the dangers of crossdressing

[Chaplain David]

Interesting thread in some ways. After a scan of the posts, I have several nonjudgmental observations about the discussion.

1. The majority of the people that support crossdressing in this thread are atheists and agnostics.

2. There seems to be some Christian poking as often happens when both Christians and Atheists/Agnostics are in the same thread.

God Bless.

 

[CreedIsChrist]

it has been brought to my attention that, according to the bible, crossdressing is an abomination. though i find that the only dangers of crossdressing come from those who oppose it. i myself have had great joy in donning a nice dress and stilettos, entertaining those at a party with my attempt to navigate carpet in women's dress shoes. somehow i doubt that, be there a god, he would oppose the smiles brought to my friends as a result of crossdressing

is this a joke??

 

[SithDoughnut]

is this a joke??

No. However, it is a year old OP. Why would you assume it is a joke? I myself have dressed up as a woman for the amusement of other people. Specifically the most recent time was my performance of the character Flute in A Midsummer Night's Dream.

 

[Tropical Wilds]

How do you do I,
See you've met my,
Faithful handyman.
He's just a little brought down because,
When you knocked,
He thought you were the...
Candyman.

That film mentally scared me. I can never look at Tim Curry the same again.

When Tim Curry was shown the costumes for Frank, he told them that he didn't like them and brought his own outfits from home, which was what he wore in the film.

Enjoy knowing that.

 

[Macx]

First, let me say:

Thanks for posting something that didn't require the card.

I'm doing research on this topic for personal reason.

I think arguing about what constitutes male or female clothing is a distraction from the issue because it varies by culture and history. I think if it is wrong in general, then what matters is what the occupying culture says is male or female clothing. I believe that the intent of the heart is what determines if how one dresses is sin or not. I don't know this for fact, but it is what I am guessing.

Yup, of course this is also a section of law that forbids combining two kinds of fiber, so all those poly-cotton garments have got to be burned if we're going to hold to the Law. We don't being freed in Christ, I'd ask my fellow Christians who get knotted up over cross dressing to check their labels and burn their undies, RIGHT NOW, and repent of the sin.

As to our modern day clothing, T-shirts and jeans are common for men and women. We usually do not have much trouble telling one sex from another. I think we are trending toward a more unisex society as far as clothing is concerned, and honestly, I feel no conviction against that because it is not with the heart motive of sin, but seems to be more about function and comfort.

It isn't cross dressing for me to wear a kilt, but I sure do enjoy the freedom to. Unless a guy is cross dressing so he can pick up drunk straight guys at bars, and use deceit to have sex with them. . . I can't say I have much a problem with cross dressers (I have a neighbor that strolls in this manner). There, the problem is the deceit, not the clothes. My favorite comedian cross dresses (mentioned as full disclosure).

 

[wanderingone]

So are kilts evil?

Only if a woman wears them since they are garments meant for men .....

 

[moorronnie]

It isn't cross dressing for me to wear a kilt, but I sure do enjoy the freedom to. Unless a guy is cross dressing so he can pick up drunk straight guys at bars, and use deceit to have sex with them. . . I can't say I have much a problem with cross dressers (I have a neighbor that strolls in this manner). There, the problem is the deceit, not the clothes. My favorite comedian cross dresses (mentioned as full disclosure).[/quote]

I think this is the reason why that scripture forbidding crossdressing was put in the law of Moses: so people wouldn't enter into homosexual relationships through deceit. But this scripture just like the one forbidding combining different kinds of fibers is in the law of Moses, which Christ fulfilled and replaced with the law that we love God and our neighbor as ourselves.

Deceit is the sin that needs to be avoided here not what kind of clothes you wear. The New Testament never mentions anything about crossdressing but it does often mention that we need to avoid deceit. If you are crossdressing trying to 'pass' as a woman then that is deceitful and it should be avoided. If you wear clothing of the opposite gender because it turns you on, that's an issue too, but if you wear it simply because you enjoy it or be cause it's more comfortable for you then why in the world does it matter?

Anyway, here is my blog on the subject if you care to read more about what i think: Crossdressing, Christianity, Culture and Me

 

[moorronnie]

Only if a woman wears them since they are garments meant for men .....

