My look - I hope it looks normal

[crfriend]

Carl I cannot define straight or trans-*. When I look inward I can'not see what drives me. I see a whirlpool of different drivers. Because definitions elude me, I'm left searching in dark for some kind of meaning. All I can say is I feel a strong masculine and a strong feminine presence.

Here's the tactic I use for getting close to reasoning:

1) How do you identify, and are you happy with that definition?
1a) Are any subsets of what you're feeling actually compatible with either extreme noting that things are a "blend of traits" not "specific and dictated traits?
1b) How fervently do you believe that things would be "better" the other way 'round?
2) Do you prefer lovers to be the "other" sex or your own?

The first is definitely to harder of the two to crack, and this is made worse by 50 years of hateful propaganda against men and the modern -- and incorrect -- belief that men do not have feelings more advanced than rage and lust. Modern men are fully capable of the entire range of human emotion for the simple reason that we are human creatures. To suppress those emotions is a silly and dangerous activity.

When I stand next to bunch of guys (none of which know about my skirt wearing) and I'm NOT attracted to any of them, never have been. I'm straight. That much I know.

Then item "2" from above is answered cleanly and simply.

On item "1", try a thought experiment: Remove the constraints of the past 50 years of propaganda and allow that all men and women are a blend of "traits" that are only notionally attached to their gender. Where does that put you? If your set falls mainly towards male then you're male; if predominately towards female, then female; if in the middle, then there might be some questions, but unfettered the choice usually goes one way or the other. Note also that the older model has an overlap in the middle containing traits that are common to both men and women, and that the overlap is entirely natural and normal. It's only fairly recently that the middle portion has been declared "female" leaving the real detritus over in the far corner which is where men have been collectively shoved.

I want to stand with the straight men and revolt, if they will have me.

Highly likely they will. Sure, there will be a few cowards and rotter who won't, but guys -- in general -- tend to support self-expression.

Carl, I hope this "revolting" reply lends some fresh vim and vigour toward our freer futures.
I certainly won't back down any time soon that is for sure.

[STEVIE]

Steve, I hear you but I find it so hard to do. We can do it, its fine but it often feels like a friendless, lonely place. I do it for my daughter as much as myself. BTW she would probably say "don't do it on my behalf, do it for yourself and I'll stand alongside you".

Hi BM.
It certainly does and nobody can deny that at all but take it a step at a time and don't beat yourself up for how you feel about it either.
As you are aware it is really that I have had a considerable degree of practice and I do see it as a mission to try to make the next guy's journey just a little bit easier.
I was once asked about the motivation behind my attitude and the response was easy.
"I remember all too well the isolation that I experienced in the formative stages. I really could have used the help of the Cafe and the wider web when I was a teenager. I honestly believed that I was the only one, a weird misbegotten freak".
Well, I survived and here we are today, and I will be as revolting as possible.
Finally, every time you make a comment, I just like your daughter more and more.
Real kudos to her parents is quite in order.
Steve.

[Dust]

https://12ft.io/proxy?q=https%3A%2F%2Fw ... r-AA13lD7U

Samuel Sim said in the article "It’s beyond annoying that cis-heterosexual men can experiment with gender and it’s celebrated".

This guy talks like creative (I'm sorry "gender non-conforming") dressing is the property of LGBTQ+ Inc. It reminds me of The Kilt (TM), and the women who talk like if men wear skirts that they can't or they somehow lose something being special and "theirs."

People are trying to keep "their thing" special and exclusive. No one stops to think about whether maybe sharing doesn't cost them a thing. It's not a zero sum game, and never has been.

[Dust]

...

My own view is the writer is wrong. It is widely recognised that men are handcuffed and victims of the patriarchal system by the expectations pressed upon then and the confirmities they have to adhere too.
The plight of men might be widely recognised but nothing (much) is being done. Society is far to preoccupied.

