Hypothethical Question

[Grok]

It's a slightly odd scenario you depict. One where female attire on men is allowed and encouraged but strictly controlled.

Actually, the scenario reminds me of the discussion about the next skirt to gain traction (in Mainstream society). There was at least one thread about that. The speculation tended towards the sort of rig Jamie described.

[crfriend]

It's a slightly odd scenario you depict. One where female attire on men is allowed and encouraged but strictly controlled.

Actually, the scenario reminds me of the discussion about the next skirt to gain traction (in Mainstream society). There was at least one thread about that. The speculation tended towards the sort of rig Jamie described.

That's precisely what it was -- and represents no measurable progress because aside from cut, men will still be shackled by the same boring colour-pallet and the same crappy fabrics they're confined to now.

Not only that, the likely thought processes are in-line with my hypothetical model of Jamie's state of thought which goes like this: "OK, silly little weakling, we'll allow you access to skirts -- but nothing beyond that because you're not qualified for it. You get the same colours you have now, and don't even think about fancy fabrics, or we'll take it all away again." And it drips with the sort of condescension you'd expect from somebody who's swallowed the rad-fem manifesto word for word and hook, line and sinker.

What sort of "progress" is that? Not any, I'd posit. More like retrograde thrust.

[jamie001]

I believe that the Cafe is made up of biological males of that are on many different places on the gender continuum. It is very important to understand that gender is a continuum and most biological males more toward the masculine side, some are in the middle, and others are more to the feminine side. Those biological males that are more to the feminine side take pride in their feminine appearance but they are not attempting to deceive anyone that they are a biological woman. Many of us wear feminine accessories like hairstyles, nail polish, purses, women high heel shoes, and the list goes on an one. They just love wearing girly things because it gives them a feeling of inner peace. The female part of their psyche is at peace with the biological male part. It is important to understand that they are not trans and they don’t have any desire to transition like Caitlyn Jenner, although much respect should be given to Caitlyn Jenner for her bravery and learning how to be her true self. They don’t identify entirely with crossdressers because they are not attempting to deceive anyone into believing that they are a biological female. They are simply biological males that are feminine or girly and that love girly things.

I believe that the Cafe should accept all types of biological males. Identification as a biological male X-Y chromosome should be all that is required for membership. You should not have be within a predefined range of the gender continuum. Lumberjacks we well as girly men should be welcome because we share one thing in common, “We all love to wear skirts” and should never loose sight of that concept that binds us all together.

Yes, the Cafe has (gasp) LGBTQ and GNC members and we should welcome those members without discrimination. The views regarding presentation while wearing a skirt here on the Cafe vary widely. Some prefer a very masculine presentation, while others here love the feminine look because it feels so wright to them.

Many of the men on the Cafe want to wear skirts as men with no other label attached. More power to them as they will have a large hill to climb during their lifetimes. Other more feminine men prefer to be acknowledged for their beautiful feminine presentation even girly-girl like presentation, while still not trying to deceive anyone that they are biological women. We all belong here because we love skirts, dresses and other non-bifurcated garments that are classified as women’s garments by society. We should support and respect each other no matter where we are on the gender continuum and whether we prefer a masculine look, somewhere in-between look, or a girly feminine look.

Jamie
Fashion Freedom for Biological Males

[jamie001]

It's a slightly odd scenario you depict. One where female attire on men is allowed and encouraged but strictly controlled.

Not only that, the likely thought processes are in-line with my hypothetical model of Jamie's state of thought which goes like this: "OK, silly little weakling, we'll allow you access to skirts -- but nothing beyond that because you're not qualified for it. You get the same colours you have now, and don't even think about fancy fabrics, or we'll take it all away again." And it drips with the sort of condescension you'd expect from somebody who's swallowed the rad-fem manifesto word for word and hook, line and sinker.

What sort of "progress" is that? Not any, I'd posit. More like retrograde thrust.

This has nothing to do with rad-fem manifesto. It has to do with the Man-Box that exists today. If skirts for men are even completely accepted by society, you can bet that the designs, colors, and fabric must comply with the rules of the Man-Box. Therefore we will be relegated to the same fabrics, and colors, that we have for trousers and other men’s clothing. By being GNC, I will not be forced into this box.