Then why not just start selling 'mens' dresses and high heals. That way it won't be a 'sin' anymore, because they will be labled for 'men'.

 

[BlackSabb]

Then why not just start selling 'mens' dresses and high heals. That way it won't be a 'sin' anymore, because they will be labled for 'men'.

That is actually a good point. However, you will find that people in the fundamentalist camp want to have their cake and eat it too. For eg, they will argue that it's wrong for a man or woman to wear anything that pertains specifically to the opposite gender. However, when a new line of clothing product comes into existance that legitimises a particular article of clothing for a gender that didn't exist before, they still don't accept it.

For eg, some die hard fundie will tell you that a woman shouldn't wear a suit as it's a men's garment. These days however, suits are specifically made for women but are still suits in the traditional sense. But those fundies want to have their cake and eat it too. They say that traditionally, suits were for men and just because they are now made as womens, doesn't change that fact. So you can never win an argument with this logic.

But women can buy boots and overalls made for them, men can buy kilts and tights.

To me, "crossdressing" has a very specific meaning. It means wearing of clothing to emulate someone of the opposite gender. In other words, you want to look like someone of the opposite gender and you want to feel like someone of the opposite gender. A woman who works in the garden and wears heavy overalls with big sturdy boots and leather gloves is not crossdressing, despite the fact that those items are tradtionally strongly male. A woman who prefers jeans and flanalette shirts for comfort and practicality is not crossdressing. A man who jogs or cycles in lycra tights is not crossdressing. I myself have worn ordinary footed tights for the cold plenty of times. I don't do it to be a woman, look like one, feel like one and I have never gone beyond that one item of traditionally female clothing.

Crossdressing is going the whole hog. The vast majority of this thread has deviated into the spurious article or two of clothing traditionally associated with the opposite gender. This is not crossdressing. It's like doing a few engine modifications to your car and now you claim that you have a "racing car" without adding a roll cage, strengthened body work, altered suspension, exhaust etc, addition of wings and spoilers etc.

The same with "crossdressing". If you're not going the whole hog in order to look and feel like the opposite gender, you're not really crossdressing.

 

[Mling]

Then why not just start selling 'mens' dresses and high heals. That way it won't be a 'sin' anymore, because they will be labled for 'men'.

Yeah, pretty much. I mean, men wore "dresses:" long, non-bifurcated garments, for most of human history.

 

[Mling]

I think this is the reason why that scripture forbidding crossdressing was put in the law of Moses: so people wouldn't enter into homosexual relationships through deceit. But this scripture just like the one forbidding combining different kinds of fibers is in the law of Moses, which Christ fulfilled and replaced with the law that we love God and our neighbor as ourselves.

Deceit is the sin that needs to be avoided here not what kind of clothes you wear. The New Testament never mentions anything about crossdressing but it does often mention that we need to avoid deceit. If you are crossdressing trying to 'pass' as a woman then that is deceitful and it should be avoided. If you wear clothing of the opposite gender because it turns you on, that's an issue too, but if you wear it simply because you enjoy it or be cause it's more comfortable for you then why in the world does it matter?

Anyway, here is my blog on the subject if you care to read more about what i think: Crossdressing, Christianity, Culture and Me

Is your neighbor actually a man, actually hiding that fact, and actually pursuing deceitful sex with people he knows are straight?

Or is your neighbor, perhaps, a transsexual woman? Or a known cross dresser who pursues people who are into cross dressers?

For all that people complain about gay men dressing as women to "trick" straight men into sleeping with them, I've never seen or heard of a reliable case where that's actually happened. Usually, they mean, "this person of a gender I don't like was out in public, and, because I think people exist in public solely as an invitation for me to have sex with them, and I made the mistake of thinking they were a gender I'm attracted to, I feel cheated."

Or else it means, "I know other people better than they know themselves, so if I say this person is male, that means they are, and if they disagree, they're lying."

 

[Mling]

That is actually a good point. However, you will find that people in the fundamentalist camp want to have their cake and eat it too. For eg, they will argue that it's wrong for a man or woman to wear anything that pertains specifically to the opposite gender. However, when a new line of clothing product comes into existance that legitimises a particular article of clothing for a gender that didn't exist before, they still don't accept it.

