Article in Student Magazine

[crfriend]

(a) If dressing as a girl is a kid's preferred gender expression, then there is no threat to their "male identity", because they don't have a "male identity", they have a personal identity which is not stereotypically male.

What happens if he is making a fashion/style choice and identifies as male? Why do we never consider that? That seems a bit short-sighted.

(b) I have been thinking of investigating bows for long hair since seeing a guy (older, grey hair in ponytail) wearing one recently. If a bow in the hair is manly enough for Haydn and Mozart, then it's manly enough for me. If you combine it with gold hoop earrings, be prepared to say "Aarrr, shiver me timbers!" to passersby occasionally.

Bows (and other "hair toys") are manifestations of having long hair, and say precisely zero about sexuality or gender. Full damned stop.

Every time we make these mistakes we shoot ourselves in the foot. Of all people, WE should know better.

[Fred in Skirts]

On the subject of gender. What is gender? Why do we consider gender so important? Who assigns gender?
We know their are two sexes, they are male and female! No more arguments about that!!!
So what is gender lets see what the The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, 5th Edition says about it...
gender /jĕn′dər/
noun

A grammatical category, often designated as male, female, or neuter, used in the classification of nouns, pronouns, adjectives, and, in some languages, verbs that may be arbitrary or based on characteristics such as sex or animacy and that determines agreement with or selection of modifiers, referents, or grammatical forms. The fact of being classified as belonging to such a category.
"agreement in gender, number, and case."
Either of the two divisions, designated female and male, by which most organisms are classified on the basis of their reproductive organs and functions; sex.

Your gender is based on your sex full stop (As Carl likes to say).
You are either male or female. What you call your self is up to you and no one else.

As for being important it is only important to you no one else has the right to tell you what gender you are or should represent. NO ONE!!!!

Just my two cents worth like it or not!!!

[pelmut]

[...]
We know their are two sexes, they are male and female! No more arguments about that!!!

That is quite simply wrong, please read previous posts on the subject.  Male and female are convenient categories for describing sexual reproduction, there are many variations that do not fit into those categories.

Your gender is based on your sex full stop (As Carl likes to say).

Then why does the word 'gender' exist if it is no different from 'sex'?  By conflating the two you are denying that transgender people exist.  Our language* hasn't caught up with our better understanding of the subject in recent years.


*Neither have some laws, some religions and many politicians.

[geron]

Gender is eassentially a grammatical term, but many people these days seem to find it a convenient euphemism for sex (no doubt they feel squeamish about dragging that into ordinary discourse).

[crfriend]

We know their are two sexes, they are male and female! No more arguments about that!!!

This is the stance of classical genetics where species viability is defined as the ability to reproduce. Assorted things can, and do, go wrong with this resulting in sterility, and many of these could (or would have before the advent of "modern medicine") result in stillbirth or infant mortality.

Of interest is that in the modern world with its abjectly failed societies and support structures, the ability to reproduce is dramatically reduced in importance -- perhaps to the point of zero as we have (1) an overpopulation of humans and (2) abjectly failed societies to properly raise children in.

Your gender is based on your sex full stop (As Carl likes to say).

Again, this is classical thinking. Whilst, yes, most "male" children identify as "male" and most "female" children identify as "female", the correlation is not 100%. "Errors" happen -- as they do in any biological (or, generally, complex) system, so we cannot count on it. Thus, every so often we have a biologically "male" individual that identifies as "female, and vice-versa. In complex systems, most anything is possible given enough permutations.

In the end analysis, in a world with abjectly failed social constructs, what difference does it make?! I'd posit precisely zero.

[Faldaguy]

We need to decouple style choices from sexual preference -- and we can't do it quickly enough.

I absolutely agree, but surely you would agree with me that there needs to be some distinctions in appearance between boys and girls otherwise there would be misgendering on steroids! How is any boy going to feel if not only is he routinely mistaken for a girl, but people refuse to believe him when he says he is male. I would suggest it would undermine his male identity before it was even fully formed.

Why are we so concerned about having a male or female identity? I would posit that such arcane rigidity in defining what is masculine or feminine is in fact at the root of a great many of our societal problems.

I typically tell folks that inquire about the reason(s) for my skirt wearing, is in part to help men get out of their rut of regimented conformity. And it is in part that imposed conformity that stilts their ability to respond to life with much more than a limited set of black and white emotions. If we allowed all persons to indulge as they please (so long as it does not harm others) the world would be not only a kinder place, but more creative and peaceful.

Any kid that has the inclination to express his feelings is developing a healthy, integrated self. Yes, you may need to stand by that child with the support and knowledge of social expectations as you hopefully do throughout their development-- but we should not attempt to mold them into caricatures of what we think the world expects--that is caving into the very prejudices that have given rise to the need of places like Skirtcafe.