If men are the "victims" of it, why are we still blaming men (the victims) by calling it "the patriarchy"? "Victim blaming," much?

I hope our plight is being recognized. The first step is admitting we have a problem. But some seem intent on preventing anything from being done. It's almost like they think relations between the sexes and caring about people and their problems are another one of those zero sum games. "Can't let anyone care about men, people will stop caring about women!" It's absurd, and most won't voice that, but it's the only thing I can think of that could be rattling around in the backs their subconsciousness that would explain their behavior.

[Barleymower]

Carl I cannot define straight or trans-*. When I look inward I can'not see what drives me. I see a whirlpool of different drivers. Because definitions elude me, I'm left searching in dark for some kind of meaning. All I can say is I feel a strong masculine and a strong feminine presence.

Here's the tactic I use for getting close to reasoning:

1) How do you identify, and are you happy with that definition?
1a) Are any subsets of what you're feeling actually compatible with either extreme noting that things are a "blend of traits" not "specific and dictated traits?
1b) How fervently do you believe that things would be "better" the other way 'round?
2) Do you prefer lovers to be the "other" sex or your own?

The first is definitely to harder of the two to crack, and this is made worse by 50 years of hateful propaganda against men and the modern -- and incorrect -- belief that men do not have feelings more advanced than rage and lust. Modern men are fully capable of the entire range of human emotion for the simple reason that we are human creatures. To suppress those emotions is a silly and dangerous activity.

When I stand next to bunch of guys (none of which know about my skirt wearing) and I'm NOT attracted to any of them, never have been. I'm straight. That much I know.

Then item "2" from above is answered cleanly and simply.

On item "1", try a thought experiment: Remove the constraints of the past 50 years of propaganda and allow that all men and women are a blend of "traits" that are only notionally attached to their gender. Where does that put you? If your set falls mainly towards male then you're male; if predominately towards female, then female; if in the middle, then there might be some questions, but unfettered the choice usually goes one way or the other. Note also that the older model has an overlap in the middle containing traits that are common to both men and women, and that the overlap is entirely natural and normal. It's only fairly recently that the middle portion has been declared "female" leaving the real detritus over in the far corner which is where men have been collectively shoved.

I want to stand with the straight men and revolt, if they will have me.

Highly likely they will. Sure, there will be a few cowards and rotter who won't, but guys -- in general -- tend to support self-expression.

Carl, I hope this "revolting" reply lends some fresh vim and vigour toward our freer futures.
I certainly won't back down any time soon that is for sure.

Carl it's a good analytical model. I've been around and around the problem over the years from every angle possible. As soon as I pin it down it moves. I move.

I like what you saying about women now occupying the middle ground with men shoved into a corner. It is most apparent in mens dress. I won't go into it but it it is an abysmal situation men are in.

My conclusion men are blind to their situation. It seems they comply with the current definition of manhood or risk losing their self image of what it means to be a man

I done enough to establish my manhood. I won't have that taken away from me because I also like feminine things. I certainly won't be defined by other men or women because I have a skirt on. That's my decision. Grrrrr.

[Barleymower]

...

My own view is the writer is wrong. It is widely recognised that men are handcuffed and victims of the patriarchal system by the expectations pressed upon then and the confirmities they have to adhere too.
The plight of men might be widely recognised but nothing (much) is being done. Society is far to preoccupied.

If men are the "victims" of it, why are we still blaming men (the victims) by calling it "the patriarchy"? "Victim blaming," much?

I hope our plight is being recognized. The first step is admitting we have a problem. But some seem intent on preventing anything from being done. It's almost like they think relations between the sexes and caring about people and their problems are another one of those zero sum games. "Can't let anyone care about men, people will stop caring about women!" It's absurd, and most won't voice that, but it's the only thing I can think of that could be rattling around in the backs their subconsciousness that would explain their behavior.

I fear darker forces are at play. I often hear of the male dominated patriarchy. If that's true why did they give it up and get shoved in a corner?

