National Geographic magazine

Clippings from news sources involving fashion freedom and other gender equality issues.
User avatar
Fred in Skirts
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 3989
Joined: Mon Mar 14, 2016 6:48 pm
Location: Southeast Corner of Aiken County, SC USA

Re: National Geographic magazine

Post by Fred in Skirts »

Well said Moon! Lets all just drop the labels and live our lives the way we want to without all of the crap that we have to put up with now. We are who we think we are and nothing more!

See my signature line below.
"It is better to be hated for what you are than be loved for what you are not" Andre Gide: 1869 - 1951
Always be yourself because the people that matter don’t mind and the ones that mind don’t matter.
User avatar
crfriend
Master Barista
Posts: 14433
Joined: Fri Nov 19, 2004 9:52 pm
Location: New England (U.S.)
Contact:

Re: National Geographic magazine

Post by crfriend »

The inane part of the whole labelling exercise is that's it's completely and utterly irrelevant unless one is looking for an intimate relationship. Aside from that caveat, it's a meaningless distinction, and that irrelevancy is compounded by the lack of a consistent taxonomy.
Retrocomputing -- It's not just a job, it's an adventure!
User avatar
Pdxfashionpioneer
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 1650
Joined: Sun Oct 25, 2015 6:39 am
Location: Portland, OR, USA

Re: National Geographic magazine

Post by Pdxfashionpioneer »

As I've said a number of times, I agree with you Moonshadow that if we keep pushing these gender issues either by increasing the size of the box so it encompasses everyone who's a half bubble off level (broad definition of "transgender" for instance, which in fact the transsexuals, and apparently you too Moon, reject) or create more boxes so there's one for every flavor (The folks who keep adding initials to the cause. Apparently there are now 50 separate labels available. If they crank out just a few more I'll bet you Carl, even you could find one you'd be comfortable with.)

Confronted with that reality I'm tempted to get on a rooftop somewhere and suggest at the top of my lungs that we stop the madness and recognize that each one of us is unique, just like everyone eslse.

However, "We're entering dark times Harry. Dark times." Oh dammit, Dumbledore's already taken that line. Well, it's true IRL as well as on screen so I'm just saying we have to find someone who's gained some societal presence that we can buddy-up with until the rest of society comes to their senses.
David, the PDX Fashion Pioneer

Social norms aren't changed by Congress or Parliament; they're changed by a sufficient number of people ignoring the existing ones and publicly practicing new ones.
User avatar
r.m.anderson
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 2601
Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2004 6:25 pm
Location: Burnsville MN USA

Re: National Geographic magazine

Post by r.m.anderson »

Pdxfashionpioneer wrote:As I've said a number of times, I agree with you Moonshadow that if we keep pushing these gender issues either by increasing the size of the box so it encompasses everyone who's a half bubble off level (broad definition of "transgender" for instance, which in fact the transsexuals, and apparently you too Moon, reject) or create more boxes so there's one for every flavor (The folks who keep adding initials to the cause. Apparently there are now 50 separate labels available. If they crank out just a few more I'll bet you Carl, even you could find one you'd be comfortable with.)

Confronted with that reality I'm tempted to get on a rooftop somewhere and suggest at the top of my lungs that we stop the madness and recognize that each one of us is unique, just like everyone eslse.

However, "We're entering dark times Harry. Dark times." Oh dammit, Dumbledore's already taken that line. Well, it's true IRL as well as on screen so I'm just saying we have to find someone who's gained some societal presence that we can buddy-up with until the rest of society comes to their senses.
Has someone here been "Fiddling on the Roof" - and I don't know if it was intentional or a attack of the Qwerty key board {{eslse}} all these boxed varieties
of human diorama eslse's - I like what he is wearing even though it was formerly fit for her - now moving on OFF the bubble as the balance swings the world is one
big melting pot - going forth and multiplying strange languages and customs and now gender issues !
I think I will have a double shot of my finest Irish and dwell on this TRANSition !
"YES SKIRTING MATTERS"!
"Kilt-On" -or- as the case may be "Skirt-On" !
WHY ?
Isn't wearing a kilt enough?
Well a skirt will do in a pinch!
Make mine short and don't you dare think of pinching there !
User avatar
crfriend
Master Barista
Posts: 14433
Joined: Fri Nov 19, 2004 9:52 pm
Location: New England (U.S.)
Contact:

Re: National Geographic magazine

Post by crfriend »

Pdxfashionpioneer wrote:If they crank out just a few more I'll bet you Carl, even you could find one you'd be comfortable with.
I already have one: "male"; further refined, "masculine", with an individual sense of style.

