Hypothethical Question

[jamie001]

How about this: "When will men once again be allowed to be fully human?

Unfortunately not during our lifetimes. That is why I take whatever I can get. People like Harry Styles have paved the way for us and made GNC acceptable. 10 years ago men in skirt = homosexual. Small steps in progress. Maybe 50 years from now society will achieve what CR wants, but it ain’t happening so and I’m not holding by breath.

[crfriend]

Unfortunately not during our lifetimes.

If we don't start taking action, nobody is going to do it for us -- because nobody's particularly interested especially given the abject failures of many larger societies. And we're not going to achieve it by apologising for our actions, either, and this GNC garbage is attempting to do just that, apologise in advance for our actions because, "we're not normal guys". Except when we are!

Maybe 50 years from now society will achieve what CR wants, but it ain’t happening so and I’m not holding by breath.

Then you're going to die waiting for somebody else to do it for you. A heck of a waste of a human life if you ask me.

The old sentiment stands, "Lead, follow, or get out of the way." -- and waiting for somebody else to do something is merely loitering in the way of those who are trying to do something. And every time we apologise for our acts, or seem contrite about "Oh, I'm not normal." we set the clock back actively.

Men are supposed to be creatures of action -- not passive little wallflowers. Go ahead and be the passive one, but at least have the decency to cower in the corner and not underfoot of those who are trying to change things. Note, too, that "action" does not necessarily equate to violence. The mere act of unapologetically being ourselves is inherently non-violent (unless you're one of the truly macho and you have no other outlet -- in which case you belong in an institution and segregated from society) -- and compelling because it demonstrates what's possible. Men can have amazing powers of getting their points across that do not involve shouting or violence. We have expressive voices, and we have a full range of emotions to draw upon. Or at least real men do. GNCs and the like, perhaps not.

[crfriend]

Here's another question that's germane in the current context: "Why do some of us insist on constructing "boxes" that are even more cramped than the "Man Box" in order to apologise for something that we're doing that (a) is not wrong and (b) harms no-one?"

[Mouse]

Here's another question that's germane in the current context: "Why do some of us insist on constructing "boxes" that are even more cramped than the "Man Box" in order to apologise for something that we're doing that (a) is not wrong and (b) harms no-one?"

I maintain that the boxes some men are containing themselves in, are all in their own head. In some parts of the world there is nothing to stop a man putting on a skirt, going out about his life and being happy. No one is going to stop him doing as he pleases as long as he legally covered and not being a fool. The only thing limiting his skirt wearing is himself. If only men would stop over thinking things and just enjoy life un constrained, they would much much happier.

Of course I know family and friends play apart, but even so, a man has the ability to stand his ground for his right to be happy also.

[crfriend]

I maintain that the boxes some men are containing themselves in, are all in their own head. In some parts of the world there is nothing to stop a man putting on a skirt, going out about his life and being happy. No one is going to stop him doing as he pleases as long as he legally covered and not being a fool. The only thing limiting his skirt wearing is himself. If only men would stop over thinking things and just enjoy life un constrained, they would much much happier.

That's well put, but I'm also ticked off by the assertion that because we're behaving differently for the vast herd means that we're somehow "damaged goods" and must be contrite and apologise for ourselves.

I don't care one whit about how anybody else identifies, but just because I dress differently from the vast herd does not mean I need to be meek, contrite, and apologise for it. We have an inalienable right to be ourselves and when hard-core "classifiers" mischaracterise us, we have reason and right to stand up and say, "No. You have it wrong." We do not have to "suck it up and accept it". I don't care if one identifies as an armadillo or a bonobo, just don't drag me into that box because I wear skirts -- because I am neither an armadillo nor a bonobo; I am a human man. Imagine that.

Of course I know family and friends play apart, but even so, a man has the ability to stand his ground for his right to be happy also.

Indeed. It's hard enough daring to be different; it doesn't need to be made even harder.

