Welcome to Crossdresser Heaven, a safe and welcoming place for everyone in the crossdresser community.
Join Crossdresser Heaven today to participate in the forums.
It seems common for moderators of CD forums such as CDH to discourage the use and discussion of labels mostly to try and avoid divisive and inflammatory discourse. I generally sympathise with this approach because CDH and its sister sites should be a haven from the vitriol of your typical social media site. However, I think there are situations when labels can help us understand a little better what it means (and what it doesn't mean) to be a CD and I have a couple of examples from my own experience.
The expression cross-dresser is of course a label which CDH is happy to use in it's name but when I was becoming an adolescent in the UK in the 1960's and my CD inclinations were beginning to blossom I couldn't put a name to what I was. I remember seeing a BBC show about April Ashley who was a famous transgender model at the time and being slightly alarmed that I was transgender and I might need to undergo a sex change. It wasn't until a few years later that I first saw the word "transvestite" and this was a real light bulb moment for me. A bit of research in the local library (remember the 1960's were well before the internet) and I realised that a transvestite was exactly what I was, that being a TV wasn't that unusual and that I wasn't a freak. Although now having a label for what I was, didn't exactly get rid of all the doubts and anxieties (it was the 1960's!) it did provide a small degree of comfort I didn't have before.
Also, in a recent post I asked if other CDH members had experienced feelings of autogynephilia (AGP) which based on some of your replies I now know is a controversial label and concept although I wasn't aware of this until recently. However, in what I think was a measured debate a number of members responded that the idea of self-desire is something that resonates with them and is not an abnormal part of being a CD. Again, I took some comfort from there being a label for my feelings and that others out there experienced them as well.
Now I'm not advocating a label free-for-all but in some circumstances I think labels are a useful short-hand for helping us to deal with the daily complexities of being a CD.
Categorisation and classification is an essential part of communication without which everything would be just a "thing". The word "label" may be in some circumstances considered pejorative, especially in the sense of a label being applied to a person rather than it being a category with which the individual identifies.
Me calling you "a tranny" might offend you, me calling myself "a tranny" in jest is okay. I identify as bi-gender and I'm happy to be classified or labelled as such, part of which means to the outside world I crossdress, however if part of me is female then it is not crossdressing it is just dressing as the appropriate gender.
See, its complicated ...
Categorisation and classification is an essential part of communication without which everything would be just a "thing".
Cathy has hit the point here. Human brains are innate lablers. All things we encounter need a name, a category - something so we can classify it. We have labeled literally every animal we know of (in Latin naturally).
So to me there's no separating our basic human instinct in this or any instance. However, what we can do is try to be more aware in our use of them for those who are in a more sensitive state.
Then again, I'd restate my standard line: Someone's reaction to you says everything about them, and nothing about you. So if someone calls me 'tranny' - be it intentionally mean or not - well that says no more about me than if they'd called me Napoleon. (shrug) Smile and go on about your business. If I let that bother me, then my reaction is what's telling because that's the part I get control over.
I don't get all wrapped around the axle about labels. Heck, I label things - my kids alway joked with me about that.
As for me, I "label" myself a hetero crossdresser, wifey says that I am a crossdresser and rarely a transvestite (I prefer the latter).
Labels are all around us, for me it ain't no thang, I just do me and try to stay happy.
Have fun, Staci...
Having a headline label like 'crossdresser' certainly has its uses. Without it, how many of us would have found this site?
Beyond the headline though, labels can be meaningless and therefore fail. Would every member within a labelled group see themselves in the generally accepted or clinical description of that label? Particularly if it covers a really wide range, can a label be successfully divided into labelled sub-groups?
Ironically given that it's us humans who make the labels, I think that they fail the worst when used to describe people and our behaviours. It's like we forget that they are all really just subsets of a larger group which, rather than being distinct from each other, can overlap.
Personally, I have never been conflicted about my gender. I started dressing in my preteen years and have always wanted to be a girl when I was wearing girl clothes, when I wasn't I was a boy. Looking back now, I can't explain why I have excepted me being both genders without questions but I always have.
Like Cathy, for years I have considered myself bi-gender. Because I have never thought of myself as a guy in a dress when I'm Jessi. I see Jessi as the female version of me. I am happier as Jessi but my other gender has its role to play.
In my opinion and my opinion only, I think most crossdressers put to much emphasis on trying to be just one gender. If your happy with both versions of yourself then be yourself.
I hope every woman here finds peace in who you are and except the inner beauty you all possess!!
Labelling was so simple in the early days like you Veronica there wasn't much about so it was simple. As you say, Transvestite and Transgender. I feel the newer term 'Crossdresser' or 'Transgender' is much nicer.
In the last decade 'labelling' has become a huge thing as has 'spectrums' and it doesn't just cover us. I think that the word 'Trans' has become a wide meaning for people to attach a label or indeed invent a label to add to a very long list. It also involves sexuality to add another dimension. Each want to be different and I believe that this does those of us crossdressers or transgendered a disservice, is counterproductive to our needs and publics perception of us.
I can see from some posts that it adds to the confusion we feel about ourselves, 'What am I', 'Who am I' and trying to find a label adds to angst.
In the late sixties there was Flower power and Unisex clothing which raised eyebrows but no body demanded any different rights, it was fashion, a lifestyle that moved on to glam rock and new wave eras, boys wore makeup and looked effeminate, there was androgyny and a bit of gender bending but it was taken as a fashion and it moves on. These were times when the transgender and crossdressers felt more at ease in coming out as attitudes changed and a better understanding and acceptance followed as you were either one or the other.
