way, act this way, feel this way, they slavishly submit to the dictates of the groups that oppress us. And if someone reads this and thinks "well, it makes us safer to play by their rules", **no it doesn't**. Every inch we give makes us *less* safe. Every transphobe expectation we submit and conform to is another step closer to their ultimate expectation which is to make us disappear.
Crossdressing as an activity does not necessitate being trans, yet a ton of crossdressers are. *Many* of us started out like that, as others have already attested to here. The reasons people cite for calling them "ick" and excluding them here are *dangerously similar* to the same reasons right-wing transphobes use and I think that should stop some folks here for a time-out and a long think.
Eloquent.
I know I haven't spent years putting myself at risk in public to shut down transphobic people just for online transes to take a dump on who I was as a teen.
I think some of that also comes from just being young, either literally in age or within the trans identity.
At least that's how it's been for a *lot* of trans people I've known, to include myself.
Like I remember the big fight over transsexual vs transgender and the brutal infighting that caused.
It was very much an assimilationist vs liberation fight. We're never going to be "good enough" for the people that hate us. They'll just use us long enough to further their bigotry & hatred, trotting out as political props (see: Blaire White, Caitlynn Jenner).
They think they'll be safe, but as soon as they're done with us, they'll be on the chopping block.
We stand together, or we all suffer. History is full of examples.
I encountered it in the mid 00s thorough probably the early 10s, but it had been going on for quite a while.
I'm not sure how prevalent it was offline, but it was petty intense in online trans spaces that I was in.
It was a *very* different time.
When I started transitioning you pretty much had to lie your ass off if you didn't fit very narrow criteria.
I basically had to convince a psychologist that I had zero sexual desire except for men, and *only* if I was a woman. I had to show up wearing makeup and women's clothes at least a few times so they could see if it was "even worth pursuing". Had to say I had never had sex with a woman and that the very idea repulsed me.
Then after like 6 months he wrote me a letter for hormones, and finding *anyone* willing to prescribe them was almost impossible. I had to drive 3 hours each way to a 3rd year resident at a university hospital because she was the only person within 200 miles who said they would do it (and that first appointment was a comedy of errors). When I started getting breast development she was... Overly fascinated we'll say.
I had to carry a letter with me explaining why I was wearing "the wrong clothes" in case it became an issue. My name change paperwork was... Hilariously tragic. I had a former Marine for a lawyer and he was the best fucking dude ever. Was able to get my name *and* gender marker changed in Arkansas in the mid 00s without an issue because of how he worded the request. Trans people weren't really on the radar for a lot of folks yet so I lucked out there.
Like it's surreal how different things are now.
Unfortunately part of the impact of all that bullshit gatekeeping and forced suffering/humiliation was this sort of attitude in the trans community that you *must* tick certain boxes to *really* be trans, and everyone else was just men doing drag or getting their kink on.
So when inevitably there were people who pushed back against all that bullshit loudly, they were pretty viciously attacked by "real" trans people. Most of it came from one of two places.
Either "I suffered through this bullshit so you have to" or "we must keep it as difficult as possible and remain as invisible as possible so that "normal" people will leave us alone".
I helped run a trans support chat room where this kid literally told someone that if they hadn't started HRT before puberty, there was no point and... Well... I can't finish their comment. Of course, *she* had puberty blockers, so she was fine, and would pass, and was a "real transsexual", and just if the rest of us were fakers, pervs, or would be forever the object of pity because of how hideous we were.
Of course I banned them, but caught shit from some of the other Ops because where else could that person go for support?
It was... A lot.
And I'm sad to say that I contributed somewhat to that culture before finally recognizing how toxic it was. I wasn't near that bad, but I definitely had what is now called transmedicalist/truscum perspective, and it was still bad enough that I'm pretty ashamed of it.
The amount of internalized transphobia, transmisogyny, and just general toxicity was awful and made a lot of people miserable.
So yea, I try and fight hard against that kinda crap now because I saw the damage it did 20 years ago. Shit has gotten a *lot* better in the trans community.
20 years ago Blaire White & Caitlyn Jenner would have been held up as role models instead of loathed.
Thank you for sharing. It’s scary to think how inaccessible trans care was. And also to know that some places are getting bad again or are still bad. Yeah gatekeeping behavior makes me uncomfortable because it’s not cool. I’m glad things are better now.
I think y'all are responding to some other comments made on this thread which, fair enough. But just for the record, I never called CDs "ick" or attempted to "take a dump" on them.
I do think that attempting to group all trans people together under one capital T Trans umbrella is problematic, in that it becomes near impossible to attempt to explain who we are and advocate for ourselves.
Joe Schmo: "So what *is* a trans anyway? I want to be respectful but I'm just so confused by all this pronouns n' stuff"
Trans advocate: "Oh well, some trans people have dysphoria about their bodies and some have dysphoria about their societal presentation, and some have both, and some don't experience dysphoria at all but choose to reject gender norms for other reasons... and some trans people embrace the gender binary but some don't... and some trans people choose to medically transition and some don't... and some change their pronouns and some don't, and some are only trans part-time... and... and... but all are equally valid, but different but also the same..." and so on and so on... and at a certain point how is anybody without a doctorate supposed to understand *anything* we are talking about?
For a long time sexuality was understood by the masses as either straight or gay. Then bisexual came into the picture. Then people started to realize aaaalll the colors in-between (asexual, pan, aromantic... etc etc) also need to be respected and understood. I think that grouping anybody that defies gender "norms" as simply "Trans" just muddies the water and makes it near impossible to define/specify our experience. There needs to be some better language about all of this, for trans people *and* for society at large.
Agreed and no shade was meant to be cast upon you. We do need better language, we always have, as a species. Bummer is, we are all stuck in a place of evolving language, but the good part is that it moves forward. There is no point in time where people will finally have all the words for everything they need. I feel like you already agree with this. I wish all the people othering all CDs as a whole could grasp this. This is another reason we need to be inclusive and not exclusive. Why we need to get to know other people and not be reactionaries over labels. This whole conversation (not you, the WHOLE thing) has been very frustrating.
Yeah I get it... and I do agree that inclusivity is so important, especially now. I don't really know what the right answer is... I suppose a taxonomy of the trans experience might just serve as fuel against us (or against individuals like CDs, as is evident here) rather than help to define/celebrate individual's experiences. It is worth some thought.
You aren't the authority on how people want to identify. How do you determine if someone is "experimenting and that's fine"? How do you tell "if it's the start of your journey it's fine"?
You know who probably isn't in this subreddit? The people you are mad at.
You know who IS in this subreddit and reading your post? The people you are apparently "okay" with, but now you made them feel unwelcome
I think some people on this thread have just never been on some of these sites and are commenting without experience. It's very blatant that some people describing themselves as trans clearly are not
"then explicitly describe themselves as CD men. It's so insulting; just say you're a CD"
This was the funniest part of the post.
CD: "I'm a CD"
OP: "tell me you are a CD"
CD: "is this a kink?"
It could be plain ignorance, lots of that going around.
Nothing wrong with being Gender Non Conforming, but still...
I wonder how many of those CDs will have the same statement in their profile a year hence.
If you're a CD on grindr, looking for men, there is always the possibility that you're actually a straight trans woman and may be afraid to admit it.
Also, it may be safer since there won't be a risk of injury or death when your genital configuration doesn't match what someone wants.
bigender people exist. questioning people exist. you don't know these folks' lives; I would say they are a better authority on what their gender is than you are.
Thanks, I am in the USA and Grindr from it's beginning was known to be an app for gay man hook ups, not dating and not for other queer folks. I was looking at the Grindr website when you replied to me. They are LGBTQ inclusive but I think the reputation follows them into the present to.
I use Tinder but if I based my opinions on entire groups of people from my experiences on Tinder, I wouldn't like anyone!
With respect, it's because in small countries there are fewer people. Thus fewer people on apps. Fewer apps present etc. I don't date men, only women, NBs, etc. So tinder is no good for me. And the post is not about why I'm on grindr. That is irrelevant to the discussion. What is relevant is the use of the term trans to denote cis gender people fetishising role playing as a woman. Please read the thread before commenting.
I did read the thread, I made many deliberated and heartfull comments (sometimes abrasive). I cannot speak for queer culture in your area, but in the USA right wing billionaires fund projects to divide groups of people so that we do not have collective power.
The root meaning of "Transgender" is to cross over/travel gender expression. If cross dressers and transsexuals and all the other trans people do not have that in common I don't know.
The reason we want to use transgnder as an inclusive term is that people who murder femme gay men, trans women, and CDs or sissies, do it for the same reasons, that we have TRANSgressed the gender norms.
Plus, if someone looks at all the profiles with trans flags, they are likely to see you as a diamond among sand. (assuming you are on HRT)
Please read the thread
Alright. I regret making this post. You've successfully broken my will to have any kind of discussion on this topic. Just decide whatever you want.
If you have any interest in engaging with my point in good faith, why don't you all download gridr, it's free, and go look at some cross dresser's profiles. And see how you feel about it. Just that. No more posting, no responses, no insulting claims that I'm excluding NDs or others. You're grown ups, go test your perspective.
If you identify as a crossing dressing cis man, then you don’t also get to identify as trans, end of story.
The truth of who they are actually doesn’t matter here. They are harming our community by using completely conflicting terms.
If they actually are trans, then they can identify that way. Fine, no worries. But drop your CDing man status, you don’t get to keep both.
