That is one of the first steps towards ‘normalization; making something so prevalent that it is ‘accepted’ as usual.
I do not like the words, ‘normalization’ (as it carries the connotation that it is perverse although cross-dressing has been with us since time immemorial) or ‘acceptance’ (as if social acceptance should be a criteria for permission to do something ‘normal’ in the first place). Perhaps better terms are available.
However, in the past, oh, 70-years, people in certain nations or societies have become less imbued with that strident objection peculiar to people too prone to blaming others for their problems of perception. I wonder if some nations or societies simply don’t have any problem with gender variance.
The most consistent and relevant estimate amongst a wide range of speculative estimates is that 3% of males ‘dress’ for any length of time (if periodically). Still, I have always felt that to be a low estimate and there is the sense, as mentioned below, that the relevant statistics were meaningless because respondents were less than forthcoming.
There has also been a growing sense that what is wholly ‘masculine’ may not be so certain, and ditto for ‘feminine’. The definitions for masculinity, femininity and androgyny have, in some ways, achieved clarity as more focused and finite collections of attributes, traits and behaviours. This still confuses a lot of people who find the elaborate mosaic of human identities overwhelming and feel only comfortable with what they are familiar with.
But is spite of all of the setbacks, misapprehensions, condemnations and viciousness that have also become openly prevalent it still has become at least a topic for public discussion and therefore understanding. It has become better.
That is heartening.
- This reply was modified 1 month ago by Araminta Purdy.