For eg, some die hard fundie will tell you that a woman shouldn't wear a suit as it's a men's garment. These days however, suits are specifically made for women but are still suits in the traditional sense. But those fundies want to have their cake and eat it too. They say that traditionally, suits were for men and just because they are now made as womens, doesn't change that fact. So you can never win an argument with this logic.

But women can buy boots and overalls made for them, men can buy kilts and tights.

To me, "crossdressing" has a very specific meaning. It means wearing of clothing to emulate someone of the opposite gender. In other words, you want to look like someone of the opposite gender and you want to feel like someone of the opposite gender. A woman who works in the garden and wears heavy overalls with big sturdy boots and leather gloves is not crossdressing, despite the fact that those items are tradtionally strongly male. A woman who prefers jeans and flanalette shirts for comfort and practicality is not crossdressing. A man who jogs or cycles in lycra tights is not crossdressing. I myself have worn ordinary footed tights for the cold plenty of times. I don't do it to be a woman, look like one, feel like one and I have never gone beyond that one item of traditionally female clothing.

Crossdressing is going the whole hog. The vast majority of this thread has deviated into the spurious article or two of clothing traditionally associated with the opposite gender. This is not crossdressing. It's like doing a few engine modifications to your car and now you claim that you have a "racing car" without adding a roll cage, strengthened body work, altered suspension, exhaust etc, addition of wings and spoilers etc.

The same with "crossdressing". If you're not going the whole hog in order to look and feel like the opposite gender, you're not really crossdressing.

You're (rightly, I'd say), dividing this question into two:

1. The question of which clothing patterns are associated with which recognized gender.

and 2. The question of whether people are presenting themselves as a particular gender, as determined by their own internal sense of gender and the styles of the surrounding culture.

I'm with you up till there, but then you specify that, for it to be "cross-dressing," it has to be whole-hog, and there I start asking questions.

What about in-betweens? I mean, wearing a gendered garment that isn't associated with your culturally assigned gender, not just for practical reasons, but also not to emulate a different gender.

What I mean is, this past weekend I went to a dance. I (female) wore a suit. It was a suit cut and designed for women--it had an hourglass silhouette. From behind, you could identify me as female.

But under it, I bound my chest, and over it, I wore a tie, tied in a male fashion, and a boutonnière. If I wear it again in a similar context, I plan to get a dress shirt and cufflinks--which I will wear in a male fashion. Also, I wore a bit of makeup, and my hair is medium-length in a somewhat androgynous but feminine-of-center style.

Everything about this was deliberate, and it was the first time in my life that I did not feel crossdressed. It was the first time that I actually felt like myself in formal clothing, and could actually look in the mirror and say "that's me." I looked neither especially male, nor especially female...nor especially "butch" nor especially "femme." I looked like exactly what I am: a femalely androgynous whatchamacallit.

I feel cross-dressed in "woman's" clothing, and in "men's," and I don't go whole-hog in either direction, because both feel like deeply uncomfortable lies. The only honest way for me to dress is by mixing and matching until neither socially-assigned gender is recognizeable.

 

[moorronnie]

Is your neighbor actually a man, actually hiding that fact, and actually pursuing deceitful sex with people he knows are straight?

Or is your neighbor, perhaps, a transsexual woman? Or a known cross dresser who pursues people who are into cross dressers?

For all that people complain about gay men dressing as women to "trick" straight men into sleeping with them, I've never seen or heard of a reliable case where that's actually happened. Usually, they mean, "this person of a gender I don't like was out in public, and, because I think people exist in public solely as an invitation for me to have sex with them, and I made the mistake of thinking they were a gender I'm attracted to, I feel cheated."

Or else it means, "I know other people better than they know themselves, so if I say this person is male, that means they are, and if they disagree, they're lying."

Hmmm.... I'm not sure you understood my post, because it kind of sounds like you are disagreeing with me, but I agree with everything you said. The point that I was making is that if you do something with the intent to deceive people then there is something wrong with it. I wasn't saying that crossdressers or even transsexuals are such for that intent. I believe most of them are not. They, like myself are just trying to be the person they believe they are. I am a crossdresser in the sense that I feel more like myself when I wear women's clothes and makeup, but I don't do it to lead people into thinking I am a woman, and I don't do it to attract men. The point I was making is that you should be honest with people and honest with yourself about who you are, and your body is an important part of who you are. I was simply saying that I believe the original intent of this scripture was to teach us to avoid deceit because there were people that did dress as women in order to deceive people and there still are!