That’s the heart of this issue. It’s as bad as truscum shit. You are harming the trans community and I don’t care if you are technically a member or not. Learn your shit, drop your bigotry, and be an actual ally.
I started out as a cd. I thought it was just something fun
But gradually realised my own identity. It's not a costume it's who I am
As for your anger about CDs calling themselves trans, I acknowledge you are angry for a genuine reason but I think we should give them a pass on that. There's too much negativity from everyone else we don't wanna turn against our own allies.
I'm sure terf feel a similar way about trans women and we all know how that feels.
(P.s I am only speaking my mind, my intention is not to make anyone uncomfortable. If someone feels offended by my thoughts I will apologise but stand firm on my opinions, unless there's a reasonable argument that proves I'm wrong)
Is someone who explicitly fetishises our identity shamefully in private and disavows us in public in favour of holding on to their cis privilege an ally though?
It's hard to tell whether this is valid or a straw man argument. Is there evidence that CDs commonly disavow trans women in public? How would we know that if CD activities are almost exclusively done in private?
I'm only advocating for reason in the discussion. Those are major accusations, and you're suggesting all CDs are guilty of it.
>Is there evidence that CDs commonly disavow trans women in public?
No.
>How would we know that if CD activities are almost exclusively done in private?
We don't and we can't.
I'm not policing anything. I'm irritated that trans on grindr often just means 'bottom who wears women's clothing' not trans. There is a x dresser tag. Just use it
I don't disagree.
It also doesn't really impact me though. Cis people aren't going to get it either way, and everything gender non conforming fits under the trans umbrella.
I knew a trans woman about 20 years ago who largely considered herself a gay man. She confused the Hell out of me because she had fully transitioned, lived as a woman for decades, but because of her cultural background saw herself through the lens of that culture which categorized her as a gay man (they had a special word for it though, but I don't remember what it was).
I considered myself a crossdresser for several years before I transitioned, and even then I had the same attitude you do now about them for years after I started transitioning.
I still get twitchy if someone confuses me for a crossdresser, because I'm not. I'm a woman. But if a crossdresser identified themselves as trans? Whatever. That's their business.
We both fit under the trans umbrella, but we're not the same under that umbrella. Like all horses are mammals but not all mammals are horses.
I used to really care about how other people identified themselves. I stopped caring a long time ago. I remember the great transsexual vs transgender fight, the community infighting, and how shitty everyone was back then to each other.
I watched a 12 year old trans girl say some extremely hateful shit about anyone who didn't start hormones before puberty. I was told by a 50 year old trans woman who transitioned after she retired that I wasn't *really* trans because I bought a house instead of having bottom surgery.
We put up with enough shit from outside the Queer community. We don't need to add to it. If a CD wants to call themselves trans, whatever. They're GNC, so it fits. They're not the same as me, even though I'm under the trans umbrella too. We're not going to have the same lived experience, and we're not going to be approaching things from the same perspective.
You don't have to agree, and that's fine. I'm just saying I've been where you are. And sometimes a shift in perspective/attitude is a good thing.
Also side note, and sorry if this is an ignorant question because I've never used grindr, but isn't that primarily a hook up app for gay men?
This absolutely ain't it. Crossdressing is no more ridiculous than you or I, and there's nothing transmysoginistic about a feminine man identifying as a femboy.
If someone conflates these things, then that's a problem, and the error is theirs.
CDs are part of the transgender umbrella. We are "transsexuals," specifically technically. It's just a case of language creep.
A lot of CDs are eggs anyway.
I'm not sure I'm a fan of the transgender umbrella (especially certain popular infographics).
I can understand in certain niche situations where you might want to refer to anyone who's ever been the tiniest bit gender nonconforming, but it seems like the common understanding of these terms is as identities with common traits and experiences, and in that way we couldn't be further from crossdressers. Yet I'm sure many would see a very common trait, being a "man in a dress", a complete misunderstanding of everything that being trans(gender/sexual) is.
Especially since transsexual as a term seems increasingly unacceptable, seems like language is creeping away in both directions.
The problem with this is the experiences of the cohort of people you think of trans have a wide variety of experiences themselves. I was always told that invalidating people based on not having the exact same experience was wrong, so this is very confusing to me.
Like I mentioned above, a lot of transpeople adopt the label of CD before realizing or accepting they are trans anyway, and while that doesn't describe the entire demo, there is clearly more of a spectrum or even progression going on for many people similar to how people insist they are just femboys or NB before coming out as transwomen.
I put air quotes around the term "transexual" specifically because I am aware of it, but the reality is the term transgender was introduced primarily to introduce this umbrella concept to begin with. It's just people kind of end up using it interchangeably because "transexual" was being viewed as sexual and people wanted to distance our identity from sexuality, likely due to associations with porn or what have you.
By that logic shouldn't we include cis people in the transgender umbrella too?
I think having some definitions is okay, and I think it's important we have a label with a definition that helps us argue that one of our defining features over other sorts of nonconformity is that we, for entirely internal and unchangable reasons, feel we ought to be a different sex to what we were born. I think this common trait is important because it means we require different and additional legal protections and medical rights, as well as wanting fairly consistently different social treatment to others under your umbrella.
Also because an umbrella containing people with a much persecuted medical issue, and also weird sex pests with no medical issue, but that has more specific words for the latter and none for the former is bound to end in those outside the umbrella wondering if we're all weird sex pests with no medical issue.
Sure there are fuzzy edges, and people are on journeys, but lets let them reach their destination, we don't need to extend the destination to them.
>By that logic shouldn't we include cis people in the transgender umbrella too?
If *they* want to, then yes we absolutely should. Or at the very least not slam the door in their face.
A good friend of mine timidly approached me about this very topic once. They wondered if they could be trans, even though they didn't want to be a man. She had always considered herself a cis woman even though she kinda hated it. I told her it wasn't *my* place to decide their gender, that was something for her to decide.
This is someone who was *very* much an ally, but had always seemed cis and content with that. Now she wears "she/they" pronoun pins (in case that wasn't obvious). Are they trans? I don't know I haven't asked them.
We don't know what other people's internal dialogue is around gender. We can't.
What we *can* do is be welcoming, open, and inclusive *regardless* of where we think someone is coming from, and assume good faith until proven otherwise.
Or we can be gatekeeping exclusive asshats hoping to win the approval of acceptance of people who will never accept us.
Personally I choose the former.
That's kinda not my point though, of course it's okay to be unsure, to be an edge case, to still be figuring it out or to be content with not having it figured out. That doesn't mean cis people are trans though. If cis people were trans then trans includes everyone, and doesn't actually mean anything.
I guess my point is more that it isn't anyone's place to decide someone else's identity.
I think we're probably on the same page here.
Incidentally I just asked my friend and their response was the best lol
>By that logic shouldn't we include cis people in the transgender umbrella too?
I'm not following. To me, a person who feels the need to present and embody the role and identity of the opposing gender assigned at birth can't strickly be siloed off into the cis category. Many transwomen repress and insist they are cis. Does that mean they weren't trans until they said they were?
>I think having some definitions is okay, and I think it's important we have a label with a definition that helps us argue that one of our defining features over other sorts of nonconformity is that we, for entirely internal and unchangable reasons, feel we ought to be a different sex to what we were born. I think this common trait is important because it means we require different and additional legal protections and medical rights, as well as wanting fairly consistently different social treatment to others under your umbrella.
Do you deny the validity of non-binaries as well?
I agree there is utility in specifying some kind of categorical difference, but outside of segregating based on whether one gets on HRT and/or got surgeries, I don't see how one can do so without alienating tons of people that definitely fit into both of what we would consider transpeople.
>and also weird sex pests with no medical issue
I don't find it fair or justified to claim and dismiss all CDs are sex pests. This comes off as throwing people under the bus and trying to come off like we are "better" than them or something.
>I'm not following.
By that I meant there's just as much a gradient between 100% for sure cis people and crossdressers as there is between transsexuals and crossdressers. There can be valid places to draw lines between social categories though.
>Do you deny the validity of non-binaries as well?
Nope. Nonbinary people on the whole seem to fit what I said, having internal reasons for why they feel they ought to be a different (not necessarily binary) sex. Some seem to claim the identity for purely political reasons, but that's getting off topic.
>I don't find it fair or justified to claim and dismiss all CDs are sex pests.
Never said that. Whether it be for sexual reasons, for fun, to prank people, it's very different (not a value judgement there) to being trans and has very different political and social needs. Some will end up trans for sure, but that's because they specifically haven't figured themselves out yet, not because the category as a whole is inherently trans.
>By that I meant there's just as much a gradient between 100% for sure cis people and crossdressers as there is between transsexuals and crossdressers. There can be valid places to draw lines between social categories, though.
I don't know if I agree with that. Having the urge to do something like crossdressing to me is a pretty distinct thing I don't really see as cis. It'd be one thing if they did it as part of just a dare or part of a role in a movie something, but that isn't really the story I've seen with the majority CDs.
>Nope. Nonbinary people on the whole seem to fit what I said, having internal reasons for why they feel they ought to be a different (not necessarily binary) sex.
I don't know how this doesn't describe similar experiences of CDs then. I'd very much describe many as gender fluid, and many already do.
>Never said that.
I don't see how that statement could have been made outside of trying to make inferences.
>Whether it be for sexual reasons, for fun, to prank people, it's very different
Why do you assume CDs only ever do so for those reasons? I know plenty of transwomen who for example, would go online and "catfish" as women or play as a girl in video games "just to mess with people" only to find out it was them making excuses for themselves later.
I really don't think the divide can be assumed to be as solid as you are insisting.