[Mouse]

just because I dress differently from the vast herd does not mean I need to be meek, contrite, and apologise for it.

That's the thing, I don't think I or any other man has to, "be meek, contrite, and apologise". I stride through life now as me and if you don't like it then tough. A confident man in a skirt is just that. I expect to be treated like any other man and in my dealings in life, I think I am. Confidence, humour, a smile and conversation. I am far more out going now than I was in trouser days and I seem to flow though the world with few problems in the happy knowledge that when I see other men in normal boring clothes, I know I am free and not boring. Even as I move, I feel what I am wearing on my body, and it makes me smile and happy.

[STEVIE]

It's not the concept -- it's the usage.

OK, Carl et al (Al too)

A different and very real question.
Is it really helpful or constructive to dismiss a term such as Gender Non Conforming as "crap"?
Ref Uncle Al on 1st May in viewtopic.php?t=24718&start=30.
Here is my problem, I certainly conform to my birth gender and in most respects never challenged that in all the time that I have worn or at least wished to wear skirts or dresses.
Society dictated that choice was limited to females only, the limits placed on them are irrelevant in this context.
Point is, loud and proud though I am as an unashamedly male in a skirt, the fact remains I am not conforming to the standards set by society for my gender.
The fact that I just don't give a damn and raise a two fingered salute to the nay-sayers may or may not assist the revolution, but the "crap" comment did not feel like a comment fostering encouragement to discuss and explore fashion freedom for men.

Post by Bob » Sun Aug 26, 2007 10:20 pm
Continuing dialog on gender is encouraged in the context of fashion freedom for men. In particular, we recognize that gender is a complex subject and some of us may feel more "masculine" or "feminine" at times. However, this is NOT a transvestite or crossdresser forum. We are committed to a fundamentally masculine gender identity --- masculine name and pronouns. We call it "gender honesty." Beyond that, what it means to be a man is individual and open to discussion.

Steve

[crfriend]

I will explain my take on this matter herewith, and I'll allow Al to explain his as his will likely be different from mine.

My take on "GNC" is that it's yet one more attempt to create a "classification" (box) without need. We might as well just call the behaviour "effeminate" -- and whatever it is will ONLY be used to beat men up with. We have enough grief already; we don't need any more. To your point, if you can raise a two-fingered salute to accusers in this regard, then I propose that you do not belong in that "box"; nor do I (save that we use a single digit in the USA which is considered quite impolite).

There are also compounding issues here that I have with the individual who was harping on the matter so vociferously a few days ago. History is one of those. I recall history, and I've read each and every one of those posts and have built up a pretty good model of what's going on in "his" head (which is going to stay private) -- and I was tiring greatly of the rhetoric and histrionics on the matter. (The astute will recall me reacting similarly to PDX Dave when he asserted baldy that we're all on the LGBTWTF "spectrum" simply because of our attire choices.) To Bob's original quote, had this been done in a respectful manner my feathers likely would not have gotten ruffled -- but they weren't: they were outright accusatory of everybody who was born with an XY chromotype (read, every last male, living and dead). Thus, it was the accumulated detritus of years that finally pushed me over the edge.

OK, so on one level we are being "non-conformant". Does that impinge on anything else? Are we "lesser people" because of it? Why do we need to be ashamed of being ourselves? Why do we need to be apologists for just being us? Does it even matter in the big picture of things? I posit, "No" on all counts.

[denimini]

It's hard enough daring to be different; it doesn't need to be made even harder.

Actually I find it quite easy ............. comes naturally
Perhaps some other people find my digression from convention hard but I have no control over that.

[denimini]

My take on "GNC" is that it's yet one more attempt to create a "classification" (box) without need.

The crux of the matter is not to put anyone in a box. If someone wants to put themselves in a box then they are at liberty to do that, although near impossible if they are dead.
Once we have a name by which to call or refer to someone then that is how we call them, as the individual which they are with a complex and unique mix of characteristics.
Respect and expect respect.

[denimini]

As for the second hypothetical: "When will men once again be allowed to be fully human?"

