Has the attention on transgendered individuals helped us?

Discussion of fashion elements and looks that are traditionally considered somewhat "femme" but are presented in a masculine context. This is NOT about transvestism or crossdressing.
Grok
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 2021
Joined: Fri Aug 29, 2008 2:21 am

Re: Has the attention on transgendered individuals helped us?

Post by Grok »

rivegauche wrote:
Sat Jul 25, 2020 12:57 pm
. I think recreational cross-dressers and men who just want to wear a skirt do not exist for most people
Recreational free styling is an interesting concept, and the taboo might actually encourage that-the lure of the forbidden.

And men who just want to wear a skirt...they are suppressed.
Faldaguy
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 308
Joined: Sun Feb 02, 2020 5:09 am

Re: Has the attention on transgendered individuals helped us?

Post by Faldaguy »

crfriend » Fri Sep 25, 2020 5:53 pmmoonshadow wrote: ↑Fri Sep 25, 2020 4:58 pm[... G]etting back to the French boys... I have my doubts they are truly "right wing"... they probably don't really know what that even means... they're just your run of the mill THUGS...I suspect that sums it up nicely. There may be very vague religious components to it, but it's basically thug behaviour which should be charged and the miscreants taught a lesson for their deeds.
Moonshadow said:
But getting back to the French boys... I have my doubts they are truly "right wing"... they probably don't really know what that even means... they're just your run of the mill THUGS... just like the ones burning cities down here state side... they don't give a damn about any political ideology.. they just want to raise hell.
I think you have both said it in a far more nuanced and accurate manner than my quick babble. Nor have I ever had any threats or undue attention due to my attire, though I suspect some have thought I needed to be straightened out, it was not worth the effort! Yes, the French boys and their ilk everywhere are often just spouting off anger and frustration they do not have more directed or considered outlets for. Thanks for keeping this anchored in more insightful terms.
User avatar
SkirtsDad
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 686
Joined: Wed Oct 14, 2015 11:03 am
Location: Hampshire, UK

Re: Has the attention on transgendered individuals helped us?

Post by SkirtsDad »

moonshadow wrote:
Wed Sep 23, 2020 3:41 pm
rode_kater wrote:
Wed Sep 23, 2020 12:58 pm
FtM crossdressing does exist, though much harder to find.
I disagree by observation. Women often wear men's clothes... often times they are... actually their husbands/boyfriends clothes. This is, by definition, crossdressing, it just doesn't carry the social stigma that m2f crossdressing does.

When a woman is seen lounging around in her boyfriends flannel shirt, it's often celebrated.

10 years ago, a man wearing a skirt was mocked in these same circles, now many cheer it in their own way, such as my sister who thinks "it's awesome".

Is it viewed in the exact same light? No... a woman wearing her boyfriend's flannel is seen as "sexy" and perhaps a little sultry. But a man who wears feminine clothes seems to carry the notion of a type of progressive enlightenment.
Moon, I feel I must take you to task on the f2m crossdressing and women wearing men's clothes. Firstly, your observations would, on this occasion, seem somewhat limited. Your only reference to women wearing "men's" clothes has been confined to the context of the having a boyfriend, which makes me wonder if you are being rather heteronormative, but secondly the idea that is is based on making a woman somehow "sexy" I believe is outdated at best.

Working in a charity shop I often get to overhear women discussing the clothing they are looking at. For various reasons women buy clothing from the men's section. It tends to be jumpers and checked shirts, but they are trying them on and buying them for themselves. It is not to look "sexy"! I would perhaps go as far as to say that occasionally it is often for precisely the opposite reason. Without wishing to fall into the trap of stereotyping, I have also observed lesbians with a particular style sense also buying from the same section.

In terms of actual f2m crossdressing, I have a punk/goth female friend that lately dresses up as a man on a Friday night and will even add a 9 o'clock shadow for greater authenticity. For whatever reason, artistic or otherwise, I have never asked, she enjoys taking the time to do so. The first time I saw a picture I had to check carefully to see it was actually her as it looked like she had posted a picture of a male lead singer out of a punk band or something.
moonshadow
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 5015
Joined: Sun Aug 09, 2015 1:58 am

Re: Has the attention on transgendered individuals helped us?