And no I don't think I have any homosexual crossdressing neighbors that are trying to have sex with my other male neighbors.... Most people are good and honest are not sick perverts! Though I did have a gay friend in high school that hit on me a few times, and yes that made me uncomfortable because I am not gay, but I don't think there is anything wrong with feeling uncomfortable with things like that. I think it's normal.

I'm trying to say that I believe we shouldn't judge people based on how they dress or want to dress, but at the same time we should be completely honest about our biological sex.

 

[moorronnie]

You're (rightly, I'd say), dividing this question into two:

1. The question of which clothing patterns are associated with which recognized gender.

and 2. The question of whether people are presenting themselves as a particular gender, as determined by their own internal sense of gender and the styles of the surrounding culture.

I'm with you up till there, but then you specify that, for it to be "cross-dressing," it has to be whole-hog, and there I start asking questions.

What about in-betweens? I mean, wearing a gendered garment that isn't associated with your culturally assigned gender, not just for practical reasons, but also not to emulate a different gender.

What I mean is, this past weekend I went to a dance. I (female) wore a suit. It was a suit cut and designed for women--it had an hourglass silhouette. From behind, you could identify me as female.

But under it, I bound my chest, and over it, I wore a tie, tied in a male fashion, and a boutonnière. If I wear it again in a similar context, I plan to get a dress shirt and cufflinks--which I will wear in a male fashion. Also, I wore a bit of makeup, and my hair is medium-length in a somewhat androgynous but feminine-of-center style.

Everything about this was deliberate, and it was the first time in my life that I did not feel crossdressed. It was the first time that I actually felt like myself in formal clothing, and could actually look in the mirror and say "that's me." I looked neither especially male, nor especially female...nor especially "butch" nor especially "femme." I looked like exactly what I am: a femalely androgynous whatchamacallit.

I feel cross-dressed in "woman's" clothing, and in "men's," and I don't go whole-hog in either direction, because both feel like deeply uncomfortable lies. The only honest way for me to dress is by mixing and matching until neither socially-assigned gender is recognizeable.

I think I like your definition of feeling cross-dressed. If I'm understanding you right feeling cross-dressed is dressing any way other than how you feel conforms to your identity.

Honestly, I would feel more like myself if I wore mainly women's clothes, but I don't usually do so because of how I know people would react to me, or what they would think of me. My goal is to feel like and be who I am, but let's be honest how people treat you does have an effect on how you feel about yourself no matter how hard to try to not let it get to you. I don't want to wear women's clothes because I want to feel like or be a woman, but because I feel more like myself. So I must agree with you that the narrow definition of crossdressing proposed in the previous poster is inadequate.

I think we need to stop redefining crossdressing. Crossdressing is simply the practice of wearing clothes that stereotypically pertain the the opposite sex. It doesn't matter if you are a man and only wear women's socks, technically you are crossdressing, but why make a big deal of it? Is it because the word crossdressing has negative connotations for you? Get over it! Personally I think having everything separated into men's and women's things is ridiculous. Do we really need male specific deodorant, shampoo, or nail clippers, socks, pants, shirts etc? Who cares what you wear as long as it's decent!

Personally I think people are far too touchy about this subject, and I think we need to realize that making such a big deal about clothing is exactly the opposite to what Jesus Christ wanted us to do:

25aTherefore I say unto you, Take no bthought for your life, what ye shall eat, or what ye shall drink; nor yet for your body, what ye shall put on. Is not the life more than meat, and the body than raiment? 26Behold the fowls of the air: for they sow not, neither do they reap, nor gather into barns; yet your heavenly Father feedeth them. Are ye not much better than they?
27Which of you by taking thought can add one cubit unto his stature?
28And why take ye thought for raiment? aConsider the lilies of the field, how they grow; they toil not, neither do they spin:
29And yet I say unto you, That even Solomon in all his glory was not arrayed like one of these.


