Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Pete Ross Junior

(404 posts)
17. Interesting question, but it gets fuzzy around the edges ...
Fri Mar 17, 2023, 04:27 PM
Mar 2023

There are certain kinds of clothes that are canonically women's clothes, such as dresses.
If a man wears those he is a "cross dresser".

But canonical men's clothes have been socially acceptable on a woman since the 1960s.
For example a woman wearing Levis and a work shirt might be stereotyped in some way, but not a "cross dresser".
And a woman's business suit differs from a man's only in cut.

If it were a high class formal occasion, a woman might get some comment if she showed up in a tuxedo, but nowhere near to the degree a man would in an evening gown.

I agree it's not fair, but "cross dressing" is definitionally pretty much a male thing in the prevailing culture.
YMMV with religious communities.

I think the advancing trend toward gender variety is chipping away at it, but we're far from there.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Latest Discussions»Alliance Forums»LGBT»what is so wrong for men ...»Reply #17