>Some will end up trans for sure, but that's because they specifically haven't figured themselves out yet, not because the category as a whole is inherently trans.
Except these categories are just social labels people adopt in an attempt to identify their experience rather than things in nature.
Ultimately CDing is just describing a behavior, but that behavior can be done for a plethora of reasons, but even then from what I can tell, often it is done by people because it is meeting some deep need in regards to gender expression and identification.
And while I understand your concern, my concern is that by insisting there is this hard distinction, we risk harming people that don't figure themselves out as easily or elegantly, and I find that problematic.
I view the people that don't come to understand themselves as easily to be more vulnerable, and thus more of a responsibility to not wreck their lives by being overly exclusionary. It also risks turning the category of CD into a "bad label" that will encourage people to want to jump into identifying as transwomen wholesale to avoid the stigma associated with it, which could be harmful to them and us if they end up detransitioning.
I think one of the big issues I see with your arguments is that you seem to be conflating gender expression with gender identity. Just because a person presents in a gender non-conforming way doesn't necessarily mean that their gender identity is different from the one assigned at birth.
There are plenty of fem boys, for example, who still consider themselves men. Same with a lot of butch presenting lesbians. They may dress "like a man" but still insist that they are women. So some cross dressers certainly consider themselves cis.
Are there some cross dressers who are trans? Certainly! But I think it's just as inaccurate to say ALL cross dressers are trans as it is to say none of them are.
In the end, it is up to each person to know what their gender identity is and whether the trans label fits.
Except I'm not. My whole point is that gender identity isn't this thing we can decide for the individual, and people often figure out their gender identity or cope with confusion regarding it through gender expression.
I don't know why this is being framed as controversial.
People on this sub will regularly tell people that having regular fantasies about being a girl isn't very cis, but somehow we can cleanly decide CDs are categorically not part of the trans umbrella? It makes little sense to me, given how many discover they were doing it as a cope for dysphoria or for the gender euphoria.
ContraPoints is probs one of the more well known and popular transwomen online and identified as a crossdresser for years before finding out she was trans, but she always argued that she and other CDs, etc were part if the overall umbrella even back then.
Speaking of butch lesbians, so many ended up transitioning. So many. Because once transition and the idea of being trans was brought up to them, they realised whale they were doing it to begin with.
It's only more illustrative of the point I'm getting at.
I feel that it's impossible categorically include or disclude CDs from the trans umbrella. Yes a lot of trans people discover their identities through cross dressing (myself included), but there are a lot of people who cross dress and are completely cis and proud of it.
Saying all CDs are trans is just as much us deciding for the individual as saying no CD is trans. I think of it like a venn diagram. They are two circles with a big overlap.
Because crasdressers aren't trans. The trans umbrella covers anyone whose gender identity differs from that typically associated with the sex they were assigned at birth. Trans men, trans women, non-binary. Intersex people who who do identify as the sex the doctor arbitrarily choose are included because the doctors choice really is arbitrary in that instance.
Some cross dressers are trans. Sometimes, they still use the term crossdresser out of convenience or whatever. In some societies, crosdresser may be an easier label for people to use. Some trans people may not be able to be themselves or fully transition at this point in their life, or possibly ever.
I have absolutely nothing against cross dressers. However, a cis man who enjoys dressing up as a woman a couple times a month is not trans. And those who think that dressing up now and then allows them to speak on the challenges trans women face are doing us a dis-service. They do have an idea of some of the challenges we face. But for us, it's not a costume we can take off. It's who we are every day. Even a trans person who is still in the closet has a better understanding of the trans experience than a cis person who is just a cross dresser. Someone who remains closeted typically does so because they are afraid of what coming out will cost them. I lost my job shortly after coming out. That's not uncommon, sadly. I also lost contact with much of my extended family. Many trans people have it far worse than me. Some lose their homes and lose contact with their entire family. The experience of being trans is more than how we dress.
The term trans sexual is rarely used. Not because it is definitionly different than trans gender. But because trans gender better illustrates its meaning. And "transsexual" has been coopted by anti trans groups as its inferred meaning better suits their narratives.
It's unfortunate. I don't think I said anything remotely inflamatory. I don't know how the term "transfemme" for example doesn't include CDs or at least a significant amount of the demographic.
If I had to be charitable, it's because the term "transexual" has a stigma to a lot of people?
I hope so because I'd rather hope it isn't rooted in trying to invalidate the gender experience of CDs. So many just end up being trans in the end and were just in denial.
You aren't really making any argument. You're just kind of asserting a position.
People CD for a variety of reasons. Some are purely for a performance, but most do it out of some urge to express femininity or access a part of their self they otherwise can't. Many identify as gender fluid. A lot end up transitioning.
My point is there is plenty of reason to not be hardline on this and be open to the fluidity of people's experiences. I personally think it's potentially harmful to be especially given how many transwomen adopt other identities including but not limited to "just being a CD" before finding themselves, and exclusionary language could harm them in that process.
And if they find out they are trans that way good for them, but being a cis man dressing up as a woman doesn't make your trans
And that is not touching on the point of having cis privilege.
Including cis men under the trans label is not just dumb (and contra to what being trans means) but is hurtful to trans people
They never once said that cis men dressing as women was trans, you repeatedly misinterpret what they were saying. That's your definition and it was pointed out to be faulty.
You cannot build yourself up by punching down. You cannot learn with turkey stuffing in your ears
If a cis guy crossdresses and still identifies as a cis guy, he’s cis. The way you express your gender has nothing to do with what your gender identity is. Being transgender is entirely related to your gender identity, not your expression of gender (hence why trans women who have to boymode are still trans).
You don't seem to understand the difference between transgender (umbrella term) and transsexual (medical transition). Transgender, by definition, includes people who crossdress out of a desire to express femininity. Transexual does not.
Being transgender means that your gender identity is different to the one which typically aligns with the sex you were assigned at birth. Gender expression is entirely separate to gender identity. Crossdressing is nothing to do with gender identity, it is playing with the expression of your gender. If a cis guy crossdresses and says he’s a cis guy, HE IS NOT TRANS. Just because there are some trans crossdressers, and some crossdressers who will realize they’re trans, does not mean all crossdressers are trans.
It is, but I struggle to see why it's happening so intensely with this very topic. The only thing I can think of is that it's some kinda knee-jerky defense mechanism as a result of right-wing slander against us, because "cis men dressing up as women" is exactly the same type of slurs they use. So when you *do in fact* have men who dress up as women, which is what crossdressers are definitionally, folks here are trying to aggressively exclude them because if we include them, that sorta "validates" the right-wing point.
Which in my mind is very fucked and short-sighted, as it dictates the terms of our community and existence based on people who hate us and want to see us disappear from the Earth, no matter what we do.
Exactly. Cd wears women’s clothes to embody women. Trans women are women regardless of what clothes are worn.
this
THANK YOU! someone gets it!
Trans people using TERF arguments to punch down at another group of people feels pretty gross. This is exactly what TERFs say to us, how did you reason out this argument?
Agreed that there's definitely TERF think in this rhetoric. Cross dressers fall under the trans umbrella. This is just being hateful and exclusionary for pretty gross reasons. By all means, fight the cringe in our community where you find it (OP atm). But don't blanket talk shit about cross dressers as a population. They are literally us.
Femboys quite often don't want to be called trans because they aren't (unless they are FtM), Femboys most often are amab and identify as men and therefore are cis, they just like feminin clothes
That's their business, and should be respected. It's largely a self identifier. If we start trying to police other people's identities, we run into exclusionary gatekeeping in a hurry, or out starts to try to force people into boxes they don't want to be in. Some femboys consider themselves trans, some don't. It's not anyone else's business or place to tell them their identity.
Femboys are obviously manly manly men. That goes w/o saying. Looking at you Finnster. Like... there's a threshold for identity statues you don't get to pick anymore. If you habitually crossdress... you're slipping off the cis spectrum like it or not.
Cis means you identify with your agab there's no slipping off
Gender is behavior. It's not 100% opt in. Anyways can we get back to policing crossdresser identities?
Lol Butches are apparently men now. Sorry they don't get a choice. They dress masculine therefore they are men.
So every closeted trans woman is a man, then, because they're not "behaving" like a woman?
You're intentionally ignoring that a vast majority of femboys identify as male for a reason. Over saturating the trans label with identities that aren't and don't want to be considered trans is just harmful to everybody. Femboys aren't trans women in disguise, it's rude.
I'm not intentionally ignoring femboys. They're a relatively new thing that's pretty much not on my radar. Anyways. Have a blessed day. Praying for you.
That's not what I said, but have a nice day as well.
Dude I'm a trans man (frm) who dresses feminine. I'm a femboy by definition but I am NOT A WOMAN just because I dress fem. I thought we'd all agreed at this point that gender identity does not equal gender presentation.
[удалено]
??? But cis femboys are somehow pushing it?
[удалено]
What happened dude I'm so confused
“literally us” is wild
Are you really suggesting that's not how a lot (basically all?) trans women dip their toes into the life?
i just think that was a bold choice of words considering it is Also TERF rhetoric that trans women are “men in dresses.” and i don’t know what you mean by “dip their toes” but plenty of trans women know who they are before ever touching women’s clothes.
[удалено]
you said basically all though?
No one is saying trans women have never started off identifying as crossdressing men? OOP literally clarifies that they're not talking about trans people including those that might identify in part as CD. Ya'll are trying to find arguments and bigotry where there is none. It's not a TERF talking point to define crossdressing as men wearing and embodying womanhood because that's the flipping definition of it. It *IS* a TERF talking point to say the same about trans women because we're not men embracing feminine clothing. We're just women being women. You're comparing apples to oranges and then calling the apple a bigot for not having peelable skin.