[Myopic Bookworm]

Your gender is based on your sex full stop (As Carl likes to say).

Then why does the word 'gender' exist if it is no different from 'sex'?  By conflating the two you are denying that transgender people exist.  Our language* hasn't caught up with our better understanding of the subject in recent years.

Your originally assigned gender is based on your sex. After that, all sorts of things may happen.

I agree that the language needs to catch up, but we also need to use the words we already have properly. The recent tendency to lump people together as "trans" (which is a prefix) conflates two generally distinguishable groups of people: (a) transsexuals, who identify with the (binary) gender contrary to their physical sex, who dress and behave accordingly, and often seek surgical transition; (b) transgender people, who identity with any of a range of gender expressions not determined by their physical sex, including those who consciously "cross-dress", but who may have no wish to "transition", or may transition to androgynous physical expressions of a "non-binary" gender identity.

Many on this forum obviously identify with neither of these categories, but are "cis" males who merely wish to push the boundaries of what is socially perceived as "masculine" costume.

[crfriend]

Why are we so concerned about having a male or female identity? I would posit that such arcane rigidity in defining what is masculine or feminine is in fact at the root of a great many of our societal problems.

My take on this is that we keep falling back into the same trap that we're trying to escape from because it's comfortable, safe, and "normal" and as we get a look at the landscape outside "the Trap". we get uncomfortable and possibly even frightened. Inside "the Trap" we have our families, our spouses, and our Significant Others -- outside "the Trap" it can be a very, very lonely place as I'm finding now.

The practicalities of leaving "the Trap" are legion, most of which are fortunately benign. For instance, unless one lives in a very socially-backward area "alternate attire" is not a problem and only very seldom results in violence. I have lots of friends and acquaintances and am well-accepted in my environment, so I'm not particularly lonely, but I can't seem for the life of me to be able to kindle a proper romance -- it always comes back to, "Are you gay?" because of my attire -- and that bloody hurts. I've been known to comment in reply, "If I was homosexual (I categorically refuse to use the otherwise-very-useful term "gay") I would not be here with you now!"

[rode_kater]

So what is gender lets see what the The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, 5th Edition says about it...
gender /jĕn′dər/
noun

You seriously cannot use a dictionary to tell people they're using a word wrong. Dictionaries are *descriptive* not *prescriptive*. Language evolves and the meanings of these words has shifted in the last decade. Dictionaries will take time to catch up, you're using one from 2011. Nowadays the Gingerbread person is considered to be a more useful description.

[Stu]

Thanks for all the responses and different perspectives on this.

This reminded me of something from the early 1990s when my eldest daughter was a child. There was a village not far from where I lived called "Blyth" and it was regarded as quite upmarket. It didn't have many shops (but it did have at least three great pubs!), but one shop called Persephone or something like that and which sold exclusive girlswear - coats, dresses etc and a few accessories. Everything was massively "girly" and most of their stuff was eye-wateringly expensive and well outside my budget. While my wife and I sometimes browsed, we rarely made a purchase and even when we did, it would either be be from the reduced-price rail, or else a hair decoration like the one I showed and which would be more affordable. The clothes were gorgeous, though - innovative in design, beautifully made and felt lovely to touch. They were quality merchandise for parents with deep pockets. The shop would advertise in a local free paper and I recall the shop's strapline was "Because it's great to be a girl". There were also variations on that - all about how girls get to wear lovely clothes because they are girls. The inference any boy would draw from that was that girls get to enjoy much nicer clothes and that was a major privilege of being female. It also acted as a demarcation in my mind - YOU (a boy) can't share in this. That was true: they couldn't. Such things were an inherent part of being female and being identified as such and any attempt to trespass on the female experience would be instantly punished by humiliation. It did cross my mind that at some point a boy accompanying a sister choosing an outfit in there might very well feel a bit envious of his sibling, although he would never dare to admit it. The shop has long since closed down, I guess because people couldn't afford their lofty prices.

OK, I know the link between Persephone and my original post is a bit tenuous, but I put it out there and people can make of it what they will.

[crfriend]

[...] The shop would advertise in a local free paper and I recall the shop's strapline was "Because it's great to be a girl". There were also variations on that - all about how girls get to wear lovely clothes because they are girls. The inference any boy would draw from that was that girls get to enjoy much nicer clothes and that was a major privilege of being female. It also acted as a demarcation in my mind - YOU (a boy) can't share in this. That was true: they couldn't.

You can take solace that any reasonable boy would come to precisely the same conclusion and be disgusted by the fact. Children are surprisingly adept at detecting -- and pointing out -- double-standards, only to be told, "That's the way it is." by their parents, thus perpetuating the double-standard and giving rise to "the Trap" that I alluded to above.

