Freestylers

[jamie001]

I forget to add that all of the fashion items that we argue about like high heels were invented for men. George Washington even wore high-heels to his inaugural ball. Men need to reclaim all of the fashion choices that they had in the past. One of the worst things that ever happened to fashion was the industrial revolution where all men were expected to look like clones of each other. Unfortunately that look has persisted to this day.

Some men wear high heels with their skirts to complete the look. I usually wear women's low heel shoes because I like the feminine shoe style. IMHO, most men's shoes are too bulky and masculine looking.

Skip, if you do a web search of the term freestyler, with mens fashion, you will find this site is indirectly linked through references to Tom's Cafe. So IMO this site is already considered a freestyler site. I really did not find that many freestyler websites either. Now there are a lot of men in high heels...but this site is about men in skirts, NOT high heels, "...as a fashion choice for men..."
I'm not insulted. Just my two cents worth.

binx

[Kilty]

Skip, didn't mean to get at you, dude, just I think all of us are getting overheated about this issue.

TBH, normal guys don't argue over something trivial, I do see this behaviour as more of a female trait. None of us should be bickering over different terms. IMHO the site has changed a lot, and I've moved over to X Marks The Scot, and the Sporran Clan site, as there are more genuine kilt wearers. I'm not into wearing a whole ensemble with a skirt like some members.

Some comments like "I watch what women wear and what matches and try to do the same with my wardrobe" a little disturbing, that some members have posted in different sections of the forum. I'm more of a kilt wearer than a skirt one, at least the kilt is recognized as a male garment.

TBH skirt wearing men will always have a struggle if there are no young men to start the cause (I don't mean anarchist groups and the like, just regular guys), no one looks to those slightly older, to use a politically correct term...

I'm rambling now, but I might just lurk and if things gets a little too 'feminine' for my liking, I'll

I guess we are all entitled to our views on skirt wearing, it seems the IMFF guy has joined the ranks of the regular guys out there. I know I'm more with the MIST crew myself (Men in Shorts and Trousers!)

I was curious about men in skirts, but I think the fascination is fading, and it unnerves me a little. Perhaps its cultural...

I rarely wear a kilt, even at home. And what with winter coming, and my apartment radiators on the blink...

[crfriend]

Some comments like "I watch what women wear and what matches and try to do the same with my wardrobe" a little disturbing [...]

I think there's precious little wrong in observation; it gives one a sense of what works and what doesn't -- where the line gets drawn, at least in the context here, is that what we take away from that as "our own" and work into our looks (and there are several, very distinct, looks amongst "the regulars here) we integrate into our clothing choices as men.

Having a "good eye" for what works on you (the generalised "you") is not a purely feminine trait -- architects make judgment calls on "what works" (for them, and hopefully their clients) every day. Does this make architects "feminine" (unless they happen to be women)? I'd submit not.

TBH skirt wearing men will always have a struggle if there are no young men to start the cause (I don't mean anarchist groups and the like, just regular guys), no one looks to those slightly older, to use a politically correct term...

I'm reminded of the old saw that I first heard back in the 1960s: "Never trust anyone over 30." And, you know, it sort of made sense back then because I was under 30. As another old adage goes, "Time is a wonderful teacher; it's a shame she kills all her students." With the years come something beyond what gets drummed into you during your "formative years" when an unbelievable level of effort is undertaken to make everyone "conform" (it makes running things (think "command and control") easier). It's only after a few decades of actually seeing the system in action does one gain the realisation that one's been "had".

I continually run into this queer aspect of "time warping" all the time with a passion of mine that eclipses skirts -- computers: from what one sees and experiences on the streets, even amongst the "younger" set of computer literates one would believe the computer sprung into its modern form in 1981, fully formed and running DOS. Nothing, in fact, could be farther from the truth! There's a truly deep and wonderful history there which gets roundly ignored (or, at best, glossed over).

The same holds for the history of fashion, and, most notably for the crowd here, mens' fashion -- it's deep, it stretches back hundreds, even thousands, of years, and up until quite recently has been remarkably fluid.

The parallels to computing history, and how it's treated, bear comparison. In the former, a whole lot of folks tend to think that there was nothing before the microprocessor, just as many think that there was no mens' fashion before the modern outfit of shirt, trousers, and (for formal occasions) the suit. Nothing could be farther from the truth! Just as before the microprocessor there were mainframes and minicomputers, before the modern garb that we all accept as "menswear" there were tunics, frock coats, tights with codpieces, lace trim in all its exuberance, high heels, and rakish cuts of all sorts. The sad part is that it's only the interested person and the historian that can draw those parallels -- and it's the ability to draw those parallels that only comes with either intense passionate interest or the wisdom of accumulated years.