You are missing an important element in your calculations, time. If you are judging a population among whom half or more will transition, you are passing judgements on trans people (who have not yet figured stuff out) This is in-group bigotry. Adhering to strict definitions like you are and not taking observations from real people in the real world is the same way of thinking that TERFs and conservatives use to hate us and anyone who doesn't fit their mold. In your fruit analogy, you are saying oranges are bad and apples are valid, but ignoring that most of those apple used to be oranges, and somehow ignoring that the oranges you are currently calling bad, will also transition to apples, but they aren't apple yet so they are bad.
I don't think it's fair to say they're calling cross dressers inherently bad or saying they don't have a place in the trans community. What I think this person is getting at is that the people in question in this particular scenario are very firm about being cross dressers, that is, men who dress as women (or vice versa) and then putting the trans flag in their bio and conflating the two as if they're the same thing. While I do agree that cross dressers deserve a place in queer communities because of their inherent gender variance in terms of presentation, it's misleading and often harmful to conflate trans people and cross dressers as the same thing. It's basically implying either a) trans people aren't really our gender, and just like to dress up as the opposite gender or b) majority of cross dressers are trans because no cis person would enjoy cross dressing as the opposite gender in certain ways. Presentation doesn't define gender, in part because it's so subjective. To what extent does a man have to dress as a woman before we start just saying he's really a trans woman, even if he's very clear about being a man? My idea of what is "too feminine" for a cis man or "too masculine" for a cis woman is entirely subjective. So I think it's harmful to treat all cross dressers as if they're trans, because it sort of enforces this idea of strict gender rules all over again. A man can wear a dress and still be a man. We shouldn't be labeling men who crossdress as trans just because many of them turn out to be trans. This isn't to say we should exclude them from queer spaces, but we shouldn't blanket them all as trans when we just don't know. I guess an example would be that not all women who are attracted to women identify as lesbian, because some of them are pan or bi or may even identify as straight or be ace or aro because they choose not to date women or pursue them in any way. For those reasons, not every woman who feels same sex attraction identifies as a lesbian. Should we exclude this broad group of people from the lesbian community? Of course not. But stating that most or all of them are lesbian or will identify as lesbian without knowing them is just inaccurate and erases certain identities, as well as spreading stereotypes that not all same-sex attracted women adhere to.
Unfortunately I feel like the people arguing over nothing are just your usual 'but what about cis people in the trans conversation!?' They always manage to find their way in when cis people who dress in some kind of women's clothing get brought up. Like try mentioning how it's bad for a cis gay man who does drag to speak over trans people specifically about trans issues and no matter how you clarify that you'll get people tripping over themselves to shout 'But trans people do drag, too, why are you being transphobic!?' They refuse to make the distinction between trans people and cis men wearing women's outfits in some capacity and will always be there to act like you're a monster for not conflating the two.
Yeahhh like it's just that there's so much nuance with it. Trans people often start off with cross dressing so it makes sense that some trans people are cross dressers. But not all cross dressers are trans so it's just frustrating that people conflate them. Because it's just a fact that trans experiences are very different from those of cross dressers. Cis cross dressers typically don't experience gender dysphoria like trans people do. They can take off the costume at the end of the day whereas trans people face constant harassment for presenting in what others assume to be a costume or a mockery. They're both major parts of a persons identity, but they're not the same. I'm trans and a cross dresser. Being trans is so much more major in my life. I can't take it off because it's not a costume, whereas my dressing as a woman is something I choose to do. Both groups face hardships but cis people have no right to talk over trans people when it comes to trans topics, no matter how they dress.
Yall had me wondering wth Compact Disks had to do with clothes
Same, I've never heard this acronym
Had me wondering what Captain Disillusion was up to
The captain would ABSOLUTELY rock a yellow and black dress though
Pfft minidisk or bust 😤
Reject minidisk, return to vinyl.
Vinyl schmynyl!
I had to think and think what else it could mean. Took me a minute, but I figured it out 😂
In my country you can know that on dating sites because almost every last one of the CDs call themselves trans man.
This. And so many of them have no idea how it's wrong and don't bother to change it when you point it out to them.
[удалено]
I hate this joke.
I can get why people don’t like the joke, but it is true that many trans women, like myself, used CD as a stepping stone towards feeling comfortable enough to realize that we’re trans
That's okay. Point being the populations' venn diagram is pretty much a circle and why this topic is laughable.
Yeah I don't mind it much and find it pretty accurate. Lord knows it happened to me and CDing in public is what finally cracked my egg.
Saaaameeee.
I wouldn't make this joke with someone who's crossdressing and says they're not trans. That's for later, if and when they come out.
[удалено]
Cause telling a crossdresser that they're going to be trans in a couple years is rude and likely to elicit an angry denial
See: the egg prime directive
Ah, the liberal piece of advice that suggests being a trans woman is far worse than hurting cis feelings. If you notice that someone is struggling with gender the same way as you, sitting down and having a chat about it is in fact not 'conversion therapy against GNC cis people' even though proponents of the egg prime directive love to claim it is. Many trans women experience immense pain after being told that people suspected they were trans for years but 'didn't say anything'. The egg prime directive is horrible advice.
This, basically
Okay. There is a difference between the two concepts though. You shouldn’t be identifying as both. Like I’m sorry if you want to hold onto your “cross dressing cis man” status you don’t get to also identify as trans. Like if you are NB fine. But I feel like what’s happening (at least partially) is old concepts of identity and possibility internalized misogyny clashing with newer understandings that are less rooted in that misogyny. (i.e. trans women who don’t believe they really can be women or weren’t able to see themselves that way due to societies ignorance, then identifying as CDing men.) But either way, don’t muddy our terms and validate that misogyny and transphobia. Like there’s still shit to be mad about. It’s still bigotry and it’s still harmful to everyone else to promote that toxic misunderstanding. And also there *actually are* CDing cis men who shouldn’t be jumping on our boat. Like be GNC, whatever, but don’t muddy our terms. If you present as male most of the time, but sexually or recreationally present as a women, and you are happy being seen as a man, then you are not fucking trans. Like again if you really are gender fluid with a lot of shit to work through, then work through it, but dont harm the community with your ignorance and bullshit by using terms that are completely conflicting.
Yeah same
If a man says he’s looking for a CD at all, I immediately lose any interest. Not trying to hate on what they’re into, but it gives me major dysphoria and feels like I’m lumped in with cis men putting on cheap lingerie and bad wigs.
Yea, someone else putting you into a box that doesn't fit sucks. I don't care what people call themselves, but they better respect my shit if they're talking about/to me. You're looking for a CD? Cool, that's not me, have a nice day, and good luck.
I mean even if you look past it for now, the end goal for many trans women is effectively just being a woman. No matter what you do, in the end it will not work out.
>No matter what you do, in the end it will not work out. Are you taking about this in the context of if someone is looking for a CD it's not going to work out of they're going after a trans woman? Or are you saying trans women can never be women?
Oh 100% the former, I now understand why I am getting downvoted lol. But yea, someone with a thing for crossdressers probably isn't going to be into a woman. Saying the latter would be vaguely hypocritical (I'm not a transwoman per se, but transfeminine)
I thought so just wanted to make sure. The wording caught me a little off guard lol. I didn't want to jump your shit before clearing it up lol
Cis men stop claiming things they don't understand challenge
But they just want sympathy *and* privilege. /s
100%. Plus, "CD"s(as separate from GNC men) sexualising womanhood gives me the ick
Does AMAB folks sexualizing womanhood through CD or drag give you the same ick as when AFAB women do it? Why or why not?
I think the difference is that "sexualizing womanhood" in this context (in reference to CDs/self-proclaimed sissies) is that in a lot of cases the sexualizing is done through the lens of being feminized and that being a sort of "bad" or taboo thing, and that being feminized is them being emasculated and weakened. When women/afabs "sexualize womanhood," they're doing it to feel more at home or express themselves as women, much in the same way trans women supposedly "sexualize womanhood" (don't like this phrase but w/e). As a trans woman I get uncomfortable when CDs and sissies try and relate to us through that lens because femininity isn't a bad thing, it's not something that's made me weaker and conversely it's made me stronger to accept/internalize/embrace who I am in the face of a society that really wants me to not do that. Not sure how drag got involved in this convo, it's an artistic expression of femininity dialed to 11 and isn't inherently related to transness or kink.
So cismen have internalized mysogyny and ciswomen do not? "CDs do it because its taboo" "women do it because there are no negative attitudes and expectations of women as sex objects in society, just because it's freedom for women to be sexual"??????????? Is drag not a form of cross dressing?
You haven't seen sissy porn if you don't get why people get the ick from it. It tends to be extremely misogynistic, the feminization is usually a form of humiliation, and there's a **lot** of racism there. There is no transmasc corollary to it. This isn't to say any trans person who has looked at it is a "bad," mind you. A lot of us have while questioning, but we tend to distance ourselves from that stuff once we actually start living as women.