[crfriend]

I fear darker forces are at play. I often hear of the male dominated patriarchy. If that's true why did they give it up and get shoved in a corner?

It wasn't "relinquished", it was taken -- not by force but by conniving. Men didn't even see it coming. It's taken 50 years, but here we are, and it's finally playing out in the way it should have been foreseeable by properly-trained psychologists. The shrill voice -- as pointed up by the parable about the donkey and the tiger -- almost always wins in the modern world.

[ScotL]

https://12ft.io/proxy?q=https%3A%2F%2Fw ... r-AA13lD7U

Samuel Sim said in the article "It’s beyond annoying that cis-heterosexual men can experiment with gender and it’s celebrated".

This guy talks like creative (I'm sorry "gender non-conforming") dressing is the property of LGBTQ+ Inc. It reminds me of The Kilt (TM), and the women who talk like if men wear skirts that they can't or they somehow lose something being special and "theirs."

People are trying to keep "their thing" special and exclusive. No one stops to think about whether maybe sharing doesn't cost them a thing. It's not a zero sum game, and never has been.

Wouldn’t we all be better off if we just enjoyed and encouraged each other’s individuality without letting petty jealousy get in the way.

[Pity]

I fear darker forces are at play. I often hear of the male dominated patriarchy. If that's true why did they give it up and get shoved in a corner?

I think it's worth noting that 'the patriachy' refers to a social system resulting from thousands of years of gender/power imbalance extending into every facet of society, it's not an awful lot to do with any individual man. It's a largely informal and unspoken context that we all operate within and, much like free-market capitalism, it often acts against the interests of its participants.

[Barleymower]

I fear darker forces are at play. I often hear of the male dominated patriarchy. If that's true why did they give it up and get shoved in a corner?

It wasn't "relinquished", it was taken -- not by force but by conniving. Men didn't even see it coming. It's taken 50 years, but here we are, and it's finally playing out in the way it should have been foreseeable by properly-trained psychologists. The shrill voice -- as pointed up by the parable about the donkey and the tiger -- almost always wins in the modern world.

On that basis power has been taken but it won't be held because the new owner will fall victim to its own stupidity.
Cold comfort when life is so short.

[Barleymower]

New skirt just in. This a change in style for me, I usually go for pleated or gathered skirts. These are nice and fun to wear but I'm finding they are unruly and catch the wind. So I've bought this one, I'm unsure about it. That said, my tiny fashion expert has given me the nod. Not much of a nod because they are watching 'tick tick boom'.
My wife likes it with the burgundy tights and now needs a pair. I'll pop down to m&S later and get her some, all the the name good relations and I like buying her stuff.

Capture.JPG

[john62]

I like the skirt and combination.

John

[Big and Bashful]

I find these statements so awkward to comprehend. Shouldn’t we all just be happy that anyone regardless of sexual orientation or gender is able to dress as they please?

I think the point he is making is it takes cis-heto men to normalise something the lgb community has been trying to normalise for years. The very people who have persecuted the lgb group.
My own view is the writer is wrong. It is widely recognised that men are handcuffed and victims of the patriarchal system by the expectations pressed upon then and the confirmities they have to adhere too.
The plight of men might be widely recognised but nothing (much) is being done. Society is far to preoccupied.

Who keeps making these words up? cis-heto? What? No, don't explain, I don't want to know! When it gets to 30 odd made up gender terms I come out in a rash!

[Barleymower]

Who keeps making these words up? cis-heto? What? No, don't explain, I don't want to know! When it gets to 30 odd made up gender terms I come out in a rash!

My error for not using quotations. I was quoting the writer.

[Barleymower]

I feel like I've cracked the school playground problem. I've canned the mix of skirts and jumpers. I've found a skirt which less conspicuous than my usual. In it I feel relaxed and normal, like I could do anything.
Today I collected my son and chatted to a teacher in the new skirt. Well done me.