I was curious about men in skirts, but I think the fascination is fading, and it unnerves me a little. Perhaps its cultural...

Experiencing something outside one's comfort zone is something that will help one grow into a broader-minded person. I've been exposed to some things here that have, to be honest, made the hairs on the back of my neck stand up; however, I have not lashed out, nor damned, the individual espousing such ideas. If the notions are "not for me" because I cannot fathom or understand them, I may ask the question, "Why?" or I may just go on and ignore the idea -- but the exposure frequently provokes thought, and that's never bad.

I rarely wear a kilt, even at home. And what with winter coming, and my apartment radiators on the blink...

Wear thicker kilt hose or, perhaps, *gasp* heavy-gauge tights;. You'll be warmer that way -- and still be a guy -- tights were around in the 1500s and worn exclusively by men. Even though I can't deal with the notion of a codpiece myself.

[ChristopherJ]

Some comments like "I watch what women wear and what matches and try to do the same with my wardrobe" a little disturbing, that some members have posted in different sections of the forum.

I was just amazed by that comment. Very suprised.

I don't wear a kilt - and yet I am very interested to hear from kilt wearers what their particular problems, issues etc. are in regard to getting decent kilts, kilt styling, view on the 'modern' kilts etc. etc. I think it's all great - and just another part of the larger picture of men wearing skirts (or MUGs, if you are sensitive about that sort of label). I don't denigrate men who wear kilts - quite the opposite, I try and support their right to wear whatever they choose.

So how is it that some people who wear kilts (and I stress the word 'some' here) do not seem able to return a mutual respect and tolerance to me? All I ask is for those kilt wearers to offer me the same respect and tolerance that I offer them. I don't see where the problem is, to be honest.

[Pythos]

I feel I should apologize for my outburst toward since1982.

There really was no want of a personal attack, though it did turn out that way.

I, as I am sure most here, wish for the freedom to wear what I want, when I want, how I want, with the only limitations being that it needs to meet the expected level of decency.

This is something in my opinion that should have been reached when women began wearing jeans, out and about as everyday wear. We men just kinda got left behind, because frankly we either did not care, or we were too frightened at the idea of actually paying attention to our physique.

I just wish people would just lower all barriers and let one another wear what they want, with no social repercussions.

I wish that if or when I land a corporate flying job, that I will have the choice between trousers, or a nice mid length, or long business skirt, along with the leg wear and footwear I feel makes the outfit complete, and not run the risk of losing my job solely based on my clothing preferences.

This is a very real threat to most here, losing one's job for such an unimportant reason. This would not be a problem if there was more of a social drive to achieve clothing equality, like women have.

I have heard some say that the unfairness argument doesn't hold water.

Why not I ask.

I think it is at the very heart of the matter. Why is a man wearing a skirt thought of as lowering himself socially? Is it because the skirt is an artical of clothing that only women wear, and women are lower than men? This is wrong if it is indeed the case, and is a notion that needs to be stomped out. Women are not lower than men as a whole. Some are unfortunately, but some men are lower than other men. It is just how things are.

I, for the umpteenth time, heard some comedian making a joke about how the two sexes see dating. Men see sex, and only sex. Women see a relationship. I for one see women as much more than warm holes to put my penis (I know one fellow who openly thinks this way about women...It makes me sick). I also know that this is factually untrue, cause I know women that view men as nothing more than sexual outlets (which also sickens me). But this theme is one that is driven into men continuously, and usually in the stand up arena.

When people of a group start ripping into others for going a little out of the boundaries that are not even set, it upsets me. I did not like free stylers being lumped into being TVs, or CDs, and felt I had to defend.

I personally think the term freestyle applies to all people who choose to wear that which is outside the norm. Period, end. This can apply to men and women.

A woman that chooses to wear a tie, is a free styler.

A guy choosing a tight shiny skirt, with black hose, is a free styler.

A guy that puts things on himself to form fake breasts, and hips, tucks what God gave him, puts on makeup, and or a wig, and wears an outfit normally worn by females is a cross dresser, or Transvestite.

The fellow in that picture someone posted, (the guy in all black, with a pony tail, high heels, black leather skirt, and black hose) is definitely an good example of free styler.

A guy in a kilt, with dress shoes on, and a T-shirt, is a free styler.

I hope this helps with the definition as I see it. I wish others saw it this way too.

So, thank you for reading this long post. I hope those offended are a bit less offended.

[Sasquatch]

Knickerless, I can see Skip's worries (albeit unfounded in my view). The balance achieved by the Café is difficult. It would be all too easy for it to descend into a CD/TV forum or website of which there are huge numbers already available. However, impose too much control and you have a narrowly focused forum that jumps on any that stray out of line.