If we shouldn't take much thought about what we wear, why should we take much though about what other people are wearing?

 

[Mling]

Hmmm.... I'm not sure you understood my post, because it kind of sounds like you are disagreeing with me, but I agree with everything you said. The point that I was making is that if you do something with the intent to deceive people then there is something wrong with it. I wasn't saying that crossdressers or even transsexuals are such for that intent. I believe most of them are not. They, like myself are just trying to be the person they believe they are. I am a crossdresser in the sense that I feel more like myself when I wear women's clothes and makeup, but I don't do it to lead people into thinking I am a woman, and I don't do it to attract men. The point I was making is that you should be honest with people and honest with yourself about who you are, and your body is an important part of who you are. I was simply saying that I believe the original intent of this scripture was to teach us to avoid deceit because there were people that did dress as women in order to deceive people and there still are!

And no I don't think I have any homosexual crossdressing neighbors that are trying to have sex with my other male neighbors.... Most people are good and honest are not sick perverts! Though I did have a gay friend in high school that hit on me a few times, and yes that made me uncomfortable because I am not gay, but I don't think there is anything wrong with feeling uncomfortable with things like that. I think it's normal.

I'm trying to say that I believe we shouldn't judge people based on how they dress or want to dress, but at the same time we should be completely honest about our biological sex.

Ah! I'm sorry! The neighbor comment was made in the post you were quoting. I mistakenly thought you said it yourself.

Sorry about the snark.

That said...I still raise an eyebrow when the topic of deception/honesty comes up in this context at all. I have still never heard of a person actually lying about their sex in a situation where total honesty is required, and I question what people mean when they talk about being completely honest about it. For me, I think the line would be drawn at not revealing a trans history to an extremely long-term partner, but even then, I mean...I just think it wouldn't be healthy to hide a significant part of your childhood and life from a long-term partner, but if somebody is in a place where their sex-assignment at birth is completely irrelevant to their current life, and their past isn't relevant to their present anymore, well...whatever, if they don't want to dig up their past.

That's the only case I can think of where somebody *might* hide their sex-assignment, and I might consider it something that maybe should be said...but even then...if it's truly irrelevant, then I see no reason why they would have to divulge it.

The situation that most people think of where honesty comes into play: guy dresses as woman, picks up other guy, brings him home and surprise! just doesn't happen. I mean...it doesn't.

People think it does because a middle stage does happen pretty frequently: person dresses in a way they feel comfortable; other person sees them, finds them attractive, starts trying to pick them up; they somehow discover that this person is not what they thought, and then blames them for existing to cover up their own feelings of shame at having found them attractive.

That is really the only general type of situation where the accusations of deceit come out, and it's only because the person who was attracted is trying to blame the person they were attracted to for their own feelings. Most likely, the person they were attracted to was just out on their business, playing golf, going to work, grabbing a snack for their kids, going out with friends... I see no reason why people would need to be "honest" about the entirety of their sexuality in that sort of situation--and that's the only situation where accusations of dishonesty or really made, so....

Yeah, personally, I think the entire issue of deceit is a giant combination strawman/red herring.

 

[Mling]

I think I like your definition of feeling cross-dressed. If I'm understanding you right feeling cross-dressed is dressing any way other than how you feel conforms to your identity.

Honestly, I would feel more like myself if I wore mainly women's clothes, but I don't usually do so because of how I know people would react to me, or what they would think of me. My goal is to feel like and be who I am, but let's be honest how people treat you does have an effect on how you feel about yourself no matter how hard to try to not let it get to you. I don't want to wear women's clothes because I want to feel like or be a woman, but because I feel more like myself. So I must agree with you that the narrow definition of crossdressing proposed in the previous poster is inadequate.

I think we need to stop redefining crossdressing. Crossdressing is simply the practice of wearing clothes that stereotypically pertain the the opposite sex. It doesn't matter if you are a man and only wear women's socks, technically you are crossdressing, but why make a big deal of it? Is it because the word crossdressing has negative connotations for you? Get over it! Personally I think having everything separated into men's and women's things is ridiculous. Do we really need male specific deodorant, shampoo, or nail clippers, socks, pants, shirts etc? Who cares what you wear as long as it's decent!