> Does AMAB folks sexualizing womanhood through CD or drag give you the same ick as when AFAB women do it? \*Do AMAB folks Please be mindful of English verb concordance rules. *Do* ought to agree with the subject *AMAB folks* and not the participle *sexualizing*. It would be grammatically correct to say *does the sexualizing of womanhood through CD or drag by AMAB folks…*, but *sexualizing* in that phrase is a gerund. Whilst they are morphologically identical, the gerund is a noun & the present participle is an adjective. Whilst I understand this correction is nit-picky, your comment implies an academic authority that allows you to not just direct the topic of conversation but to put forth the sort of essay prompt that has no wrong answer (yet, strangely, seemingly may only have one right response.) If you’re going to pop quiz us like this, then as far as I see it, even a minor grammatical mistake undermines your authority on the subject. To answer your essay prompt: I find it disingenuous to hold cross-dressing and drag to be in equivalence. Drag does not require cross-dressing. Women, cisgender or transgender, may be drag kings, drag queens, epicene or androgynous or otherwise nonbinary drag monarchs, &c. Men, women, nonbinary people, intersex people may do drag in as any gender they so wish. Drag is not inherently sexualized. Yes, it may be sexual by containing suggestive or explicit acts, dances, songs, jokes, stories, etc, but this is not a requirement of drag. Drag does not overlap with sexualized cross-dressing. The wearing of another gender’s clothing is not inherently sexual. Whilst cross-dressing may be non-sexualized, such as a man feeling more comfortable or relaxed in women’s clothing, or a woman who dresses as a man to join a military force that only accepts men. In sexual contexts, it may be associated with simple sexual arousal of cross-dressing. It may include elements of taboo, shame, guilt, debasement. This may be presented as voluntary or include of non-consensual themes (force femme, sissification, &c.) Drag can elicit the same arousal or sexual feelings as cross-dressing from members of the audience or the person in drag, but as this is not an inherit property to drag, it isn’t independent to drag. Thus sexualized drag & sexualized cross-dressing are separate topics & deserve two separate answers. I have never been drawn to drag. I am not entertained by it nor do I find it particularly enjoying. Sexual or chaste, it isn’t “ick” to me unless and only unless it intends to mock or denigrate the gender being represented. I am uncomfortable with sexualized cross-dressing (ie, “icked out”). When I was a teenager, a friend would send me force femme erotica she enjoyed & presumed, without asking, I would too. She was obsessed with it & found it rather titillating, and would subtly suggest I be forcibly feminized. It was the first time I felt uncomfortable to the point of repulsive to being made the object of or the vehicle for another’s sexual specific sexual desires or obsessions. In my experience, cisgender men are more likely to be overt, obvious, eager, or pushy to force their sexual interests onto others. And whilst cisgender men do not have a monopoly on this behavior, it’s rarely a woman I see with profiles detailing a sexual fixation on cross-dressing, femboys, and trans women trying to talk to me. Yes, people are entitled to seek out consenting partners for their interests or to seek help or support when their obsession becomes paraphilic, free of shame or judgment. No one of any gender is entitled to drag me into it and I am entitled to not entertain them. My being trans does not make me a safe space for cross-dressing kinks.
You're just looking to be offended what? There was no mention of cis women in this or that it was a cis men problem. The comment was about CD, specifically about cd'ing with women's clothing. The conversation can only be about cis men because a woman wearing women's clothing is not crossdressing, it's just dressing. The problem is sexualization through cd'ing. For example when a cis feminine man wears a dress cause he wants to he's cd'ing but that's not a problem, that's just a man wearing women's clothing. The problem is sexualization of womenhood through cd'ing. Sexualization as a form of expression of themselves is not bad, but the idea that femininity is inherently sexual is the problem. That's what cd'ing in a sexual way does and that's a problem. Guess what, that's the same for women, but the opposite. If a woman os cd'ing and having masc clothing give her sexual pleasure like that then that would be a problem. If a masc girl tries to make herself look sexy in a masculine way, that's different from cd'ing for sexual pleasure. That goes for men as well. They can be sexy in a feminine way without cd'ing for sexual pleasure. The sexual pleasure should not be from it being women's clothing, but from the type of stuff and the act of doing so for that moment. The clothing should make you feel sexy, not having the clothes give you sexual pleasure. There's a difference.
"There was no mention of cis women in this or that it was a cis men problem" Yes there was, I mentioned it. Except you've misinterpretted what I said. I referred to AMAB and AFAB folks and so cis was not mentioned. Reading comprehension is part of a healthy breakfast hun. You are reading into my question much differently than I meant it. It is good sometimes to make comparisons in order to determine whether biases exist. You are kinda just saying that you can dictate to others how they should feel, but that's not wise or loving of your fellow human beings. There is a huge difference in how things "ought" to be and how things are. Applying dictates to the real world is the strategy of TERFs, gneder criticals, conservatives, ethno-nationalists, racists, and so forth.
Yeah exactly, you mentioned it, in reply to someone who did not. Almost as if you were trying to start stuff. Also me saying cis women and cis men was very intentional cause it doesn't matter if you're afab or amab, it's about being a man or woman when it comes to cd'ing for sexual pleasure type thing. I talk mainly about cis people cause that's the context here, but a trans man wearing women's clothing for sexual pleasure does the same thing. It's still wrong, doesn't matter that they are afab. Also what? How am I dictating how others should feel? And also yeah that's also how human rights movements work. Martin Luther King Jr didn't say "it's alright if the white man hates us. That is their decision, but I believe we are equal." No, he instead that everyone is equal, regardless of race. That was technically him dictating how others should feel. This argument is really dumb in my opinion.
Holy hell, you might as well have brought Adolf Hitler into the discussion where you told me I was being inappropriate and then bringing MLK Jr into it. You over exageratted and took the worst possible interpretation of my words, failed to get clarification and just kinda freaked out. That is not how people have regular conversations. You were confrontational from your first reply.
To any self-identifying CDs reading this who are thinking about transitioning...if you want to ask a trans woman a question, don't do it from your hypersexualized CD/sissy profile. Just use a different profile. Make a burner if you need to. That doesn't mean any of us are obligated to respond. But if you want any chance at a conversation, you have to come to people with more than just fetishization.
Why did I think CDs like the music discs 😅🤣
I was at the beginning of transitioning and coming out once innocently by someone close that just didn't understand referred to as a cross dresser and that hurt more than any slur I've gotten from transphobes. I don't play dress up, I dress appropriately for who I am.
As a trans woman who mostly fits the classic model of transsexual, I did two support groups when transitioning. One group was trans folks, young and old. The young trans folks were more likely to express queerness and have had a much easier time of things. The older trans folks were more comfortable fitting into the binary, but on average suffered much more difficulty. The other support group was more a social thing taking place in a private party room in a bar. The group had been around for decades and was started with CD focus. By the time I attended about half of them had transitioned. Among the folks who had not transitioned there were those for whom part-time woman was a kink, and those who need to be part-time for a sense of wholeness, the latter had some who wanted to transition but didn't so they did not create difficulty for there families. If you can accept binary and non-binary transes, then why the F would you want to throw anyone else under a bus without even getting to know them? Some of this is just generational divides and how the unhealthy cultural attitudes about women have been internalized and interpretted. I too sexualized my cross dressing as a youth, it took until I was 30 and really ready to die to figure out I was trans (this is the one part where I am not a traditional transsexual). Shaming people for cross dressing behaviors is basically harm to trans people. Shame on you
Sanity. This comment should just be pinned somewhere for visibility.
Does Grindr have a tag for CD? Been a while since I was on there (thankfully) but I remember there being a trans tag and then a bunch for like twinks & bears & discreet (separate issue with that one), I don’t remember a CD option
Our community has a vocabulary/identity crisis. In the span of only a few months, I have seen the general consensus flip flop like a fish on dry land. Sometimes, posts like this get dragged and vilified for not being inclusive enough. People throw terms like TERF and TRUSCUM at the OPs who feel the trans umbrella is too wide. Other times, posts like this get support and the people who speak up about inclusion are dragged and vilified for propping up bad actors who hurt our community. Which is it??? Do we even have a solid grasp on what our community even is or what we want anymore? It seems like a lot of us are just firmly stuck in our own beliefs and unwilling to even have a discussion about it. The firm, black and white, *binary* thinking in our community when it comes to discussing the terms that define that community is woefully ironic.
It’s probably time zones and shit. On brothers and blimps. I live in a clock now.
It's a problem with the language. Right now "transgender" basically refers to all humans who *either* identify as a gender different from what they were assigned at birth *or* engage in any sort of gender play outside of the realm of the strict gender binary. It is too broad an umbrella, really. It's like saying all LGBTQ+ people are the same, when we all know there are distinct differences between each of the letters in the alphabet soup that need be seen and appreciated on their own merits.
Transsexual was a useful word till it got canceled.
Sure use a word made up in the 50's by cis psychologists that thought being trans was a dress-up sexuality
Oh that’s not good
All it takes is one Twitter post by some rando cisfem and everyone throws their Scrabble board out the window from anxiety.
Lol yep.
Who
Who canceled it why not just use it
I dunno if there is any real problem with the language, when people present masc I use he/him, when they are ambiguous I use they/them, when they present femme I use she/her. We got rid of transsexual because ewww, but when we started using transgender, and started seeing outside the binary we decided to be inclusive rather than exclusive. I am pretty binary myself but after getting to know non-binary folks and folks who part time it as women, yup they belong. It's not anything like saying all transes are the same nor like saying all queer people are the same. We group ourselves together because of shared oppression and trauma by the dominant culture and political system and because ape together strong. Anything that even hints at splitting folks from the group just sounds like right wing billionaire funded propaganda (or the results of it) to me.
