Recent invasion of Evangelical Orthodox Freestylers

Discuss recent changes, make suggestions, etc.
User avatar
AMM
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 841
Joined: Tue Feb 28, 2006 4:01 pm
Location: Thanks for all the fish!

Recent invasion of Evangelical Orthodox Freestylers

Post by AMM »

I've put this post in "Changes at the Cafe" because it's a meta-posting, and I figured this was probably the best place for meta-discussion.

In the past 3--6 months or so, we've had a number of people join SkirtCafe who I've taken to calling "Evangelical Orthodox Freestylers" (EOFs). The things I've noticed have been:

-- They catagorically reject the idea of masculinity and certainly any attempt to present a masculine appearance, however defined.

-- They feel compelled to "respond" to every posting that mentions masculinity with a recitation of their point of view.

-- They are not willing to respect the views of those who disagree with them. Even a simple, "I guess you see it differently" is beyond them. My guess is that they simply can't comprehend how someone could disagree with them, but that's just a guess.

I have tried to respect their point of view, even when I really don't like their taste in clothes, but I am tired of having every post that does not fit in with their Orthodoxy of Freestyling immediately responded to with a post that essentially says, "just throw away your masculinity and all your problems will be solved." I'm tired of having the realities and constraints of the the world I live in every day dismissed with a wave of the hand.

I think it's sort of like being a Jew and finding one day that a mob of Jews for Jesus evangelists have joined your synagogue. They're not shouting insults at us, but to have what we consider important dismissed as foolishness and to have what we say basically ignored if it doesn't agree with their dogma is still pretty insulting.

I joined SkirtCafe, and not Atrium, or IMFF, or Xmarksthescot, or bravehearts, or Crossdressers.com, because I thought that the stated purpose -- discussion of how men can wear skirts and other supposedly "feminine" clothing and still be men -- fit most closely with what I wanted to do. To me this means that we (who are not EOFs) shouldn't have to defend this choice. We shouldn't have to defend ourselves against charges that we are transsexuals or crossdressers or gender dysphorics simply because we put on a skirt. But we also shouldn't have to constantly defend ourselves against charges of being prisoners of society's brainwashing if we don't want to give up our gender identity.


I find I am feeling less and less comfortable posting here, or even reading. It's reached the point that I'm seriously questioning whether I want to continue to participate in SkirtCafe. Trying to deal with this cr*p (especially calming myself down after reading a particularly infuriating post) takes energy and time which I can't spare. I'm not sure where I would go -- maybe to kiltmen.com, maybe somewhere else, or maybe just give up on the on-line world.

I don't know what to propose as a solution for SkirtCafe, either. I suspect that if nothing is done, the EOF's will drive away all but the most thick-skinned of Unbelievers.

-- AMM
User avatar
knickerless
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 284
Joined: Wed Feb 01, 2006 9:59 am
Location: england

recent discussions

Post by knickerless »

And I thought this all the recent increase in postings was good news. A couple of months ago you were lucky to find two or three new posts a day - now there over a dozen everyday. We have a revamped site, several female members, people from all over the world and many different viewpoints. We have members who are curious about wearing skirts, some who wear them indoors but are frightened to go out, some wear them for fun, some wear them for comfort, some wear them all the time and others only wear kilts. If you don't like a particular thread - then simply ignore it, if you don't like what someone posts - either tell them or ignore it.
I check for new postings three times a day. Somedays I like what I read - other days I don't.
By the way who are these newcomers you feel are spoiling this site?

Nick
ChristopherJ
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 427
Joined: Mon Dec 11, 2006 2:24 am

Post by ChristopherJ »

I'm not at all comfortable with all the vague allusions to "they". Personally, I think that if you have any problems or difficulties with the posts of some other members of the forum you should state clearly who you are referring to.

In respect of your comments. I find it odd that you feel the need to call people names:
In the past 3--6 months or so, we've had a number of people join SkirtCafe who I've taken to calling "Evangelical Orthodox Freestylers" (EOFs).
As if by giving others whimsical or derogatory names, you denigrate them in some way - and make out that they are outsiders.

I haven't noticed an invasion of "anti-masculine" posters here - and am wondering why you have become upset over, what to me is a non-issue.

Like Knickerless, I have enjoyed seeing a broadening of the forum over the last few months - both in terms of the variety of member and in terms of the subjects up for discussion.