One last time: "There is no subtext." Just because I happen to wear open-hemmed garments has no bearing on anything else. So stop insinuating that it does. Do you not make the connection? Or do I have to give up my individuality and rejoin the herd so you stop bullying me? That's the direction your argument is following.
Retrocomputing -- It's not just a job, it's an adventure!
User avatar
Sinned
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 5804
Joined: Sun Aug 19, 2012 5:28 pm
Location: York, England

Re: National Geographic magazine

Post by Sinned »

Carl, I don't think that Dave was trying to insinuate anything by his remark. It's just your flat refusal to be put into any box has prompted his suggestion that if they create so many more boxes that you will eventually fit into one even if it is "heterosexual masculine period piece skirting gentleman". Try generating a single word for that. Lighten up a little.
I believe in offering every assistance short of actual help but then mainly just want to be left to be myself in all my difference and uniqueness.
User avatar
crfriend
Master Barista
Posts: 14433
Joined: Fri Nov 19, 2004 9:52 pm
Location: New England (U.S.)
Contact:

Re: National Geographic magazine

Post by crfriend »

Sinned wrote:Carl, I don't think that Dave was trying to insinuate anything by his remark.
That's not the way it reads, nor is it just this instance. It's been his continual theme that any guy who dares to buck what passes for "male fashion" in the modern era must be trans-* [0] -- and that's what I find patently offensive. I also suspect one heck of a lot of straight blokes would as well, and if that's keeping them from fiddling with style it's a rotten shame.
It's just your flat refusal to be put into any box has prompted his suggestion that if they create so many more boxes that you will eventually fit into one even if it is "heterosexual masculine period piece skirting gentleman".
Why do I need a label? Why does anyone? Does "human being" somehow not do? To label me as, say, a "tortoise" would be as entirely incorrect as labelling me as "trans-*" (unless one clings to the pseudo-scholarly and one-way term "transvestite"), although calling me a tortoise would not be as offensive as the other option -- and that's down to local culture.

I think I'll wear trousers today. That way I won't offend anyone. No there will not be "film at eleven".

[0] The asterisk, "*", used in this context is what's known in computing circles as a "wildcard". This single character can take the place of any sequence of characters, including the asterisk. It's easier to use than the current crop of alphabet-soup which is continually morphing.
Retrocomputing -- It's not just a job, it's an adventure!
User avatar
Sinned
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 5804
Joined: Sun Aug 19, 2012 5:28 pm
Location: York, England

Re: National Geographic magazine

Post by Sinned »

If what you say is true and Dave is trying to say that anyone who is unconventionally dressed should be labelled as trans* ( and I do get the wildcard as I cut my teeth on UNIX ) then I would find it offensive too. I am not trans anything. Sorry if I haven't picked up on that. My humblest apologies.

So sorry Dave here's another that is not trans*. You're barking up the wrong tree. Must re-read some of the previous posts.
I believe in offering every assistance short of actual help but then mainly just want to be left to be myself in all my difference and uniqueness.
User avatar
moonshadow
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 6994
Joined: Sun Aug 09, 2015 1:58 am
Location: Warm Beach, Washington
Contact:

Re: National Geographic magazine

Post by moonshadow »

Look, I think that most of us, if not all of us to some extent on this site (I know there may be a few exceptions) are for the most part "live and let live" people.

You don't have to be trans* to be an trans* ally, and I believe that most of us here, save for our position on select issues (i.e. bathrooms) would at least agree that a trans person has the right to at least direct their own life without unwanted outside interference.... and that's okay with me.

It is my understanding this site exist to unite men who choose to wear kilts and outward clothing intended for the opposite sex (also known as "free styling"), it is built on the premise that we are not trying to "become women". However that said, this site was created a long time before the national gender discussion really took hold.

Under the modern study of gender, there is a growing tendency to include us, all of us under the transgender umbrella. I do believe it is up to each of us on an individual and personal level to decide if the trans* label applies to ourselves. That's a personal decision and as for each of us is the result of a lifetime of soul searching. Dave has chosen his path, Carl his, Dennis his, so and and so forth. It's not up to anyone else to direct our own lives.

Dave wants a world where everyone is free to simply be themselves without becoming a victim of prejudice. To my understanding Carl wants the same thing. Both work to that end in their own way. Though the paths may be different, the destination is the same, the destination of tolerance and acceptance of people simply being free to be who they are and to choose their own path.