Post by moonshadow »

Understood skirtsdad...

Keep in mind these are just observations and not meant to imply the gospel truth.

I'd hazard a guess there is a sharp contrast between the culture of our regions. More metropolitan areas probably do have the diversity you describe.

'Round here* people's fashion styles generally come in three main categories:

- Puritan religious
- Masculine redneck men
- Masculine redneck women

Note, femininity is generally acceptable in religious context, but only for genetic females.

* Rural Virginia coal fields. Larger cities (e.g. Johnson City TN, Knoxville TN, Roanoke VA, etc) exempted.
User avatar
Freedomforall
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 818
Joined: Mon Jan 23, 2017 3:00 pm

Re: Has the attention on transgendered individuals helped us?

Post by Freedomforall »

moonshadow wrote:
Sat Sep 26, 2020 4:52 am
Understood skirtsdad...

Keep in mind these are just observations and not meant to imply the gospel truth.

I'd hazard a guess there is a sharp contrast between the culture of our regions. More metropolitan areas probably do have the diversity you describe.

'Round here* people's fashion styles generally come in three main categories:

- Puritan religious
- Masculine redneck men
- Masculine redneck women

Note, femininity is generally acceptable in religious context, but only for genetic females.

* Rural Virginia coal fields. Larger cities (e.g. Johnson City TN, Knoxville TN, Roanoke VA, etc) exempted.
Moon I agree with your observations and see the same things here as well. We are only a few hundred miles from each other and are areas are very similar.
moonshadow
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 5015
Joined: Sun Aug 09, 2015 1:58 am

Re: Has the attention on transgendered individuals helped us?

Post by moonshadow »

Found this tonight...

https://www.leoweekly.com/2017/06/city- ... svestites/

An article discussing a now defunct anti-crossdressing law written in Louisville Kentucky, 1971... only 50 odd years ago...

Still think the LGBTQ movement hasn't helped us? Check out the wording of the court case...

And by the way... if you're able freely walk around in public, wearing a skirt or dress of your choice without fear of arrest... be sure to thank a liberal!
Dust
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 437
Joined: Sun Sep 23, 2018 7:03 pm

Re: Has the attention on transgendered individuals helped us?

Post by Dust »

moonshadow wrote:
Sun Sep 27, 2020 3:21 am
Found this tonight...

https://www.leoweekly.com/2017/06/city- ... svestites/

An article discussing a now defunct anti-crossdressing law written in Louisville Kentucky, 1971... only 50 odd years ago...

Still think the LGBTQ movement hasn't helped us? Check out the wording of the court case...

And by the way... if you're able freely walk around in public, wearing a skirt or dress of your choice without fear of arrest... be sure to thank a liberal!
It appears the case cited the striking down of prohibitions on long hair for men, and the idea that it was an expression of ones "philosophy". So really, this became a free speech case. The results of the case were not determined by the author, but the article did indicate that the law remained on the books (and generally uninforced) until it was quietly removed in 1997.

Today, free speech is something modern conservatives are pushing hard to protect, in part because conservative speakers were recently getting blocked from speaking in many venues, including at colleges. This is likely also because the modern conservative movement has taken a libertarian turn. (I remember a certain "far right" commentator giving a speech in full drag, to the cheering approval of a crowd of mostly younger Trump supporters, back in 2016, I believe...) Additionally there is the whole tech censorship debate going on right now, with conservatives arguing against large tech companies blocking content they disagree with, especially on social media and in internet search results.

Also, back in the time of this case, the "civil liberties union" outfits, like the one that argued this case, followed a philosophy closer to what we would today call "libertarian" (usually considered to be "right wing," I hear talk of the "libertarian wing of the Republican Party," though there is also a Libertarian Party that considers itself neither right nor left wing...) than the modern left. These are the groups who would (back then) successfully argue that literally anyone, including self-described Neo-Nazis, had the right to demonstrate, as long as it was peaceful and they got their permit paperwork in.