You would be right to remind all forum members that the Skirt cafe is concerned only with men who wear skirts - as men. But I am left wondering who "they" are. And am I a member of "they". Will I ever know?
It's never too late to have a happy childhood . . .
SkirtDude

Re: Recent invasion of Evangelical Orthodox Freestylers

Post by SkirtDude »

AMM wrote:Trying to deal with this cr*p (especially calming myself down after reading a particularly infuriating post) takes energy and time which I can't spare.
<begin philosophical musings>

Personally I have left two organizations over the last 12 months because they became sources of focused negative energy in my life. One was an online forum and the other was an "IRL" group.

In 20 / 20 retrospect a lot of the negative energy I found in the groups was of my own making - divergent growth, things I had lost interest in etc etc. Yes, there were certain individuals that really ticked me off :roll:, but they were simply triggers that accelerated the inevitable.

Both pullouts are still among the best decisions I ever made. My life has both a lot more positive feel and opportunity these days. 8)

<end musings>
Bob
Barista Emeritus
Posts: 587
Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 9:31 pm
Location: New England

Post by Bob »

I thik AMM has some valid points.

But first on tactics: It is completely inappropriate to name names publicly on this board. If anyone does so, I will delete it. If anyone here feels that they are not being respected for who they are --- either explicit or implicit lack of respect --- or if anyone just wants to complain without any "valid" reasons --- then please do so to me in private. You can email me or PM me. And also, if possible, please be specific about who said what that made you feel uncofmortable or disrespected. I cannot make any promises as to what I will do about it. But I can certainly listen and consider various courses of action.

As for what AMM said in general --- I have noticed a definite shift toward "Atrium-style" stuff too. On the one hand, I am pleased that we have a diverse and growing community. On the other hand, I am not pleased at the idea of old-timers feeling they are no longer welcome and leaving. And AMM is NOT the first one to express that feeling either. Nor am I pleased at the idea of SkirtCafe drifting too far.

So much of what goes on here is shaped by the mission statement and, secondarily, by the set of rules. I tried to make the mission statement to include a diverse group of skirt-wearing men. But diversity is always difficult to achieve and maintain. It is hard work.

Two recent things I believe are affecting the current influx of members we are experiencing:

1. The demise of IMFF.org. It's been down for so long by now that for all intents and purposes, it's gone for good.

2. A stagnation in participation at the Atrium, due (in my opinion) to a general lack of structure.

Thus, people who in the past would have gone to IMFF or the Atrium are now coming to SkirtCafe. And that is changing the "balance" of how SkirtCafe had previously been over the past year.

I don't know what to do about this, or even if we should do something about it. Certainly if SkirtCafe were to drift too far, it would leave a void in the landscape of ideas; there really needs to be a forum focused on skirts as men's fashion. I have a few thoughts and I'm interested in others' ideas.

One idea would be to launch a new web site to fill the void of the Atrium & IMFF. We would have to work up that site's name, mission statement, and probably also narrow SkirtCafe's mission statement somewhat. The mission statements would probably break down into "skirts for manly men" (SkirtCafe) and "skirts for femme men" (the new site) The new site might or might not retain the rules against femme names. We would have to think up a logo and maybe look-and-feel for the new site. All of this --- mission statement, logo, rules, look-and-feel --- is about "branding." So that when people think "SkirtCafe" or "the new site," they have a clear idea of what that site stands for.

Another idea would be to try to keep the various constituencies together at SkirtCafe, but provide more clearly defined forums for them. Frankly, I don't think this would work as well. It would certainly dilute the meaning of the SkirtCafe "brand," and it would probably not make people happy either.

And finally... if we're going to launch a new site, we could allow SkirtCafe to move in a femme direction and launch a more masculine Skirts-For-Men site in place of the current SkirtCafe. This option is worth thinking about because there's always been a little hesitation as to whether the name SkirtCafe REALLY conveys what we're trying to get at. Prominent links would have to be placed on skirtcafe.org leading people to the "new" SkirtCafe under a new domain name.

And... we could do this also under separate domain names. For example:

manly.skirtcafe.org
femme.skirtcafe.org

OK.... any ideas, comments?
Stevie D
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 479
Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 9:56 pm
Location: Sheffield, UK

Post by Stevie D »

Bob,
Just my opinion of course, but I think the Cafe is just right as it is. It ain't broke, so please don't fix it.
Thanks for keeping it going :)
Stevie D
(Sheffield, South Yorkshire)
User avatar
crfriend
Master Barista
Posts: 14433
Joined: Fri Nov 19, 2004 9:52 pm
Location: New England (U.S.)
Contact:

It's getting pretty close to being busted....