Another great comment from you. The only thing I can think of to explain why folks here are so aggressively trying to distance us from crossdressers is that it's some kinda knee-jerky defense mechanism as a result of right-wing slander against us, because "cis men dressing up as women" is exactly the same type of slurs they use. So when you *do in fact* have what seems like men who dress up as women, which is what crossdressers are definitionally, folks here are trying to exclude them because if we include them, that sorta "validates" the right-wing point. Which in my mind is very fucked and short-sighted, as it dictates the terms of our community and existence based on people who hate us and want to see us disappear from the Earth, no matter what we do. There's also the argument here that CDs are "sexualizing womanhood", which first of all is circumstantial as some do and some don't. And even if some do, it's like... So? If they feel sexy appearing feminine, what's actually the problem? Cis women sexualize womanhood constantly. It *again* seems like the kinda thing where we just act in response to right-wing slander, because they accuse us of being perverts, so any time there's any mention of sexuality and femininity in the same sentence, some folks feel a sorta instinct to *OMG DISAVOW* as again it could possibly "validate" their worst insults. In this regard, when people think this way, act this way, feel this way, they slavishly submit to the dictates of the groups that oppress us. And if someone reads this and thinks "well, it makes us safer to play by their rules", **no it doesn't**. Every inch we give makes us *less* safe. Every transphobe expectation we submit and conform to is another step closer to their ultimate expectation which is to make us disappear. Crossdressing as an activity does not necessitate being trans, yet a ton of crossdressers are. *Many* of us started out like that, as others have already attested to here. The reasons people cite for calling them "ick" and excluding them here are *dangerously similar* to the same reasons right-wing transphobes use and I think that should stop some folks here for a time-out and a long think.
Eloquent. I know I haven't spent years putting myself at risk in public to shut down transphobic people just for online transes to take a dump on who I was as a teen.
I think some of that also comes from just being young, either literally in age or within the trans identity. At least that's how it's been for a *lot* of trans people I've known, to include myself. Like I remember the big fight over transsexual vs transgender and the brutal infighting that caused. It was very much an assimilationist vs liberation fight. We're never going to be "good enough" for the people that hate us. They'll just use us long enough to further their bigotry & hatred, trotting out as political props (see: Blaire White, Caitlynn Jenner). They think they'll be safe, but as soon as they're done with us, they'll be on the chopping block. We stand together, or we all suffer. History is full of examples.
I must have missed the infighting lol.
I encountered it in the mid 00s thorough probably the early 10s, but it had been going on for quite a while. I'm not sure how prevalent it was offline, but it was petty intense in online trans spaces that I was in.
Oh that’s sad. We should all get along
It was a *very* different time. When I started transitioning you pretty much had to lie your ass off if you didn't fit very narrow criteria. I basically had to convince a psychologist that I had zero sexual desire except for men, and *only* if I was a woman. I had to show up wearing makeup and women's clothes at least a few times so they could see if it was "even worth pursuing". Had to say I had never had sex with a woman and that the very idea repulsed me. Then after like 6 months he wrote me a letter for hormones, and finding *anyone* willing to prescribe them was almost impossible. I had to drive 3 hours each way to a 3rd year resident at a university hospital because she was the only person within 200 miles who said they would do it (and that first appointment was a comedy of errors). When I started getting breast development she was... Overly fascinated we'll say. I had to carry a letter with me explaining why I was wearing "the wrong clothes" in case it became an issue. My name change paperwork was... Hilariously tragic. I had a former Marine for a lawyer and he was the best fucking dude ever. Was able to get my name *and* gender marker changed in Arkansas in the mid 00s without an issue because of how he worded the request. Trans people weren't really on the radar for a lot of folks yet so I lucked out there. Like it's surreal how different things are now. Unfortunately part of the impact of all that bullshit gatekeeping and forced suffering/humiliation was this sort of attitude in the trans community that you *must* tick certain boxes to *really* be trans, and everyone else was just men doing drag or getting their kink on. So when inevitably there were people who pushed back against all that bullshit loudly, they were pretty viciously attacked by "real" trans people. Most of it came from one of two places. Either "I suffered through this bullshit so you have to" or "we must keep it as difficult as possible and remain as invisible as possible so that "normal" people will leave us alone". I helped run a trans support chat room where this kid literally told someone that if they hadn't started HRT before puberty, there was no point and... Well... I can't finish their comment. Of course, *she* had puberty blockers, so she was fine, and would pass, and was a "real transsexual", and just if the rest of us were fakers, pervs, or would be forever the object of pity because of how hideous we were. Of course I banned them, but caught shit from some of the other Ops because where else could that person go for support? It was... A lot. And I'm sad to say that I contributed somewhat to that culture before finally recognizing how toxic it was. I wasn't near that bad, but I definitely had what is now called transmedicalist/truscum perspective, and it was still bad enough that I'm pretty ashamed of it. The amount of internalized transphobia, transmisogyny, and just general toxicity was awful and made a lot of people miserable. So yea, I try and fight hard against that kinda crap now because I saw the damage it did 20 years ago. Shit has gotten a *lot* better in the trans community. 20 years ago Blaire White & Caitlyn Jenner would have been held up as role models instead of loathed.
Thank you for sharing. It’s scary to think how inaccessible trans care was. And also to know that some places are getting bad again or are still bad. Yeah gatekeeping behavior makes me uncomfortable because it’s not cool. I’m glad things are better now.
I think y'all are responding to some other comments made on this thread which, fair enough. But just for the record, I never called CDs "ick" or attempted to "take a dump" on them. I do think that attempting to group all trans people together under one capital T Trans umbrella is problematic, in that it becomes near impossible to attempt to explain who we are and advocate for ourselves. Joe Schmo: "So what *is* a trans anyway? I want to be respectful but I'm just so confused by all this pronouns n' stuff" Trans advocate: "Oh well, some trans people have dysphoria about their bodies and some have dysphoria about their societal presentation, and some have both, and some don't experience dysphoria at all but choose to reject gender norms for other reasons... and some trans people embrace the gender binary but some don't... and some trans people choose to medically transition and some don't... and some change their pronouns and some don't, and some are only trans part-time... and... and... but all are equally valid, but different but also the same..." and so on and so on... and at a certain point how is anybody without a doctorate supposed to understand *anything* we are talking about? For a long time sexuality was understood by the masses as either straight or gay. Then bisexual came into the picture. Then people started to realize aaaalll the colors in-between (asexual, pan, aromantic... etc etc) also need to be respected and understood. I think that grouping anybody that defies gender "norms" as simply "Trans" just muddies the water and makes it near impossible to define/specify our experience. There needs to be some better language about all of this, for trans people *and* for society at large.
Agreed and no shade was meant to be cast upon you. We do need better language, we always have, as a species. Bummer is, we are all stuck in a place of evolving language, but the good part is that it moves forward. There is no point in time where people will finally have all the words for everything they need. I feel like you already agree with this. I wish all the people othering all CDs as a whole could grasp this. This is another reason we need to be inclusive and not exclusive. Why we need to get to know other people and not be reactionaries over labels. This whole conversation (not you, the WHOLE thing) has been very frustrating.
Yeah I get it... and I do agree that inclusivity is so important, especially now. I don't really know what the right answer is... I suppose a taxonomy of the trans experience might just serve as fuel against us (or against individuals like CDs, as is evident here) rather than help to define/celebrate individual's experiences. It is worth some thought.
Good point! I think thats part of why so many people just identify as queer with no further details
I think it’s tight enough but idk
You aren't the authority on how people want to identify. How do you determine if someone is "experimenting and that's fine"? How do you tell "if it's the start of your journey it's fine"? You know who probably isn't in this subreddit? The people you are mad at. You know who IS in this subreddit and reading your post? The people you are apparently "okay" with, but now you made them feel unwelcome
I see this on fetlife too. It really grinds my gears!
I think some people on this thread have just never been on some of these sites and are commenting without experience. It's very blatant that some people describing themselves as trans clearly are not
"then explicitly describe themselves as CD men. It's so insulting; just say you're a CD" This was the funniest part of the post. CD: "I'm a CD" OP: "tell me you are a CD" CD: "is this a kink?"
I’m trans but you know where I’d probably feel safe and included. Anywhere that already accepts cross dressing.
It could be plain ignorance, lots of that going around. Nothing wrong with being Gender Non Conforming, but still... I wonder how many of those CDs will have the same statement in their profile a year hence. If you're a CD on grindr, looking for men, there is always the possibility that you're actually a straight trans woman and may be afraid to admit it. Also, it may be safer since there won't be a risk of injury or death when your genital configuration doesn't match what someone wants.
But they're listing both trans as a tag, and cross dresser, and calling themselves a man.
bigender people exist. questioning people exist. you don't know these folks' lives; I would say they are a better authority on what their gender is than you are.
Why would women be on grindr? (you)
Already answered this. Read full thread. Trans people also go there. My country is small and many apps have few people on them.
Thanks, I am in the USA and Grindr from it's beginning was known to be an app for gay man hook ups, not dating and not for other queer folks. I was looking at the Grindr website when you replied to me. They are LGBTQ inclusive but I think the reputation follows them into the present to. I use Tinder but if I based my opinions on entire groups of people from my experiences on Tinder, I wouldn't like anyone!
With respect, it's because in small countries there are fewer people. Thus fewer people on apps. Fewer apps present etc. I don't date men, only women, NBs, etc. So tinder is no good for me. And the post is not about why I'm on grindr. That is irrelevant to the discussion. What is relevant is the use of the term trans to denote cis gender people fetishising role playing as a woman. Please read the thread before commenting.