[crfriend]

In inventing the "GNC Box" you're merely isolating yourself even farther from the mainstream. Now, that's your choice, and I'm fine with that. Just don't force it on the rest of us who are trying to "de-gender" the skirt and bring it into our realm -- and many of us are quite comfortably outside the "man box" of machismo because we recognise it as evil, troubling, and destructive -- and we've been shoved into it against our wills because we weren't paying attention to when it was happening (but some of us were, and we understand who did it to us and why).

Broadly speaking, all the presence of the "GNC Box" (and the LGBTQWTF Box and the Trans-* box and all the other splinter boxes) does is reinforce the entirely pernicious notion of the modern "Man Box" and strengthens it, it does not weaken it nor tear it down (which is what needs to happen); and since these "alternates" to the "Man Box" are proliferating, the original objectionable one is built up and bolstered -- which is leading to societal trouble soon and in spades.

This is where the Law of Unintended Consequences bites the hardest. Good intentions all too frequently wind up resulting in very bad results.

So, feel perfectly free to put yourself in the "GNC Box" (TLA overloads and all), but know that you are doing men precisely no favours in that because you're giving comfort and aid to the other side who is trying to strangle us using the "Man Box".

[Midas]

I think we need to stop talking about gender. I am a man who wears a dress, pure and simple; this has no effect on my gender or masculinity. In the words of one of my sons ‘you’re just the same as you always were’.

Talk about gender moves the issue from where it should be.

[Grok]

we share one thing in common, “We all love to wear skirts” and should never loose sight of that concept that binds us all together.

Yes, the Cafe has (gasp) LGBTQ and GNC members and we should welcome those members without discrimination. The views regarding presentation while wearing a skirt here on the Cafe vary widely. Some prefer a very masculine presentation, while others here love the feminine look because it feels so wright to them.

. We all belong here because we love skirts, dresses and other non-bifurcated garments
Jamie
Fashion Freedom for Biological Males

Somebody invented a term for people who like to wear skirted rigs-"Skirtonians." As you pointed out, this can include a fair diversity of men. Also, some women; though many women don't care for such garments.

The appeal, or lack of appeal, seems to be a characteristic independent of biological sex, gender identity, or sexual orientation.

[Grok]

That's precisely what it was -- and represents no measurable progress because aside from cut, men will still be shackled by the same boring colour-pallet and the same crappy fabrics they're confined to now.

I noticed that there seems to be interest in some sort of MIS skirt suit. Perhaps such a suit might be the next thing to gain traction?

Traditional trouser suits tend to have a disadvantage-dull in color. But suits do have a couple of advantages:

1. Finer fabrics.

2. Are amenable to style.

[Grok]

1. Only skirts in manly color palettes like black, brown, blue, and gray will be accepted. No baby blue, pastel or the colors. What shade of black, brown, blue, or gray would you like?

2. Only skirts made from heavy material are accepted so that they will appear to be really masculine. No light and airy skirts are permitted.


What are your thoughts? Is this paradise or is it Hell?

jhhhThere are several ways that this scenario could play out. Or not:

1. It simply doesn't play out; MIS fails to gain traction. MIS dies with a whimper.

2. MIS is suppressed by a reactionary back lash.

Something like the original scenario plays out..despite opposition. A very few designs gain traction before further change is halted by a reactionary back lash. The surviving designs are relatively plain, in a few rather bland colors. Mens wear then becomes frozen. What might have been, the more colorful skirts, are post toned for a few centuries.

I can imagine similar scenarios for other forms of personal expression. For example, one or two small pieces of jewelry gain traction, but further change is frozen for a few centuries.