Post by crfriend »

In respect of your comments. I find it odd that you feel the need to call people names:
In the past 3--6 months or so, we've had a number of people join SkirtCafe who I've taken to calling "Evangelical Orthodox Freestylers" (EOFs).
As if by giving others whimsical or derogatory names, you denigrate them in some way - and make out that they are outsiders.
Well, a perceived problem has been identified, and one of the scientific things that happens first is a name gets assigned to it so it can be called out in a specific manner. I don't think this was an attempt to "be cute" or denigrating -- it was an attempt to label a perceived problem for future identification for discussion.

To be brutally honest, I've noticed a perceptible shift in attitudes here recently; I think that "mutual respect" has suffered at the hands of those who, as AMM points out, are dismissive of the notion of masculinity, and, like AMM, I am completely unamused by it. There's a reason why the notion of "masculinity" comes up fairly often in our discussions of skirts -- it's important to us; blowing it off as a "non-issue" is fully as disrespectful as calling names directly.
I haven't noticed an invasion of "anti-masculine" posters here - and am wondering why you have become upset over, what to me is a non-issue.
It's not that they're "anti-masculine" it's that they're dismissive of the notion of masculinity -- and are seemingly unable to understand that it is important to a lot of people -- it's the dismissive notion, and a seeming lack of the good taste to at least listen to arguments, that is turning some of our "elder statesmen" off. I don't happen to care if anyone here wants to be an androdgyne -- don't slag off on somebody else because they're perfectly happy being a man. Furthermore, the charter for the forum states, quite eloquently, "Skirt Cafe is an on-line community dedicated to exploring, promoting and advocating skirts and kilts as a fashion choice for men" -- note the last word: "men"; not androgynes.

This may be a matter of age and "life experience" as much as anything else. I can't say for certain, but the attitudes described above strongly indicate a sense of over-assuredness, and that's common amongst the younger set who haven't seen quite as much as their elders have.
You would be right to remind all forum members that the Skirt cafe is concerned only with men who wear skirts - as men. But I am left wondering who "they" are. And am I a member of "they". Will I ever know?
I think a strong dose of "heed the rules, and show respect for others at all times" is in order. Blowing another person's opinion off as being meaningless is tantamount to blowing the person off as irrelevant. If you can't deal with the notion that you don't (and can't) agree with somebody, at least have the guts to state that -- be a man about it -- don't dismiss them arbitrarily.
Retrocomputing -- It's not just a job, it's an adventure!
SkirtDude

Post by SkirtDude »

Bob wrote: manly.skirtcafe.org
femme.skirtcafe.org
men-in-skirts.org (men in skirts and supporters)
freestyle.org (could include women who experiment with fashion freedom)
skirtsewing.org (which is the real reason I'm here :))

Personally I'm not too concerned as to whether things are masculine / feminine, though (as I have previously mentioned) I avoid pinks / purples / floral prints simply because a guy in a skirt already has enough social baggage to deal with without adding "girleyness" to the skirt.

I arrived here after IMFF's disintegration so I'm not sure if I'm part of "us" or "them" and really can't form any opinions on which way things are drifting. I think having a critical mass of people and good moderation (both of which skirtcafe has) makes a huge difference in whether or not a web forum is fun to participate in or not. Splitting things up messes with the critical mass aspect and could make things harder to moderate too.
Departed Member

Post by Departed Member »

Yeah, I fully back everything Bob and Carl have said, and I understand where AMM is coming from, too. The other sites mentioned (used to) cater for those with androgeny in mind. Half-way houses to 'Crossdressing' or whatever, if you prefer.

But, this site has always been 'reserved' (if you like!), for those folk who are men, who want to look and act like men, whilst wearing un-bifurcated clothing, principally skirts and Kilts. That in no way discounts female support and input, which isn't just welcome, but quite honestly, is vital to help overcoming current (perceived?) prejudice(s). It's all very well to say (and I'm not 'having a go') we should expand into other areas, but some of those scenarios, to be blunt, put people off. Now, they don't bother me, but they sure as h*ll, bother those around us, not so 'accomodating'. My other half would go berserk, if I arrived home with painted finger nails, tattoos or a moustache (for instance!). And she is more tolerant than many! It's like that USA march - the press 'picked up', and focussed on, the bloke wearing tights(?) and high heels. Never mind the rest - any of 'em! They were 'just' blokes wearing (oh! how unusual!) skirts. Now, much as I (or anyone else) might agree with that blokes 'right to fashion freedom', it did nothing, nothing at all, to help the 'cause' (if that is what you want to call it).
Peter v
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 916
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2007 8:42 pm
Location: The Netherlands

Post by Peter v »

merlin wrote:Yeah, I fully back everything Bob and Carl have said, and I understand where AMM is coming from, too. The other sites mentioned (used to) cater for those with androgeny in mind. Half-way houses to 'Crossdressing' or whatever, if you prefer.