Face it: Is there so much as one good reason to deny the male of the species elegance, and sumptuous fabrics? I'll posit that there is no reason whatsoever -- even idiotic ones -- that stands up to scrutiny.

I'm working on a line of thinking that utterly removes the clothing we adorn ourselves in from "gender" and "sex" entirely and pins the notion to preferences in architecture and art. I've alluded to this notion in the past, mainly in crossing swords with PDX Dave, who was insistent that anybody who dared to "dress outside the bounds" is inherently trans-* ("It's a fashion statement, pinhead!") and decided to develop it properly in response to my current lady-friend who is having a hard time regarding my wardrobe.

[STEVIE]

It did cross my mind that at some point a boy accompanying a sister choosing an outfit in there might very well feel a bit envious of his sibling, although he would never dare to admit it.

Hi Stu,
I was that "boy", dragged out on shopping trips for stuff for my sisters, the price was irrelevant the goods on display, priceless in my young eyes.
That envy and sense of frustration did a lot of damage which took a damnably long time to rectify.
Bear in mind that I had no concept of transgenderism as we know it today and I still had these delicacies flaunted before me long after I had decided that I had no wish to be a bona fide female.
The desire and dream to emulate a girl was always present because I could not envisage any other way to satisfy the need to dress as I wished.
It's as I've said, I cannot categorically state that I would have reached the same conclusion under a more liberal regime, but it did make me very very aware that my own kids could bring any subject to the table without fear of judgement from me.
Thanks for a great thread.
Steve.
PS It would be really great if there was some way you could find to join us in London on the 24th.

[TSH]

[...] The shop would advertise in a local free paper and I recall the shop's strapline was "Because it's great to be a girl". There were also variations on that - all about how girls get to wear lovely clothes because they are girls. The inference any boy would draw from that was that girls get to enjoy much nicer clothes and that was a major privilege of being female. It also acted as a demarcation in my mind - YOU (a boy) can't share in this. That was true: they couldn't.

You can take solace that any reasonable boy would come to precisely the same conclusion and be disgusted by the fact. Children are surprisingly adept at detecting -- and pointing out -- double-standards, only to be told, "That's the way it is." by their parents, thus perpetuating the double-standard and giving rise to "the Trap" that I alluded to above.

ANY reasonable child — any reasonable person, really, would rebuff that same deduction. Sadly, there's not many reasonable people in this world. It's why we haven't moved past this petty stigmatization of men stepping outside what is perceived as "masculine", as if masculinity is this rigid, dogmatic institution that hasn't changed throughout the decades, centuries, and millennia, rather than just a set of socially-constructed behavioral traits, values, and activities which were different in various timelines, and ARE different in various cultures. It's why we have so many issues in the world, today.

Face it: Is there so much as one good reason to deny the male of the species elegance, and sumptuous fabrics? I'll posit that there is no reason whatsoever -- even idiotic ones -- that stands up to scrutiny.

Having men get hung over what other men enjoy is quite ridiculous on its own, but it's an entirely different story when women are doing the exact same thing when they, themselves, used to be victims of this... "Trap", or so-called. It's sad, really, given the history of humanity.

[Stu]

Hi Steve

I was that "boy", dragged out on shopping trips for stuff for my sisters, the price was irrelevant the goods on display, priceless in my young eyes.
That envy and sense of frustration did a lot of damage which took a damnably long time to rectify.

Thanks. That's interesting, so I have a thought experiment.

One specific item I do recall us buying from Persephone for our daughter was a mid-blue velvet pinafore dress with an embroidered horse on the front and which came with a coordinating hair bow of the kind I mentioned. Now just imagine your mum took you and your sisters into that shop and they tried on and decided to buy this outfit and then your mum had suggested that maybe you should try it as well so you could all be identical siblings. My guess is that while there would have been some temptation to have gone along with it, in reality you would have reacted strongly against it and told your mum that she had taken leave of her senses. The fact is you were a boy and, while you had a suppressed interest in, or even a fascination for, feminine items, you were also developing your male persona which would have been threatened by donning such an outfit, let along wearing it publicly. You would have been insulted by the suggestion. Or am I saying that because that's how I would have reacted while you would have been absolutely delighted?

As for London on 24th - unfortunately, my wife has recently undergone a full hip replacement, so I can't leave her for any length of time just yet. I am sure there will be other events and it would be great to meet up with everyone here.

Stu

[STEVIE]

Hi Stu,
I will reply to that thought question, but it will take some thinking to give a proper answer.
I have had many thoughts based on the "what if" scenario and that one is a recurring theme.
In the meantime please pass on my best wishes to your wife. Tell her that my experience of the hip operations (left and right) has been hugely positive and the improvement in mobility immense.
Steve.