Difficulties with partners

[mishawakaskirt]

I'm kinda shocked. In the crossdressing community, Don't Ask Don't Tell arrangements are reasonably common (16.8%) (that link is from the last annual Reddit crossdressing survey). But I've never heard of partners cutting up clothes before.

I put that down to Reddit skewing young and so the domestic arrangements are probably more flexible. But if my partner started cutting up my clothes I'd be very, very deeply hurt.

That's the thing I don't agree with the terminology used in this survey. I don't consider wearing just a skirt my gender identity or cross dressing.
Wearing a skirt doesn't make one female.
I'm not identifying as such.
Women in trousers all identity as male??
I just want to be a male in a skirt.
Why is that so hard for people to grasp?

Several members made comments on my wife cutting up an item of clothing. I had thought about destroying something of hers, but I think that could easily escalate into a eye for an eye situation that would probably put even my " mom" jeans at risk for destruction or disposal. It's not worth losing more clothes, in a battle that would never end and would pointlessly destroy clothes. Pick your battles carefully. What good is full access to skirt wearing but in turn I lose my wife's love and affection? Yes it sucks that I can't skirt freely, but at the same time marriage is about giving of one's self. While I'm not giving up skirts totally, I give them up when she is around. It's not my perfect idea scenario. And me having skirts is not on her ideal scenario. But it works.

Speaking about ugly relationships and fighting.
There is a movie from the very late 80s called War of the Roses. It's about a couple getting a divorce, it doesn't end well for them. There are clips on YouTube.

Being more of a pacifist
I just quietly remember what she did. And like mentioned in above post I keep my favorite skirts well hidden. And keep a few sacrificial skirts out where she can see and find them, so I'm not hiding anything.
If they ever disappear or get destroyed, I will know I must remain dilagent at keeping my good ones stashed.

[rode_kater]

I’m not married or even in a relationship, and honestly stuff like this makes me even less likely to want to find a partner/get married/raise a family.

Don't despair. The survey I linked to above shows that over one-third of respondents had partners strongly supportive. It's not rare, but it is something that you need to bring up near the start though.

You'd think the self-confidence displayed by wearing a skirt in public would be irresistible to the opposite sex.

[rode_kater]

That's the thing I don't agree with the terminology used in this survey. I don't consider wearing just a skirt my gender identity or cross dressing.
Wearing a skirt doesn't make one female.
I'm not identifying as such.
Women in trousers all identity as male??
I just want to be a male in a skirt.
Why is that so hard for people to grasp?

Yes, well, it's a survey in a crossdressing forum, so that's what you get. I'd link to a survey from a men-in-skirts forum but I don't know of any. Together with the fact that we're an even more marginal group than crossdressers, these are the best statistics we have.

[Sinned]

Yes, guys, technically such actions are domestic abuse [0] but I suspect that any attempt to do anything about it would be the first step on Divorce Road. Many of us travelling down that Road would find the cost and emotional trauma prohibitive. As has been pointed out the others' reasons are emotive, illogical and probably impossible to overcome. I deal with it as best as I can, push the limits that much more ( baby steps ) and take advantage to skirt outside when she isn't around. If she doesn't ask I don't tell but I don't lie. Oftentimes she acts like the proverbial big bird with sand and I am grateful for that as I don't enjoy argument or confrontation.

[0] I know that if the sexes were reversed the outcomes would be entirely different and the man would come out the worst. But, hey, that's the legal system whichever side of the River you are and that's life. If you don't like it you can always check out.

It's a risk to have a husband, it's a risk to have a son.
It's a risk to pour your confidences out to anyone.
It's a risk to pick a flower 'cause there's bound to be a cop.
It's a risk to go on living .... but it's riskier to stop.

[crfriend]

It's a risk to go on living .... but it's riskier to stop.

I like the sentiment of the poem, but to stop means a terminus and that's a certainty, not a risk.

[STEVIE]

An interesting little statistic that I came across some time ago; 100% of divorces are caused by marriage!
As for "love and support", as I recall we both made the same promises in the kirk that day.
Furthermore, the Bride was very well aware of the Groom's preferences when she talked the talk.
What really sucks is that I know that the only choices I have are stay or go.
Going means effective penury, staying is less than satisfactory but tolerable.
Saddest of all is that we are beyond a point where compromise could yield any benefit.
We just have adapted to a very strange status quo, call it the Kennedy New Normal!
Steve.

[Faldaguy]

This sucks. What a sad commentary. I find my eyes lingering on tears of sadness at grown men having to hide their wardrobe; spouses acting like two year old's; and on-going pain and hurt for both parties.

I have proposed before in this forum that we develop some tips for guys to introduce their family, friends and co-workers to the public wearing of non-conventional styles. I know many of us have shared some of these thoughts casually, but not gathered in a comprehensive and coherent manner.

I also frankly wonder if the pain and shame of having to hide one's true self from people in general, and especially from a SO, friends and co-workers is not more damaging than anything that could come of a blanket declaration that you are going to be true to yourself and honest with them. We too are harmed when we must hide. This is no different than any other "being in the closet" situation--usually a reference to GLBT folk. The studies are extensive and clearly conclusive as to the psychological, and other damage, that arises when we hide our emotions, or ...skirts?