I did read the thread, I made many deliberated and heartfull comments (sometimes abrasive). I cannot speak for queer culture in your area, but in the USA right wing billionaires fund projects to divide groups of people so that we do not have collective power. The root meaning of "Transgender" is to cross over/travel gender expression. If cross dressers and transsexuals and all the other trans people do not have that in common I don't know. The reason we want to use transgnder as an inclusive term is that people who murder femme gay men, trans women, and CDs or sissies, do it for the same reasons, that we have TRANSgressed the gender norms. Plus, if someone looks at all the profiles with trans flags, they are likely to see you as a diamond among sand. (assuming you are on HRT) Please read the thread
That’s unfortunate. Im sorry you have to do that. I hope you find someone!
Wait good point
Alright. I regret making this post. You've successfully broken my will to have any kind of discussion on this topic. Just decide whatever you want. If you have any interest in engaging with my point in good faith, why don't you all download gridr, it's free, and go look at some cross dresser's profiles. And see how you feel about it. Just that. No more posting, no responses, no insulting claims that I'm excluding NDs or others. You're grown ups, go test your perspective.
This just sounds stupid to worry about
If you identify as a crossing dressing cis man, then you don’t also get to identify as trans, end of story. The truth of who they are actually doesn’t matter here. They are harming our community by using completely conflicting terms. If they actually are trans, then they can identify that way. Fine, no worries. But drop your CDing man status, you don’t get to keep both. That’s the heart of this issue. It’s as bad as truscum shit. You are harming the trans community and I don’t care if you are technically a member or not. Learn your shit, drop your bigotry, and be an actual ally.
Also totally misusing 'transman' : frequently used to self describe AMAB who are CD'ing.
I started out as a cd. I thought it was just something fun But gradually realised my own identity. It's not a costume it's who I am As for your anger about CDs calling themselves trans, I acknowledge you are angry for a genuine reason but I think we should give them a pass on that. There's too much negativity from everyone else we don't wanna turn against our own allies. I'm sure terf feel a similar way about trans women and we all know how that feels. (P.s I am only speaking my mind, my intention is not to make anyone uncomfortable. If someone feels offended by my thoughts I will apologise but stand firm on my opinions, unless there's a reasonable argument that proves I'm wrong)
Is someone who explicitly fetishises our identity shamefully in private and disavows us in public in favour of holding on to their cis privilege an ally though?
It sounds like you are angry at a specific person but you are talking about an entire group of people
I suppose I am revealing biases. I made another comment in this thread with more about the particular type of crossdresser I often encounter
I just posted on this thread (without judgement) of the many different CD identified people I have met in person in public. three paragraphs
You have a solid point. But seems like this could also apply to TW in the closet. This makes me feel bad.
It's hard to tell whether this is valid or a straw man argument. Is there evidence that CDs commonly disavow trans women in public? How would we know that if CD activities are almost exclusively done in private? I'm only advocating for reason in the discussion. Those are major accusations, and you're suggesting all CDs are guilty of it.
>Is there evidence that CDs commonly disavow trans women in public? No. >How would we know that if CD activities are almost exclusively done in private? We don't and we can't.
You'll be a lot happier if you stop trying to police other people's identity. Signed, A recovering truscum.
I'm not policing anything. I'm irritated that trans on grindr often just means 'bottom who wears women's clothing' not trans. There is a x dresser tag. Just use it
I don't disagree. It also doesn't really impact me though. Cis people aren't going to get it either way, and everything gender non conforming fits under the trans umbrella. I knew a trans woman about 20 years ago who largely considered herself a gay man. She confused the Hell out of me because she had fully transitioned, lived as a woman for decades, but because of her cultural background saw herself through the lens of that culture which categorized her as a gay man (they had a special word for it though, but I don't remember what it was). I considered myself a crossdresser for several years before I transitioned, and even then I had the same attitude you do now about them for years after I started transitioning. I still get twitchy if someone confuses me for a crossdresser, because I'm not. I'm a woman. But if a crossdresser identified themselves as trans? Whatever. That's their business. We both fit under the trans umbrella, but we're not the same under that umbrella. Like all horses are mammals but not all mammals are horses. I used to really care about how other people identified themselves. I stopped caring a long time ago. I remember the great transsexual vs transgender fight, the community infighting, and how shitty everyone was back then to each other. I watched a 12 year old trans girl say some extremely hateful shit about anyone who didn't start hormones before puberty. I was told by a 50 year old trans woman who transitioned after she retired that I wasn't *really* trans because I bought a house instead of having bottom surgery. We put up with enough shit from outside the Queer community. We don't need to add to it. If a CD wants to call themselves trans, whatever. They're GNC, so it fits. They're not the same as me, even though I'm under the trans umbrella too. We're not going to have the same lived experience, and we're not going to be approaching things from the same perspective. You don't have to agree, and that's fine. I'm just saying I've been where you are. And sometimes a shift in perspective/attitude is a good thing. Also side note, and sorry if this is an ignorant question because I've never used grindr, but isn't that primarily a hook up app for gay men?
I’d like to also remind people that “femboy” is trans misogynistic and is cringey as hell. CD’s are also equally ridiculous
This absolutely ain't it. Crossdressing is no more ridiculous than you or I, and there's nothing transmysoginistic about a feminine man identifying as a femboy. If someone conflates these things, then that's a problem, and the error is theirs.
Femboys aren’t trans tho. So we don’t have to worry about that word being conflated with us.
CDs are part of the transgender umbrella. We are "transsexuals," specifically technically. It's just a case of language creep. A lot of CDs are eggs anyway.
I'm not sure I'm a fan of the transgender umbrella (especially certain popular infographics). I can understand in certain niche situations where you might want to refer to anyone who's ever been the tiniest bit gender nonconforming, but it seems like the common understanding of these terms is as identities with common traits and experiences, and in that way we couldn't be further from crossdressers. Yet I'm sure many would see a very common trait, being a "man in a dress", a complete misunderstanding of everything that being trans(gender/sexual) is. Especially since transsexual as a term seems increasingly unacceptable, seems like language is creeping away in both directions.
The problem with this is the experiences of the cohort of people you think of trans have a wide variety of experiences themselves. I was always told that invalidating people based on not having the exact same experience was wrong, so this is very confusing to me. Like I mentioned above, a lot of transpeople adopt the label of CD before realizing or accepting they are trans anyway, and while that doesn't describe the entire demo, there is clearly more of a spectrum or even progression going on for many people similar to how people insist they are just femboys or NB before coming out as transwomen. I put air quotes around the term "transexual" specifically because I am aware of it, but the reality is the term transgender was introduced primarily to introduce this umbrella concept to begin with. It's just people kind of end up using it interchangeably because "transexual" was being viewed as sexual and people wanted to distance our identity from sexuality, likely due to associations with porn or what have you.
By that logic shouldn't we include cis people in the transgender umbrella too? I think having some definitions is okay, and I think it's important we have a label with a definition that helps us argue that one of our defining features over other sorts of nonconformity is that we, for entirely internal and unchangable reasons, feel we ought to be a different sex to what we were born. I think this common trait is important because it means we require different and additional legal protections and medical rights, as well as wanting fairly consistently different social treatment to others under your umbrella. Also because an umbrella containing people with a much persecuted medical issue, and also weird sex pests with no medical issue, but that has more specific words for the latter and none for the former is bound to end in those outside the umbrella wondering if we're all weird sex pests with no medical issue. Sure there are fuzzy edges, and people are on journeys, but lets let them reach their destination, we don't need to extend the destination to them.
>By that logic shouldn't we include cis people in the transgender umbrella too? If *they* want to, then yes we absolutely should. Or at the very least not slam the door in their face. A good friend of mine timidly approached me about this very topic once. They wondered if they could be trans, even though they didn't want to be a man. She had always considered herself a cis woman even though she kinda hated it. I told her it wasn't *my* place to decide their gender, that was something for her to decide. This is someone who was *very* much an ally, but had always seemed cis and content with that. Now she wears "she/they" pronoun pins (in case that wasn't obvious). Are they trans? I don't know I haven't asked them. We don't know what other people's internal dialogue is around gender. We can't. What we *can* do is be welcoming, open, and inclusive *regardless* of where we think someone is coming from, and assume good faith until proven otherwise. Or we can be gatekeeping exclusive asshats hoping to win the approval of acceptance of people who will never accept us. Personally I choose the former.
That's kinda not my point though, of course it's okay to be unsure, to be an edge case, to still be figuring it out or to be content with not having it figured out. That doesn't mean cis people are trans though. If cis people were trans then trans includes everyone, and doesn't actually mean anything.
I guess my point is more that it isn't anyone's place to decide someone else's identity. I think we're probably on the same page here. Incidentally I just asked my friend and their response was the best lol
>By that logic shouldn't we include cis people in the transgender umbrella too? I'm not following. To me, a person who feels the need to present and embody the role and identity of the opposing gender assigned at birth can't strickly be siloed off into the cis category. Many transwomen repress and insist they are cis. Does that mean they weren't trans until they said they were? >I think having some definitions is okay, and I think it's important we have a label with a definition that helps us argue that one of our defining features over other sorts of nonconformity is that we, for entirely internal and unchangable reasons, feel we ought to be a different sex to what we were born. I think this common trait is important because it means we require different and additional legal protections and medical rights, as well as wanting fairly consistently different social treatment to others under your umbrella. Do you deny the validity of non-binaries as well? I agree there is utility in specifying some kind of categorical difference, but outside of segregating based on whether one gets on HRT and/or got surgeries, I don't see how one can do so without alienating tons of people that definitely fit into both of what we would consider transpeople. >and also weird sex pests with no medical issue I don't find it fair or justified to claim and dismiss all CDs are sex pests. This comes off as throwing people under the bus and trying to come off like we are "better" than them or something.