This is why I believe we need to have an awareness of this problem; this non-pigeonholing of the Café and that to lose sight of that is to see it lurch into disarray.

Pythos - at the risk of inflaming things, your good points would be much better made without the aggression that can infuse several of your postings. The tone disguises the thrust of your points at times, which of course leads to even more frustration as the content is ignored due to a focus on the tone.

You may even find that people stick up for you!

(breathes out in big sigh).

[/quote]

Yeah...what he said!

Ease up on Skip. He's a good dude and he's got a point. The Cafe doesn't discriminate against freestylers but it is not the right forum for crossdressers. Everyone here is walking a different path by varying degrees, but the one commonality is that we appear as we are - MEN.

If we are all so lucky to make Skip's age, then we will also be entitled to be cantankerous and curmudgeonly coots!

Sasq

[Sasquatch]

TBH skirt wearing men will always have a struggle if there are no young men to start the cause (I don't mean anarchist groups and the like, just regular guys), no one looks to those slightly older, to use a politically correct term...

I was curious about men in skirts, but I think the fascination is fading, and it unnerves me a little. Perhaps its cultural...

Carl had a couple of good old sayings, but one that may be more applicable is "Youth is wasted on the young." I think it takes the perspective of age for many of us before we "come out" about our sense of self and start to be the unique person you are inside. If more young men could accept that calling, I bet there would be a lot fewer CDs in the world and a lot more MIS. We old guys (I'm pushing 50, soon to be pulling 50 ) are too often accused of being arch conformists, yet there is no demographic more conformist than the 18 to 35 year olds. Marketers and advertisers certainly understand that fact. Conformity keeps a lot of you kids in trousers when you have a suppressed voice inside telling you that you are different, an individual with a unique path to walk (back to my path obsession ). You may bolt from the Cafe today, but, to paraphrase Aahnold (the Tuhrminatuhr), "You'll be back!" We hope you all stay, but if you leave, please don't burn your bridges behind you. In the words of Tom Bodette, "We'll leave the light on for you."
Sasq

[Sasquatch]

I, for the umpteenth time, heard some comedian making a joke about how the two sexes see dating. Men see sex, and only sex. Women see a relationship. I for one see women as much more than warm holes to put my penis (I know one fellow who openly thinks this way about women...It makes me sick). I also know that this is factually untrue, cause I know women that view men as nothing more than sexual outlets (which also sickens me). But this theme is one that is driven into men continuously, and usually in the stand up arena.

I feel sorry for men with attitudes like that, and find them almost comical. It's so clear that it's just a show, a big sham, some crude attempt to put forth a sadly distorted aura of masculinity. It's how they mask their own insecurities, I suppose. You know they don't think of their own mothers, sisters, and wives with such contempt, yet they so easily transfer it onto the entire female sex. I should say it would be comical, except that women victimized by this attitude aren't laughing.

So, thank you for reading this long post. I hope those offended are a bit less offended.

No offense; we're cool. Everyone blows off steam from time to time.

Sasq

[Ray]

Pythos,

Nice response, and some really good points made. I share your frustration.

[ChristopherJ]

The Cafe doesn't discriminate against freestylers but it is not the right forum for crossdressers.

The two are not the same. Yet some people seem to think they are.

Even worse, in my opinion, although I completely agree that this is not a forum for crossdressers, I often feel angry when I see posts that refer to crossdressers or transvestites in very derogatory terms. I can't see why this should be and believe that such outright prejudice does not belong on this forum.

[Departed Member]

Hi 1982 et al,

Maybe I can help to bring us together a little bit with this issue. Try to imagine the spectrum of identities that we have on this forum, and then see where they fit into the overall scheme of things If we can do this, I think everyone is going to feel more comfortable.

From what I've read and been told, every human being falls somewhere on the spectrum of sexual preference and gender identity. As I've mentioned before, sexual preference is the gender with which we desire to be intimate, and identity is the gender that we identify ourselves as having.

Leaving sexual preference aside, my understanding of the gender spectrum goes something like this, becoming more unconventional and feminine the farther down we go. And by the way, I'm not using the word unconventional in a negative way:

1. Wearing men's clothes only.
2. Wearing men't clothes and sometimes skirts too.
3. Wearing men's clothes and sometimes skirts, pantyhose, heels, etc.
4. Wearing women's clothes but not trying to pass as a woman.
5. Wearing women's clothes and trying to pass as a woman.
6. Wearing women's clothes, trying to pass and taking female hormones.
7. #6, plus contemplating sex change surgery.
8. Undergoing sex change surgery, changing gender permanently.