I suspect that the consequences may not be so dire as feared; S.O's may be upset for a while, but they don't want divorces and isolation either. Changes conducted gently and caringly can allow doubters to see the positives. You must have had substantial faith in a person to have created a significant relationship. Growth comes through working on it, not avoidance and hiding. I've known a few people who did lose a SO when "coming out" and though deeply hurt at the loss, they are stronger, happier people now. There may well be some who are not -- just not in my personal experience.

Somehow we have to break this barrier whereby some people see us as weak, feeble, and weird -- and for the S.O. that feels blemished or ashamed for us rather than proud. MIS [fashion freedom & breaking regimented conformity] needs to become as righteous a movement as Civil Rights, anti-violence, environmental support, equality....et al.

OK, fling the words that this is an absurd, hopeless fantasy. But if we are unwilling to come out of the closet, rather than being agents of change we are aiding our own subjugation. I'm not suggesting it is easy, and that blanket declarations are the only route to go...but we must rise to these challenges and not hide from them. And maybe share some things that have worked!

[crfriend]

But if we are unwilling to come out of the closet, rather than being agents of change we are aiding our own subjugation.

There is much truth in that statement indeed.

Unfortunately, given the way that laws work in most places, the woman wins in any sort of separation usually leaving the man broken and forlorn.

[Jim]

Unfortunately, given the way that laws work in most places, the woman wins in any sort of separation usually leaving the man broken and forlorn.

Isn't that part of what pre-nuptial agreements are about?

In my marriage, we are both 100% in agreement that divorce is not an option because of our religious views, but if that's not the case such agreements would seem worthwhile.

[crfriend]

Isn't that part of what pre-nuptial agreements are about?

Partially, but it depends on whether they can be enforced if the need arises.

I'm actually not a big fan of marriage unless children are planned. It greatly complicates matters, and the additional rights are outweighed by the additional future risks and legal vagaries. If not for the implosion of her mind, I'd still be with my late ex-; thank goodness we weren't married!

In my marriage, we are both 100% in agreement that divorce is not an option because of our religious views, but if that's not the case such agreements would seem worthwhile.

A valid point, and I fully understand and respect that stance. Good for you. It's nice to see it work the way it's intended. Sadly, though, sometimes things go horribly wrong. What's ridiculous, is that a simple style choice in clothing can precipitate such calamity.

[STEVIE]

And maybe share some things that have worked!

Simply by just doing it and effectively not giving a damn has worked for me, if not our relationship.
I had to make the decision on the psychological cost and weigh the balance.
My fashion choices came out the winner.
The fact is that the any compromises I made were of no consequence, so why try in the first place.
On a general basis, I am very much skirted in the public eye too and I hope as good an ambassador for our cause as I can be.
Just ordered a 3 piece suit which is made to measure, skirt to my/male dimensions and costing £240 delivered to the UK.
Mrs K may not be happy but hey, she can't win them all and she'd certainly not treat it to the scissors.
Once I have it, more details and pics will follow.
Steve.

[Sinned]

The thing about pre-nup is that they are made BEFORE you get married. Not much use when you celebrate your 46th wedding anniversary on the 14th Feb. Not only were they not thought of when we got married, it's not something you think of in your early 20s and in love.

[Kirbstone]

Another little detail we neither of us thought of when we plumped for our wedding date, January 4th: 50 long years after, when we assembled for our Golden Jubilee photo with all the grandchildren present, one of our offsprings wasn't.....She was then in strict rehab and the authorities there just wouldn't let her out for either Christmas, New Year, the Jubilee celebration or the photoshoot. I see their point, of course. They had to run the place a bit like a prison to be effective.

As Dennis said, Pre-nups just weren't thought of then, at least by ordinary folk such as ourselves.

Tom

[STEVIE]

I cannot imagine the form a pre nuptial agreement would take to cover the parties fashion choices.
Let's face it, they are more about money than anything else really.
Talking of lucre, I am damn sure the lawyers love them, big fat fees at both ends of the matrimonial trial.
Almost a licence to print ones own currency.
However, none of this offers the remotest of solutions to the "difficulties" mentioned above.
Personally, I don't believe that there are any.
Steve.

[rode_kater]

It's interesting how this varies in different places. Here in NL a prenup is probably best translated as "marriage contract". They are actually fairly common, for the simple reason that the default is that everything owned by both parties is totally shared, debts and assets. This means that if, for example, one of the partners ever wants to start a business, and you want a possible bankruptcy of the business to not affect other assets, you need to specify that in a marriage contract. Simple tricks you see on TV like "put the house in the wife's name" won't work.

The default has not been recommend for a while now, because you get unfair situations like if you marry a person who turns out to have debts, suddenly you're on the hook for them too. So there were fairly standard form marriage contracts to deal with that sort of stuff (and that inheritance from parents goes to the children but not partners for example). As of a few years ago the default has been changed to make it not such a trap, still not recommend though.

But they're financial/legal constructs. Nothing in there about clothing choices.