Back to this case however, what is interesting to me, is the text of the ordinance, described in the article here (emphasis mine):
In July 1971, the story said, the Kentucky Civil Liberties Union, or KCLU, had asked Louisville’s Police Court to declare a city ordinance unconstitutional because it defined as disorderly conduct “appear[ing] in public in the dress, guise, or apparel of a member of the opposite sex with intent to counterfeit the opposite sex.”
The argument was made (in addition to the one essentially about free expression) that this was too vague to be sound law. I would disagree. While (like anything with the need to prove intent) it might be more difficult to prosecute, it rightly limits what is and is not covered.

This, to my mind (although it would have been a hard sell back then), would make the law not apply to us men-in-skirts, but only to the trans community, drag preformers, and the like. We wear what we do as men, making no attempt to hide our maleness.

This is also a point of distinction that I appreciate seeing made, and one that all too many members of the general public today would not think to make at all. I have to wonder if folks back then thought these issues through and understood them better than most today, or simply got lucky. I'd like to think the people back then may have been better equipped to have civil, rational debates than we are today, and were more nuanced in their understanding than we tend to give them credit for.
moonshadow
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 5015
Joined: Sun Aug 09, 2015 1:58 am

Re: Has the attention on transgendered individuals helped us?

Post by moonshadow »

Dust wrote:
Sun Sep 27, 2020 6:42 pm
Today, free speech is something modern conservatives are pushing hard to protect, in part because conservative speakers were recently getting blocked from speaking in many venues, including at colleges. This is likely also because the modern conservative movement has taken a libertarian turn. (I remember a certain "far right" commentator giving a speech in full drag, to the cheering approval of a crowd of mostly younger Trump supporters, back in 2016, I believe...) Additionally there is the whole tech censorship debate going on right now, with conservatives arguing against large tech companies blocking content they disagree with, especially on social media and in internet search results.
I've noticed that too. I feel this is also illustrated in my flat out lack of harassment in my ultra conservative locale. It's not the ordinary "Joe Sixpack" conservatives I worry about, it's the puritan ones that get these kind of tyrannical laws passed quietly.

I also am concerned with the flat out Orwellian censorship taking place with tech giants and the general far left ideology. Indeed, it seems politics today can claim no winners, at least as far as common sense ideals to liberty are concerned.

It is possible that if the extreme left has its way, skirtcafe may be shut down over the fact that most here refuse the "trans" label, and that may be seen as bigoted. The extreme right may shut it down for obvious reasons. Both sides have demonstrated they are perfectly willing to put their hand over your mouth, it's just a matter of which hand? The left or the right?

It is this EXTREME tug of war that will eventually rip western culture, and the ideals of true liberty right down the middle.

I've often said there are more "liberals" in Trumps redneck base than there are in the far left. As for those same people claiming to be "conservative", I can't help but wonder what paradigm exactly are they clinging to? On the surface most rednecks in my region, while not crossdressing, DO engage in plenty of other "sins" that were flat out illegal not long ago... from gambling, to work on Sunday, to the night life, and yes, even a fair number of homosexuals. Lest we forget, it was the redneck lesbians that likely broke the ground of LGBT acceptance back in the day.

As for transgender acceptance... the mouth may lie... but server logs paint a different picture, and while transgender pornography may not rank the highest among southern states... there's still a fair share of downloading going on south of the Mason-Dixon line.

Even pornography itself is considered a major sin, yet look at the scantily clad people walking the streets... look at the flesh that we lust after in our pop-culture and advertising...

I've often wondered, is "Trump culture" actually more "liberal" by strict definition? Think about it... Note, I'm speaking of Trump culture... not the man himself.

The fact is you have to be very careful what you say and write, lest you offend an extremist (left or right), and if you offend an extremist, it seems they will stop at nothing to ruin your life.

There is so much I want to say... but I have to retire first. My social opinions are enough to have me black balled everywhere.

FWIW, I've always felt reasonably safe out in a skirt in Appalachia, there have been a few places I have had my guard up though, that Walmart on the outskirts of Miami Florida comes to mind... 10pm and I just wanted some snacks. I admit the riff raff had my clutching my purse....