I may have a contentious view but a lot of it is transient lifestyle or fashion identity where you move on at some point. Somehow labelling seems to infer that the individuals under that label should be afforded 'rights' and privilege which has upset a few groups and individuals hence the review of laws and also previous laws being rescinded or reviewed as the backlash to this. There was so much progress in acceptance and understanding of us which gave us protections that are in danger of disappearing.
I go back to the simpler days. If you wear womens clothes you are a crossdresser. If you believed you were the opposite sex and wanted to change you are Transgender, sexuality or preferences isn't a consideration. You were one or the other and nothing in between.
It is my personal view and apologise if I offended anyone but sometimes simpler is best.
I think that labels are sometimes necessary as a way of helping our brains organize things.
My label = A non-transitioning transgender woman living full time as a female.
Whoa, another conceptually difficult topic! (I’m new not only to this site but any social media site, so I’m not sure what I expected, and I feel way out of my element.)
Having said that, I recognize that labels serve a useful purpose, as descriptive and for categorization. But then comes the difficulties — what are the labels used for, how are they defined, who gets to define them, when do they shift from descriptive to pejorative, and what happens if you inadvertently “misuse” them.
And adding a social science aspect to it strikes me as making it even more complicated, which may be why I’m content to be a “crossdresser” but I don’t think I want to be an “autogynephiliac” (assuming that’s the right label).
Many decades ago, I took a college course in “abnormal” psychology, where we (ignorantly) referred to those who deviated from the “norm” as “deviants.” I hope those labels are history now, especially when I think fondly of friends and colleagues who most of us would now consider to be “normal” but would have then been otherwise labeled by the textbook, as I guess so would I.
Maybe I’ll have a nightcap. Cheers!
Sally, I think all I was trying to say is that sometimes labels can help us to firstly realise there other people out there who share some of our "behaviours" (for want of a better word) and then home in on those who we can best discuss those behaviours with. For example, how could I have found CDH without knowing I was a cross-dresser
But I agree, labels used as an insult are not helpful.
Veronica xx
People like to categorize things. It just makes things simpler, but there are rarely clear demarcations between categories with a lot of overlap or fuzzy boundaries. Labels are helpful, but should not be relied on too heavily.
Personally I am very ok with being labelled as a crossdresser or a transvestite or tranny or indeed any of the other numerous terms that are used to describe crossdressing. I know the terms are often used in a derogatory and hurtful way, but being a crossdresser is only one part of me. A part that I am very happy to be. I am of course not only a crossdresser, but many other things, a husband (wife?), a father (mother?), a scientist, a table tennis player, a history lover, an artist and so many other things. As indeed we all are, we are complex people made up of many things. For me labels are only bad when that one thing is seen as the only thing that you are.
I am sorry if others see these terms as negative, insulting, hurtful words (I hope I am not being naive about such labels) and I do think that everyone should be allowed to use the terms or not for themselves. But for me, as Frankenfurter said: “I’m just a sweet transvestite from Transsexual, Transylvania.” and I’m rather happy and proud to be so.
So come on ladies, lets claim the labels back and stop the negative connotations the public at large may ascribe to them; for me these terms describe an inspiring and usually happy way of life that hurts no one, but brings peace and tranquillity to those of use who are what those labels summarily describe.
Hugs
Christine
I think labels are a necessary evil. It gives the animal a name (as we say in The Netherlands), but it also creates stigma. The most exaggerated examples often create the image people have of something. By the way, the Dutch word for 'transvestite' is 'travestiet', which is more similar to the English word 'travesty'. Plus, the 'tiet' in the word unintentionally has the meaning 'tit'. 😆
'Crossdresser' sounds good to me; I see myself as a man who once in a while wears clothes that are seen as feminine. But even more, I just would like to be seen as an androgynous dresser.
I started dressing as a girl in the 1950s, around five years of age, and thankfully, labels have caused me only minor issues.
Christine Jorgensen was a big media story in the 1950s and into the 60s, and the media labeled her with several different transgender terms. This caused some confusion with my crossdressing in that for a time I began to question my own status, as far transitioning.
In college in the 1960s, with access to a university library for research, I learned that I was a transvestite, a label I never heard of.
By the 1970s, the media was now fascinated with the story of Renee Richards and again tossing around all types of transgender terminology labels. They were doing this label tossing just at a time when I was trying to explain to my future wife what the difference was between a CD and a transgendered person.
Sadly, the media gave no publicity to Virginia Prince and Carol Beecroft, who in 1976 formed TriEss, the national organization for crossdressers. That would have made my job easier explaining to my future wife who crossdressers are. Remember, there was no internet back then in the 1970s.
My point? Labels? They can be a nuisance, but necessary at times.
Labels helped me to determine where I am on this spectrum. Over the years I have determined that I am not transgendered, TG or trans. Nor I do fall under any dysphoria terms or multiple genders. A few years ago, it became clear to me that I am a crossdresser. I enjoy wearing the clothes of the opposite sex because of the way it makes me feel. Until that point, I was constantly trying to determine what applied to me. I understand that other folks use these terms, but personally I don't care for Transvestite, tranny or gurl for my situation. I am a crossdresser or CD and I am good with that.
I hope that adds something to this interesting topic.
Thanks for listening.
Denise
😊