But, this site has always been 'reserved' (if you like!), for those folk who are men, who want to look and act like men, whilst wearing un-bifurcated clothing, principally skirts and Kilts. That in no way discounts female support and input, which isn't just welcome, but quite honestly, is vital to help overcoming current (perceived?) prejudice(s). It's all very well to say (and I'm not 'having a go') we should expand into other areas, but some of those scenarios, to be blunt, put people off. Now, they don't bother me, but they sure as h*ll, bother those around us, not so 'accomodating'. My other half would go berserk, if I arrived home with painted finger nails, tattoos or a moustache (for instance!). And she is more tolerant than many! It's like that USA march - the press 'picked up', and focussed on, the bloke wearing tights(?) and high heels. Never mind the rest - any of 'em! They were 'just' blokes wearing (oh! how unusual!) skirts. Now, much as I (or anyone else) might agree with that blokes 'right to fashion freedom', it did nothing, nothing at all, to help the 'cause' (if that is what you want to call it).
Hallo Merlin, you are right, in your own way. But I think that men wearing skirts will only make a chance of being accepted if people get used to seeing men in all soorts of skirts and suitable attire to match it. The sooner the better. That way nobody can say: he is not wearing a tartan so and so from clan so and so kilt therefore he is a travestite or something along those lines. The sooner people accept the idea that men are all different just as women are too, and have differing prefferences about the same things, amongst other things, skirts, then when you wear a skirt, ANY skirt, all they can say is: There goes a man wearing "A" skirt. And the differing attire, whether it be mountain boots and woollen socks or pantys and a form of dainty shoe, sandels or whatever, wil belong to it like black socks and shoes with a three piece black suit. Trying to present any other narrow image of men wearing skirts will only limit your own creativity and put you in just another new box while you were extravagant about getting out of the MAN box most men adhere to. We want personal freedom not more limitations.

The one person that was picked out at some demonstration, just shows the diversity of clothing and not that all men wore the same attire. People who don't want to see it that way will NEVER see it that way. So stop waisting your time trying to convince THEM. Show the OTHER people that we want clothing freedom and then every man can go his own way in that newly won freedom. Without limitations. Parallel to this, a better understanding of what a Travestite is and for that matter a cross dresser would be of great advantage to the cause and everybody in the whole scope of things.

Peter v
A man is the same man in a pair of pants or a skirt. It is only the way people look at him that makes the difference.
Peter v
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 916
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2007 8:42 pm
Location: The Netherlands

Post by Peter v »

SkirtDude wrote:
Bob wrote: manly.skirtcafe.org
femme.skirtcafe.org
men-in-skirts.org (men in skirts and supporters)
freestyle.org (could include women who experiment with fashion freedom)
skirtsewing.org (which is the real reason I'm here :))

Personally I'm not too concerned as to whether things are masculine / feminine, though (as I have previously mentioned) I avoid pinks / purples / floral prints simply because a guy in a skirt already has enough social baggage to deal with without adding "girleyness" to the skirt.

I arrived here after IMFF's disintegration so I'm not sure if I'm part of "us" or "them" and really can't form any opinions on which way things are drifting. I think having a critical mass of people and good moderation (both of which skirtcafe has) makes a huge difference in whether or not a web forum is fun to participate in or not. Splitting things up messes with the critical mass aspect and could make things harder to moderate too.

Hi, as to division, there is a big division on hand, if we go men only. You get men in original kilts, per clan, in original attire, and then men in kilts, not original, and so on and so on. What is then men in skirts? That will be and must be an ongoing discussion. Division is not a good thing.
With regards to:

(as I have previously mentioned) I avoid pinks / purples / floral prints simply because a guy in a skirt already has enough social baggage to deal with without adding "girleyness" to the skirt.