I've never worried about that in Appalachia.

I recall visiting Nashville late at night too and being a little uneasy in certain areas, such as getting gas an an inner city store. I noticed bullet proof glass around the cashier counter... another foreign observation for this old crossdressing country boy...

FWIW, 80% of my views are libertarian. I don't agree on everything, but they get the lions share. I part ways on health care, as I'm a FIRM advocate for single payer.
rode_kater
Active Member
Posts: 66
Joined: Thu Oct 31, 2019 10:46 pm

Re: Has the attention on transgendered individuals helped us?

Post by rode_kater »

moonshadow wrote:
Sun Sep 27, 2020 7:36 pm
It is possible that if the extreme left has its way, skirtcafe may be shut down over the fact that most here refuse the "trans" label, and that may be seen as bigoted. The extreme right may shut it down for obvious reasons. Both sides have demonstrated they are perfectly willing to put their hand over your mouth, it's just a matter of which hand? The left or the right?
Here the traditional two-party language stymies discussion. While there is a loose relationship between authoritarianism and the traditional "right", there are authoritarians of all stripes (though they are more common on the economic right). What I find most confusing about US politics is that the authoritarians are all bundled into the two main parties making it impossible to figure out who is actually for what. No matter who you vote for there are authoritarians amongst them. But I guess people like it that way, otherwise it would have been changed.
Screenshot_2020-09-28_13-01-20.png
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
User avatar
crfriend
Master Barista
Posts: 11643
Joined: Fri Nov 19, 2004 9:52 pm
Location: New England (U.S.)
Contact:

Re: Has the attention on transgendered individuals helped us?

Post by crfriend »

rode_kater wrote:
Mon Sep 28, 2020 11:16 am
Here the traditional two-party language stymies discussion. While there is a loose relationship between authoritarianism and the traditional "right", there are authoritarians of all stripes (though they are more common on the economic right). What I find most confusing about US politics is that the authoritarians are all bundled into the two main parties making it impossible to figure out who is actually for what. No matter who you vote for there are authoritarians amongst them. But I guess people like it that way, otherwise it would have been changed.
The trick in looking at the current system in the US is to "follow the money", ignore the antics of those "in power", and look carefully at what passes and what doesn't and whom it benefits. That analysis yields the ultimate conclusion that there is one "party" in power and it belongs to the ultra-rich who are running the country by proxy in the form of the current "government". The antics/gridlock/&c. merely block what's important to the "little people" and ultimately never gets passed or even voted on.

So, the "system" is working just fine, thank-you-very-much -- it's just not working for the general population.
Retrocomputing -- It's not just a job, it's an adventure!
moonshadow
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 5015
Joined: Sun Aug 09, 2015 1:58 am

Re: Has the attention on transgendered individuals helped us?

Post by moonshadow »

crfriend wrote:
Mon Sep 28, 2020 12:15 pm
The trick in looking at the current system in the US is to "follow the money", ignore the antics of those "in power", and look carefully at what passes and what doesn't and whom it benefits. That analysis yields the ultimate conclusion that there is one "party" in power and it belongs to the ultra-rich who are running the country by proxy in the form of the current "government". The antics/gridlock/&c. merely block what's important to the "little people" and ultimately never gets passed or even voted on.

So, the "system" is working just fine, thank-you-very-much -- it's just not working for the general population.
Indeed, and though I am loathe to bring this up, the matter of the Supreme's tax returns, while unsurprising, is the direct result of the policies of BOTH sides... indeed, the 2016 return in particular... Mr. Obama himself signed off on...

FWIW... I pay an average of $2500-$3000 per year in federal taxes alone (not counting state taxes and FICA). That's NET TAX.... after all refunds and so on are factored...

The damned sickening fact of the matter is... dollar for dollar.. I actually pay more to support this system than billionaires. And that's DOLLAR FOR DOLLAR.... NOT by percentage.

The slogan should go:

WORK HARDER! A HANDFUL OF BILLIONAIRES DEPEND ON YOU!

SMDH...
Post Reply