I sense that the majority of the folks on this forum fall into category two. Others, myself included, fall into category three. Either way, we are light-years away from the higher numbers. We are still part of the overall spectrum, however, and we should not be afraid of this.

So even though I like to dress femme now and again and always look forward to choosing my skirt, heels and pantyhose for the day, I'm still very much a guy. In addition to music, art, restaurants and museums, I'm also a licensed and active pilot with with more than 900 hours of flight time. I'm also pretty good on the firing range with my semiautomatic rifles, and I've been thinking that I should go shooting sometime while wearing my camouflage skirt! I'm too soft-hearted to hunt, but I have no problem with those who do, as long as they are true sportsmen and eat what they take.

So...let's take strength and courage from knowing where we stand, wherever it may be!!

Cheers, John

PS: Here's a shot of me in my camo skirt, self-taken at the Sacramento Railroad museum

[Since1982]

Kilty, I truely believe you ARE Jermaine. You make all the identical type comments he made on IMFF. You seem to have either cropped and saved all HIS posts and MY posts to HIM for some unfathomable reason. Your picture of yourself when compared to the picture of himself that Jermaine posted on IMFF are nearly identical, (different skirts). Your offering of insults and offering to "do violence to me if you ever meet me" is very much the same type things Jermaine said to me at IMFF. Quote Jermaine, "If you were anywhere I could find you, I'd knock your lights out"..

This is my last response to you, as I believe you are a chain puller that enjoys getting rises out of people by what you say, just as Jermaine was...As to your apology, I don't believe it was any more sincere than the one Jermaine gave, yours being right after several other people said you were a bit offline by attacking me, and Jermaine gave a similar apology to me after the moderator of IMFF came down on him for the same thing.

Have a nice life Jermaine/Kilty. bye.

[JeffB1959]

Maybe I can help to bring us together a little bit with this issue. Try to imagine the spectrum of identities that we have on this forum, and then see where they fit into the overall scheme of things If we can do this, I think everyone is going to feel more comfortable.

Leaving sexual preference aside, my understanding of the gender spectrum goes something like this, becoming more unconventional and feminine the farther down we go. And by the way, I'm not using the word unconventional in a negative way:

1. Wearing men's clothes only.
2. Wearing men't clothes and sometimes skirts too.
3. Wearing men's clothes and sometimes skirts, pantyhose, heels, etc.
4. Wearing women's clothes but not trying to pass as a woman.
5. Wearing women's clothes and trying to pass as a woman.
6. Wearing women's clothes, trying to pass and taking female hormones.
7. #6, plus contemplating sex change surgery.
8. Undergoing sex change surgery, changing gender permanently.

I sense that the majority of the folks on this forum fall into category two. Others, myself included, fall into category three. Either way, we are light-years away from the higher numbers. We are still part of the overall spectrum, however, and we should not be afraid of this.

John: That was a brilliant discourse on your part, one I agree with completely, and your scale hits the target dead on. Speaking for myself, I usually fall into category #2 and occasionally #3, in fact, I prefer the latter as that's what looks best on me, I'm certainly comfortable with eitehr as I don't feel my masculinity suffers one bit because of my preference for clothing. After all, something as simple as clothing shouldn't determine one's gender, nor should you allow others with narrow mindsets to determine that for you either. But the bottom line is that wearing skirts don't make us any less as men, period!

[SkirtedViking]

I have to fall into category three and four then.But probably we should gorget all divisions and just be ourselves.

[crfriend]

I have to fall into category three and four then. But probably we should [f]orget all divisions and just be ourselves.

The enumeration is a useful one, but one that I, personally, found rather disturbing. Why? I found it disturbing because it used the language of the rigidly-defined western concept of male and female garments, and in the context of fashion, items 5 and beyond are irrelevant and should, probably, have been omitted.

This differentiation is something that we're going to have to come to grips with, just as we're trying to come to grips with what constitutes "masculinity" -- and I suspect that we're going to need to develop new language for it because there's clearly nothing in current English that expresses some of the thoughts that we have; else we'd be using it already. We've pretty much chucked off the terms "crossdresser" and "transvestite", and that's a pretty good start (they're arbitrary and discriminatory); we're grappling with "masculine" and "feminine" (and what they mean) and we're almost at a standstill because there's no concise way to express the ideas involved. To the best of my knowledge, the terms themselves have never been formally "defined" in the language of the layman.

Pushing forward, I'd like to see a stop to the usage of the terms "mens'" and "womens'" clothing; call the garment what it is -- if it's a skirt, call it a skirt; if it's legwear, call it legwear. Just be honest, and don't assign gender to a piece of cloth. (Disclaimer: In order not to needlessly offend kilt wearers, we should refrain from calling kilts skirts. That's called "being polite".)