If you like it do it possibly with moderation. Don't deny yourself. Showing your love for flowery designs shows creativeness, emotion. I know that some people will shoot you if you have the wrong coloured doughnut, so live your life and don't inhibit yourself, putting yourself in your own cage. If YOU like that soort of clothing wear it. You are so! Or live a theatrical show, being someone you are not. Why wear skirts at all if it's not what you want to wear, might just as well wear the jeans again. And for whom? We must accept that we are who we are and it doesn't make one hoot.

To strive to keep men in skirts from being Travestites is something different to keeping it super manly.

The whole idea of men in skirts being a narrow image is like saying the only Bikers are the ones who ride unadulterated pre 1960's Harleys or something of that nature. There are many motorcycle riders, and Harley riders are a soort on there own, but all are bike riders.

That doesn't mean that it is easy keeping a "manly" image ( for lack of better terms) of men in skirts apart from Travestites.

It is the public's unawareness of the difference that makes it difficult. And it will stay difficult if the public stays uneducated in that field. Men in skirts is a very wide field and dividing it up into many different classes will only make it more difficult for the general public to understand.

Peter v.
A man is the same man in a pair of pants or a skirt. It is only the way people look at him that makes the difference.
User avatar
crfriend
Master Barista
Posts: 14433
Joined: Fri Nov 19, 2004 9:52 pm
Location: New England (U.S.)
Contact:

Post by crfriend »

I think that men wearing skirts will only make a chance of being accepted if people get used to seeing men in all soorts of skirts and suitable attire to match it. The sooner the better.
One of the interesting things about this community, and the folks that inhabit it, is a healthy mix of conservatism (in a fashion sense) mixed with a dose of the pioneer. Good pioneers do things in a measured way; winding up a casualty of an activity seldom results in progress, so good pioneers tend to be fairly conservative in their actions. Up until recently, that's been the case here; however, the dynamic seems to have changed from one of tentative methodical exploration to a go-go rush to throw everything aside and charge forward and ignore convention. I happen to hold that if we completely abandon convention we're doomed to fail -- and by "fail", I mean that your average staid bloke will not be accepted in anything other than trousers because the pace of change was too fast for society, which is very much an example of "lowest common denominator", to understand or embrace.

We may as well recognise it -- we're trying to undo better than a century of public perception that a man can only be a man if he's wearing trousers. It's even ensconced in the vernacular -- "Well, now we know who wears the pants in that family." It's an uphill fight; there's no percentage in running so fast up the hill that we trip over our own hems. Or worse, get tripped by detractors who cannot deal with the sort of change we propose.
The one person that was picked out at some demonstration, just shows the diversity of clothing and not that all men wore the same attire.
The example you speak of was the press focussing on a chap who was at (or near) the farthest extreme from "masculine" attire in the group; he made for a convenient "target" for ridicule, and as such, would likely sell more copy or advertising minutes on the local news station. Some of the pictures, taken by the participants, point this up; most of the guys were wearing kilts.
People who don't want to see it that way will NEVER see it that way. So stop waisting your time trying to convince THEM. Show the OTHER people that we want clothing freedom and then every man can go his own way in that newly won freedom. Without limitations.
You're, unfortunately, correct in that notions that are firmly-held by a narrow mind can seldom be swayed; but "society" as a whole tends to function as a mob, and the lowest common denominator frequently commands much power and influence.

The "without limitations" notion is a nice one, but is likely not one that will happen in any of our lifetimes. It's a case of, "pick your battles wisely."
Parallel to this, a better understanding of what a Travestite is and for that matter a cross dresser would be of great advantage to the cause and everybody in the whole scope of things.
This idea has been hashed over quite a bit in this forum, and we (as members of this community) have settled on a definition that is slightly at odds with what shows up in the DSM of psychiatry (because the one in the DSM is fatally flawed in that only men can be transvestites (a pseudo-scholarly, contrived, word for "crossdresser")). The usage of the term here is to describe a man dressing as a woman with the intent to deceive -- i.e. role-playing a part that he's not entitled to, and having to actively masquerade as a woman to fulfill his fantasy. I believe you'll immediately note the difference between the notion here -- that of a man wearing a skirt as a man from a man masquerading as a woman -- and that's why we discuss the notion of masculinity instead of tossing it aside like a piece of rubbish.
Retrocomputing -- It's not just a job, it's an adventure!
Sasquatch
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 486
Joined: Wed Jan 03, 2007 3:18 am
Location: North Carolina coast

Post by Sasquatch »

Bob, you've got quite a conundrum to deal with, and I don't envy you being thrust out onto the tightrope so often.