Personally I think people are far too touchy about this subject, and I think we need to realize that making such a big deal about clothing is exactly the opposite to what Jesus Christ wanted us to do:

25aTherefore I say unto you, Take no bthought for your life, what ye shall eat, or what ye shall drink; nor yet for your body, what ye shall put on. Is not the life more than meat, and the body than raiment? 26Behold the fowls of the air: for they sow not, neither do they reap, nor gather into barns; yet your heavenly Father feedeth them. Are ye not much better than they?
27Which of you by taking thought can add one cubit unto his stature?
28And why take ye thought for raiment? aConsider the lilies of the field, how they grow; they toil not, neither do they spin:
29And yet I say unto you, That even Solomon in all his glory was not arrayed like one of these.


If we shouldn't take much thought about what we wear, why should we take much though about what other people are wearing?

Yeah, seriously, though I go somewhat the other way in implementing that idea. Taking the "nothing should be considered cross-dressing," approach, rather than "almost everything is, but that's ok."

 

[BlackSabb]

What about in-betweens? I mean, wearing a gendered garment that isn't associated with your culturally assigned gender, not just for practical reasons, but also not to emulate a different gender.

What I mean is, this past weekend I went to a dance. I (female) wore a suit. It was a suit cut and designed for women--it had an hourglass silhouette. From behind, you could identify me as female.

But under it, I bound my chest, and over it, I wore a tie, tied in a male fashion, and a boutonnière. If I wear it again in a similar context, I plan to get a dress shirt and cufflinks--which I will wear in a male fashion. Also, I wore a bit of makeup, and my hair is medium-length in a somewhat androgynous but feminine-of-center style.

Everything about this was deliberate, and it was the first time in my life that I did not feel crossdressed. It was the first time that I actually felt like myself in formal clothing, and could actually look in the mirror and say "that's me." I looked neither especially male, nor especially female...nor especially "butch" nor especially "femme." I looked like exactly what I am: a femalely androgynous whatchamacallit.

I feel cross-dressed in "woman's" clothing, and in "men's," and I don't go whole-hog in either direction, because both feel like deeply uncomfortable lies. The only honest way for me to dress is by mixing and matching until neither socially-assigned gender is recognizeable.

What about "inbetweens?" Well, technically, by the letter of the law it can be considered crossdressing. But by the spirit of the law I don't believe it is. It is not dressing to identify completely with the opposite gender, though there are some elements of it. I see that as you finding your own identity which happens to be a mix of male and female, rather than you outright emulating a male. That is a different thing.

 

[moorronnie]

What about "inbetweens?" Well, technically, by the letter of the law it can be considered crossdressing. But by the spirit of the law I don't believe it is. It is not dressing to identify completely with the opposite gender, though there are some elements of it. I see that as you finding your own identity which happens to be a mix of male and female, rather than you outright emulating a male. That is a different thing.

The letter of the law? What law are we talking about? The law of Moses? Anyway, since the law of Moses is fulfilled in Jesus Christ then really the only thing we should be talking about with reference to the Law of Moses is the Spirit of the Law (or what is spiritual principle behind the law existing in the first place).

Honestly, I have to say that a practical purpose of having stereotypical male or female clothing is that it identifies a person as male or female, but I do wonder if this identification is really necessary. I mean gender is an important part of who we are, but so is our faith and I don't go around outwardly wearing faith specific clothing (I mean most faiths do wear specific clothing for particular ceremonies, but I mean we don't usually go
around wearing LDS specific jeans or Catholic specific t-shirts).
so why is it important to wear gender specific clothing?

 

[moorronnie]

Yeah, seriously, though I go somewhat the other way in implementing that idea. Taking the "nothing should be considered cross-dressing," approach, rather than "almost everything is, but that's ok."

I guess either way we're saying it really shouldn't matter that much to everybody else. Anyway, since 'cross-dressing' has developed negative connotations I agree with you that the "nothing should be considered cross-dressing" approach is better.

 

[religious&reasonable]

lol seriously?

Cross-dressing (while I am against it just for the question of "why?") is something that I cannot discuss since I have no idea if it is mentioned in the bible or not.

but everyone wore robes back then so what difference does it make?