I believe it's that destination that unites us, not only on this site, but the world over. That destination trumps all other special interest groups. Regardless of your gender identity, your sex, your religion, your race, your ethnicity, etc, we all work towards that end, and when and if we ever arrive there, assuming we don't nuke ourselves to death in the process, I believe we would have found the true promised land. In a world without prejudice, labels are not necessary because nobody is trying to one-up the other.
-Andrea
The old hillbilly from the coal fields of the Appalachian mountains currently living like there's no tomorrow on the west coast.
User avatar
Fred in Skirts
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 3989
Joined: Mon Mar 14, 2016 6:48 pm
Location: Southeast Corner of Aiken County, SC USA

Re: National Geographic magazine

Post by Fred in Skirts »

Well said Moon, well said!!
"It is better to be hated for what you are than be loved for what you are not" Andre Gide: 1869 - 1951
Always be yourself because the people that matter don’t mind and the ones that mind don’t matter.
User avatar
Sinned
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 5804
Joined: Sun Aug 19, 2012 5:28 pm
Location: York, England

Re: National Geographic magazine

Post by Sinned »

Thanks Moon for that note of sanity. I'm not well still and not thinking straight. You are right in what you said. The only labels, or lack of them, that apply to us are the ones we apply ourselves. Like most of you I have mainly walked my own path, for right or wrong, and accept that we are all different.
I believe in offering every assistance short of actual help but then mainly just want to be left to be myself in all my difference and uniqueness.
dillon
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 2719
Joined: Mon Nov 18, 2013 8:12 pm
Location: southeast NC coast

Re: National Geographic magazine

Post by dillon »

Moon, you are a young man, and i can but pray you live long enough to witness such a day. And who knows? You just might. I didn't think I would live to see a black man elected President. But I did, and moreover perhaps the best, most intelligent, and most successful President since FDR. So forgive my general pessimism when I say that I woke up on Nov 9th feeling like I was on some other planet, one akin to HELL.

So I may not live to see our national course corrected, but my only solace is that most of the wretched old white men who voted for this pathological liar will most likely be dead before I am. (My father lived to 96, my Grandfather to 99). So at least I am at least hopeful they will pass away in grief for the demise of their politics.

I will leave it to you and to my own kids to produce an America more akin to both REALITY and to the VISION of the founders. Best of luck in taking America back from the LUNATIC FRINGE...

But don't expect me to stop speaking truth to power while I still draw a breath.
As a matter of fact, the sun DOES shine out of my ...
User avatar
moonshadow
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 6994
Joined: Sun Aug 09, 2015 1:58 am
Location: Warm Beach, Washington
Contact:

Re: National Geographic magazine

Post by moonshadow »

Well Dillon, a shot of good news, as Bill Maher said, the one upside of this election is that it will most likely mark the end of the "50's presidents". After this, it will probably be a 60's president. We've still got about 30 years to go before anyone in my generation has a real shot at it, and when Amber, my daughter's generation hits it, I'll be near 90 years old....

I wonder what gender will be like then... in 2070?

When my great grand children will climb up and sit on my knee and tell me about what they learned in school in history. They'll say today they learned about the old diseases long since gone like cancer and diabetes. They'll ask about what's it like operating a vehicle that runs on... what is it papa.... gaa.. gaaasoline?

We heard the world hit a rough patch in 2017 and came close to world destruction, and I'll say, "yeah, that was a close one, but fortunately, we got our vision back in 20/20!" :D

For you Dillon: (click here) -- sounds like you could use a good laugh tonight! :wink:
-Andrea
The old hillbilly from the coal fields of the Appalachian mountains currently living like there's no tomorrow on the west coast.
User avatar
Sinned
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 5804
Joined: Sun Aug 19, 2012 5:28 pm
Location: York, England

Re: National Geographic magazine

Post by Sinned »

Very good Moon, I had never heard of Bill Whatsit and his monologue was American slanted but humorous nonetheless. I was born in the mid-fifties so was a product of the sixties which was a great time for me. Even the seventies weren't so bad. It seemed to be the eighties when everything started to go downhill and is still going, just not quite sure how fast.
I believe in offering every assistance short of actual help but then mainly just want to be left to be myself in all my difference and uniqueness.
User avatar
Pdxfashionpioneer
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 1650
Joined: Sun Oct 25, 2015 6:39 am
Location: Portland, OR, USA

Re: National Geographic magazine

Post by Pdxfashionpioneer »

Thanks Moon, for the Bill Maher link and for your clarification of my posts.
David, the PDX Fashion Pioneer

Social norms aren't changed by Congress or Parliament; they're changed by a sufficient number of people ignoring the existing ones and publicly practicing new ones.
Post Reply