I would suggest that the cafe by recent history (the few months I've been a member) has been a "big tent" that shelters a lot of differing preferences and personalities. I'd hate to see that very positive aspect lost. Until late, we've all coexisted in orderless harmony because we operated with mutual respect and, most importantly, support. I don't spend as much time on the site as many others, so I'm not as aware of the topics that have fomented such controversy, but I'd be surprised if it isn't something that cannot be handled with judicious moderation, and not just by Bob. I think it is apparent to most members when posts take an inappropriate tone. It doesn't take more than one sentence by some one who can exercise a bit of maturity to GENTLY bring the fact to the poster's attention.

Since I can't imagine anyone wanting the job of sitting in judgement, deciding how far is too far, or of dousing the flamers, I guess I lean toward a "live and let live policy". I have faith that most men, regardless of extent of their proclivities toward the feminine, can sooner or later grasp the generally mature tone of the site. If not, perhaps they will eventually tire of being "called" over the content of a post, and move elsewhere.

Meanwhile, I would suggest that we each count to one thousand before firing off an angry reply to something that has offended us. Remember, that not any two of us are exactly the same, otherwise we wouldn't be interested in this site at all. We're all round pegs trying to live in square holes - some of us just a bit rounder than others. As I heard it said on the news today, one man's freedom fighter is another man's terrorist. You only become one or the other when you start drawing "lines in the sand".

Sasq
Cat on a tin roof, dogs in a pile,
Nothin' left to do but smile, smile, smile!

Hunter/Garcia
BrotherTailor

Post by BrotherTailor »

I'm so new here...I hope I'm not one of the neo fundies...

Forgive my ignorance of what IMFF stands for etc. I don't know.

I was intrigued by the discussion on here, and so signed on. My personal feeling on the matter of dress are something of a "double" standard I suppose. When out in public I see myself as an ambassador, I'm being seen and noticed by others, and they are making judgments about me based on my appearance. For this reason I present in a conservative, traditional way. Wearing a kilt type skirt is one way of doing this.

When I am at home, by myself, I see nothing wrong with experimenting. I can wear long skirts, petticoats, feminine tops and so forth. who cares? No one. I would never wear such things in public - no more than I would run around in my knickers in public. There is a time and a place for everything. For me, while it is a form of self expression, the clothes I wear are not "who I am" and so I find it easy to restrain any rash impulses.

I would not want to belong to a strictly cross dressing forum...it does not interest me to pretend. I think this website is fine "as is", but only the owner can make a final judgment in that regard. To my mind (weak and warped though it may be) I think we as men have a better chance of convincing society at large that we are serious and normal in our skirt wearing if we maintain a traditionally male look. I think those who sew on here have the greatest scope in creating clothes that project a desirable male image.

I've really tried to get away from labelling others...I still fall into the temptation, but try to avoid it if possible. There is a lot of flexibility in how one presents himself as a man in a skirt, and unless we can see each person's style in living colour, there is a danger of friendly fire...
ChristopherJ
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 427
Joined: Mon Dec 11, 2006 2:24 am

Post by ChristopherJ »

Well, I can see that AMM, Bob, crfriend - and maybe others - have alluded to posts that are "dismissive of masculinity" made by so-called Freestyle Fundamentalists. Why cannot someone point out which posters are being referred to here - and give quotes from the posts that they have found offensive. Otherwise, this is simply not fair - some people are just making vague allusions here about some other people on this forum - whom they refuse to identify. What is that all about?

To be honest, I am left wondering what all the fuss is about. Yes, there has been a shift in the character of Skirt Cafe lately - but as Bob says, that is probably because IMFF is still down and the Atrium is dying on its cyber feet. But the new folders were created to make room for this broadening of character. What on earth is the Freestyle Fashions folder for - if not for freestyle fashionistas to congregate in and compare notes? If any "manly" kilt wearing gentleman is likely to be offended by freestyle fashion issues, then he should refrain from reading the posts in that folder.

As much as I respect Bob, I must say that for me, the idea of splitting the Cafe into manly.skirtcafe.org and femme.skirtcafe.org strikes me as absolutely awful. Why do we need divisions like this? As long as the Skirt Cafe always maintains a presence that is characterised by being simply about skirts as a fashion for men - I can't see what the problem is. For people who persistently post stuff that emphasises wearing skirts in order to look like a woman, they can be warned - and perhaps have membership revoked. What is the problem there?
It's never too late to have a happy childhood . . .
Locked