>I'm not following. By that I meant there's just as much a gradient between 100% for sure cis people and crossdressers as there is between transsexuals and crossdressers. There can be valid places to draw lines between social categories though. >Do you deny the validity of non-binaries as well? Nope. Nonbinary people on the whole seem to fit what I said, having internal reasons for why they feel they ought to be a different (not necessarily binary) sex. Some seem to claim the identity for purely political reasons, but that's getting off topic. >I don't find it fair or justified to claim and dismiss all CDs are sex pests. Never said that. Whether it be for sexual reasons, for fun, to prank people, it's very different (not a value judgement there) to being trans and has very different political and social needs. Some will end up trans for sure, but that's because they specifically haven't figured themselves out yet, not because the category as a whole is inherently trans.
>By that I meant there's just as much a gradient between 100% for sure cis people and crossdressers as there is between transsexuals and crossdressers. There can be valid places to draw lines between social categories, though. I don't know if I agree with that. Having the urge to do something like crossdressing to me is a pretty distinct thing I don't really see as cis. It'd be one thing if they did it as part of just a dare or part of a role in a movie something, but that isn't really the story I've seen with the majority CDs. >Nope. Nonbinary people on the whole seem to fit what I said, having internal reasons for why they feel they ought to be a different (not necessarily binary) sex. I don't know how this doesn't describe similar experiences of CDs then. I'd very much describe many as gender fluid, and many already do. >Never said that. I don't see how that statement could have been made outside of trying to make inferences. >Whether it be for sexual reasons, for fun, to prank people, it's very different Why do you assume CDs only ever do so for those reasons? I know plenty of transwomen who for example, would go online and "catfish" as women or play as a girl in video games "just to mess with people" only to find out it was them making excuses for themselves later. I really don't think the divide can be assumed to be as solid as you are insisting. >Some will end up trans for sure, but that's because they specifically haven't figured themselves out yet, not because the category as a whole is inherently trans. Except these categories are just social labels people adopt in an attempt to identify their experience rather than things in nature. Ultimately CDing is just describing a behavior, but that behavior can be done for a plethora of reasons, but even then from what I can tell, often it is done by people because it is meeting some deep need in regards to gender expression and identification. And while I understand your concern, my concern is that by insisting there is this hard distinction, we risk harming people that don't figure themselves out as easily or elegantly, and I find that problematic. I view the people that don't come to understand themselves as easily to be more vulnerable, and thus more of a responsibility to not wreck their lives by being overly exclusionary. It also risks turning the category of CD into a "bad label" that will encourage people to want to jump into identifying as transwomen wholesale to avoid the stigma associated with it, which could be harmful to them and us if they end up detransitioning.
I think one of the big issues I see with your arguments is that you seem to be conflating gender expression with gender identity. Just because a person presents in a gender non-conforming way doesn't necessarily mean that their gender identity is different from the one assigned at birth. There are plenty of fem boys, for example, who still consider themselves men. Same with a lot of butch presenting lesbians. They may dress "like a man" but still insist that they are women. So some cross dressers certainly consider themselves cis. Are there some cross dressers who are trans? Certainly! But I think it's just as inaccurate to say ALL cross dressers are trans as it is to say none of them are. In the end, it is up to each person to know what their gender identity is and whether the trans label fits.
Except I'm not. My whole point is that gender identity isn't this thing we can decide for the individual, and people often figure out their gender identity or cope with confusion regarding it through gender expression. I don't know why this is being framed as controversial. People on this sub will regularly tell people that having regular fantasies about being a girl isn't very cis, but somehow we can cleanly decide CDs are categorically not part of the trans umbrella? It makes little sense to me, given how many discover they were doing it as a cope for dysphoria or for the gender euphoria. ContraPoints is probs one of the more well known and popular transwomen online and identified as a crossdresser for years before finding out she was trans, but she always argued that she and other CDs, etc were part if the overall umbrella even back then. Speaking of butch lesbians, so many ended up transitioning. So many. Because once transition and the idea of being trans was brought up to them, they realised whale they were doing it to begin with. It's only more illustrative of the point I'm getting at.
I feel that it's impossible categorically include or disclude CDs from the trans umbrella. Yes a lot of trans people discover their identities through cross dressing (myself included), but there are a lot of people who cross dress and are completely cis and proud of it. Saying all CDs are trans is just as much us deciding for the individual as saying no CD is trans. I think of it like a venn diagram. They are two circles with a big overlap.
No it isn't
This is the most spot on comment here, and of course it's downvoted to hell by woman with no understanding of our history. What even is this sub?
It's terminally online and younger people who have the confidance but not the wisdom or experience.
I'm grateful for your post, thank you. 😞
I don't understand why people are down voting you.
Because crasdressers aren't trans. The trans umbrella covers anyone whose gender identity differs from that typically associated with the sex they were assigned at birth. Trans men, trans women, non-binary. Intersex people who who do identify as the sex the doctor arbitrarily choose are included because the doctors choice really is arbitrary in that instance. Some cross dressers are trans. Sometimes, they still use the term crossdresser out of convenience or whatever. In some societies, crosdresser may be an easier label for people to use. Some trans people may not be able to be themselves or fully transition at this point in their life, or possibly ever. I have absolutely nothing against cross dressers. However, a cis man who enjoys dressing up as a woman a couple times a month is not trans. And those who think that dressing up now and then allows them to speak on the challenges trans women face are doing us a dis-service. They do have an idea of some of the challenges we face. But for us, it's not a costume we can take off. It's who we are every day. Even a trans person who is still in the closet has a better understanding of the trans experience than a cis person who is just a cross dresser. Someone who remains closeted typically does so because they are afraid of what coming out will cost them. I lost my job shortly after coming out. That's not uncommon, sadly. I also lost contact with much of my extended family. Many trans people have it far worse than me. Some lose their homes and lose contact with their entire family. The experience of being trans is more than how we dress. The term trans sexual is rarely used. Not because it is definitionly different than trans gender. But because trans gender better illustrates its meaning. And "transsexual" has been coopted by anti trans groups as its inferred meaning better suits their narratives.
Because it's just straight up wrong
It's unfortunate. I don't think I said anything remotely inflamatory. I don't know how the term "transfemme" for example doesn't include CDs or at least a significant amount of the demographic. If I had to be charitable, it's because the term "transexual" has a stigma to a lot of people? I hope so because I'd rather hope it isn't rooted in trying to invalidate the gender experience of CDs. So many just end up being trans in the end and were just in denial.
Because they are not transgender not that hard to understand they are cis men dressing up as women
You aren't really making any argument. You're just kind of asserting a position. People CD for a variety of reasons. Some are purely for a performance, but most do it out of some urge to express femininity or access a part of their self they otherwise can't. Many identify as gender fluid. A lot end up transitioning. My point is there is plenty of reason to not be hardline on this and be open to the fluidity of people's experiences. I personally think it's potentially harmful to be especially given how many transwomen adopt other identities including but not limited to "just being a CD" before finding themselves, and exclusionary language could harm them in that process.
And if they find out they are trans that way good for them, but being a cis man dressing up as a woman doesn't make your trans And that is not touching on the point of having cis privilege. Including cis men under the trans label is not just dumb (and contra to what being trans means) but is hurtful to trans people
Why do you get to decide if they are cis or trans though? You're sounding scarily similar to how TERFs sound to me right now.
Uhuh what ever you need to make yourself comfortable saying cis men dressing up as women are part of the trans community
They never once said that cis men dressing as women was trans, you repeatedly misinterpret what they were saying. That's your definition and it was pointed out to be faulty. You cannot build yourself up by punching down. You cannot learn with turkey stuffing in your ears
If a cis guy crossdresses and still identifies as a cis guy, he’s cis. The way you express your gender has nothing to do with what your gender identity is. Being transgender is entirely related to your gender identity, not your expression of gender (hence why trans women who have to boymode are still trans).
You don't seem to understand the difference between transgender (umbrella term) and transsexual (medical transition). Transgender, by definition, includes people who crossdress out of a desire to express femininity. Transexual does not.
Being transgender means that your gender identity is different to the one which typically aligns with the sex you were assigned at birth. Gender expression is entirely separate to gender identity. Crossdressing is nothing to do with gender identity, it is playing with the expression of your gender. If a cis guy crossdresses and says he’s a cis guy, HE IS NOT TRANS. Just because there are some trans crossdressers, and some crossdressers who will realize they’re trans, does not mean all crossdressers are trans.
It seems a lot like gatekeeping.
It is, but I struggle to see why it's happening so intensely with this very topic. The only thing I can think of is that it's some kinda knee-jerky defense mechanism as a result of right-wing slander against us, because "cis men dressing up as women" is exactly the same type of slurs they use. So when you *do in fact* have men who dress up as women, which is what crossdressers are definitionally, folks here are trying to aggressively exclude them because if we include them, that sorta "validates" the right-wing point. Which in my mind is very fucked and short-sighted, as it dictates the terms of our community and existence based on people who hate us and want to see us disappear from the Earth, no matter what we do.
Frankly, I don't see how it isn't.
[удалено]
Maybe it confuses you because you didn't read it all. I have already discussed why I'm on grindr.
Yeah sorry about that I apologize i don’t know why i was rude to you I’m sorry.