It seems like a "When are you going to stop beating your wife" question which infers that you are beating your wife in the first place.

In Australia, where there actually seems to be an increasing amount of wife beating, I personally do not get any negative comments or reactions to myself being a male. I feel that I am already allowed to be fully human .............. and try to live up to it.

Sorry for 3 posts in a row .............. I am not a robot and if there is any intellegence detected, it is not artificial

[Uncle Al]

OK, here we go

The GNC comments really had me confused. The TLA(Three Letter Acronym) stands for
General Nutrition Corporation which make nutritional supplements for men and women.
That company has been around since 1935. To have it represent a 'strange concept' really
through me off. That, among the other effeminate comments, about being 'more like a woman',
goes against what we, Men In Skirts and this Cafe', are all about. We are not about trans-anything.
We do not need to change our bodies, and image, to be men. Yes, I would like a more slender
body but, my fat pills keep me from achieving that. Does that make me less of a man

We are not 'girly this or girly that', we are men who desire to have a wardrobe choice
We do not want to continually be confined to a narrow selection of clothes and guidelines.

Yes, men must be allowed to express emotions and those emotions are not effeminate.
They are emotions that show love, fear, sorrow, sadness, laughter and joy.

The continued criticism that men were not "girly" enough, along with the gender statements,
pushed all of my buttons. Again, this goes against what Skirt Cafe' stands for.
When I wear a kilt, does that make me a woman
H**l no
To the general public, does wearing a kilt mean I'm less of a man

The continued pontification that women are better, by a certain member, indicates that
member doesn't belong at Skirt Cafe'. He's been warned throughout many posts that
those comments are not wanted.

There are principals that guide Skirt Cafe' and I won't allow them to be tarnished
by any member. Maybe bent once in a while but never tarnished - EVER

Therefore, an official warning has been issued to this member.
The Admin Staff works on a 3 strike principle.
If several admonishments in public posts doesn't curb the incidents, then the member
is placed on Moderated Status. If that doesn't work, then the member is banned.

Now, it's up to him to see where this pans out.

His next step is Moderated Status for 30 to 60 days.



Uncle Al

[denimini]

Al, the correct place for that post is here:
http://www.skirtcafe.org/forums/viewtopic.php?t=24723

Sorry I mentioned GNC

[Barleymower]

Men of SkirtCafe,

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

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

Female attire on men is allowed and encouraged. Some may try and prevent it through their own bigoted views but here in the UK there are no laws to prevent a man wearing what he wants (within the limits of decency).

[crfriend]

My take on "GNC" is that it's yet one more attempt to create a "classification" (box) without need.

The crux of the matter is not to put anyone in a box. If someone wants to put themselves in a box then they are at liberty to do that, although near impossible if they are dead.

Indeed, but the accusations were direct and damning that we were getting stuffed into that box, rightly or wrongly, whether we wanted to be or not. There was no choice and no way out.

If the OP wants to put himself in that box, then he's welcome to, but he also needs to stop slagging off on guys who aren't particularly "feminine" (which is most of them at the moment because of the way the extant boxes are defined).

Respect and expect respect.

Indeed.

As for the second hypothetical: "When will men once again be allowed to be fully human?"

It seems like a "When are you going to stop beating your wife" question which infers that you are beating your wife in the first place.

That's why I posed the question in the way I did -- to avoid something that we're "allowed" to do (but which is stupid in the extreme, and counterproductive). The question asked instead for a release from the current mythos of machismo -- a chance to take back all our emotions, and not just be confined to lust and rage.

Sorry to hear about that rotten statistic, Anthony, but I suspect it's on the rise in most countries where the populations are under rapidly increasing stress on the socio-economic front and are in economic free-fall. This cannot go on much longer, and I hope the countries with functioning governments that actually represent the general public do something about it quickly. The ones that no longer represent the general public are doomed and will completely collapse in the next 10 years to internal chaos as society completely falls apart.