[rivegauche]

Just to complicate matters further, some of us are at more than one point in the spectrum. I do the thing of wearing a skirt as a man, either in public or when working from home so that my top half looks conventional in zoom meetings. I also do the thing about fully presenting in public as a woman, complete with body language. I do it because it is fun - at no point do I identify as a woman - it is just acting. Most of the time at home I am dressed completely as a woman in that I am wearing everything a women in a dress would wear (but adding a slip that women no longer seem to bother with) but with no make up or wig. There isn't a box for that and I can't be bothered inventing one. I do it because it makes me feel good, not because of any imagined feminine leanings or feelings. I am not "getting in touch with my feminine side" because I am a man and I don't have a feminine side. It is about dopamines and feeling good about myself - wellbeing - not gender related. If a woman gets a dopamine kick out of wearing a lovely dress why can't a man? My legs have been de-haired as I like wearing sheer tights and I find hairy legs in tights aesthetically displeasing. I have a naturally hairless chest but I retain the hair on my arms and hands. When I present as a woman I adopt a softer voice for two reasons - one is that I have a very distinctive bass voice and this is disguise and the other is that people like you to present "properly" as a woman - note the criticism Grayson Perry gets for wearing dresses no real woman would wear - and he points out he isn't a real woman. So I change the voice as a disguise and to fit in but I don't like doing it. Unlike the clothes, my voice is part of my personal gender identity but I only fully present as a woman in public a few times a year. I go out for meals with a woman friend with both of us dressed to the nines, and when we are alone in the car I revert to my own voice.

[jamie001]

I am not "getting in touch with my feminine side" because I am a man and I don't have a feminine side.

I disagree with this statement. Psychological research over the past 50 years has proven this to be incorrect. Men and women both have feminine and masculine sides. Women are taught to embrace their masculine side while men are taught that the feminine side does not exist and that if it somehow begins to surface (even though you were taught it doesn’t exist), you must suppress it immediately! Believing that you don’t have a feminine side is Man-Box conditioning at it’s best!

We are all on a gender spectrum. Some of us are more masculine and some of us are in the middle, and some of us are more feminine. The Man-Box teaches us that “feminine is bad” and also that we don’t have a feminine side. Women accept their masculine side because they don’t have a Woman-Box to govern their lives.

[crfriend]

Fsck it. I give up. This is useless. Who wants to be Master Barista?

[rode_kater]

In inventing the "GNC Box" you're merely isolating yourself even farther from the mainstream.

GNC is a description, namely the opposite of Gender Conforming. It no more creates a box than saying "leaves are green" creates a box of green things. It does not specifically refer to clothing but is actually more commonly used to describe roles. The situation I've seen it used most often is "woman is the breadwinner, man is the SAH dad looking after the kids". This is referred to as GNC though we all agree it shouldn't be.

I deny the existance of boxes altogether. They are all harmful.

[crfriend]

I deny the existance of boxes altogether. They are all harmful.

That's what I've been saying all along. I've also given up because I'm tired of wasting breath and keystrokes.

Argue your limitations, and lo they are yours.

[rivegauche]

I am not "getting in touch with my feminine side" because I am a man and I don't have a feminine side.

I disagree with this statement. Psychological research over the past 50 years has proven this to be incorrect. Men and women both have feminine and masculine sides. Women are taught to embrace their masculine side while men are taught that the feminine side does not exist and that if it somehow begins to surface (even though you were taught it doesn’t exist), you must suppress it immediately! Believing that you don’t have a feminine side is Man-Box conditioning at it’s best!

We are all on a gender spectrum. Some of us are more masculine and some of us are in the middle, and some of us are more feminine. The Man-Box teaches us that “feminine is bad” and also that we don’t have a feminine side. Women accept their masculine side because they don’t have a Woman-Box to govern their lives.

I am describing myself. I know me quite well. I am a genetic male. Any sides I have are male. If anyone wants to associate any of my characteristics with the female I have no problem with that but that would be other people's boxes. I insist on my own boxes. Associating particular characteristics or behaviour with one gender over another is itself conditioning. Just as I reject society's restrictions on what I can wear I reject its gender associations. For myself, I am confident that my sex and gender characteristics are determined by my Y chromosome while conceding that aspects of my behaviour and opinions have been shaped by circumstances. It is society that classifies these circumstances as male or female not biology and as such they have no physiological status. I allow others to determine their own gender characteristics. There is huge danger in unqualified people imposing their cod psychology/genetics on others - it is a form of bullying - and can have dreadful consequences if impressionable people are intimidated by it.