Just finished reading "Normal" by Amy Bloom, Random House 2002.
http://www.amybloom.com/?page_id=16
I read the cover and the Acknowledgements and Preface in the library. Then,
when I came home, of course I read "Conservative Men in Conservative
Dresses" first, then read "Afterward". Then I read "Conservative Men in
Conservative Dresses" again. Then read "Afterword" again. Then I read
"Hermaphrodites with Attitude" and finally, read the first section of the
book, "The Body Lies."
Nobody is going to like what I am going to say, but crossdressing is a form
of sexual entertainment. Where sexual entertainment starts in any activity
is a fuzzy line. Certainly, by the time you are looking at a commercial on
television for just about anything, you are into the realm of sexual
entertainment. Then, it becomes a matter of intensity as to whether society
considers it pornographic.
In a lot of ways, crossdressing is the same as looking at porn or going to
the jiggly room. In one very specific way, it is different. There is some
desire on the part of most crossdressers to see the reactions of others to
our presentation of femininity. It starts with our own reactions to seeing
our selves dressed as a member of the opposite sex and then there is the
further desire to see the reaction of others to our presentation. We know
that the reactions can be wildly varied and it is the excitement of the
possibilities that is so stimulating.
And we, who are the creators of these feminine images, also have unfettered
access to these women that we have created. (Although, physically, it is
difficult to ... mentally, we see no restriction.) And, its a two way
street. As a man, I can have the woman I make myself into any time I want
and as the woman I make myself into, I can surrender myself to the man who
made me without consequence. Wanda Joy would never surrender to another
man, she is mine and mine alone. Narcissism to the nth degree.
My wife gets it. I have never put it in these words before or had it so
cogently put together before, but this wasn't Amy Bloom's conclusion. She
feels sorry for most of us, if I am reading her right, because what
heterosexual crossdresser's do is so vividly against societal perceptions of
normal that we are jailed by the doing of it. Nobody, but another
heterosexual crossdresser, has even the slightest chance at understanding us
and even supposedly sexually liberal communities like homosexuals, lesbians
and transsexuals barely tolerate us.
But now, I understand that the man who cheats on his wife may be more common than me, but he is doing the same thing with another woman that I, in a way, do with myself. That is, he pursues an image of a woman to meet his needs. (Which is to say about the cheating husband, he really could care less about the actual woman, it is the image that he has in his mind that he is in pursuit of.) On the other hand, crossdressers don't actually physically cheat on their wives with another woman. A guy sitting in the jiggly room for the 500th time is doing the same thing that we are doing, but he is too lazy to put on the nail polish, makeup, wigs and heels.
Crossdressers aren't normal in all ways except crossdressing.
Unfortunately, (and here is where everybody is going to blow their top)
crossdressing is normal aberrant behavior for men. By that I mean, although
looking at pornography, going to strip clubs or objectizing women in
whatever way we men do it is generally perceived as something men ought not
do, most men at some time in their life do it. Crossdressing is simply one of those things on that limb of the sexual identity and behavior tree that entertains us.
It doesn't even have to be that stark an action. It could be seeing the woman as the weaker sex, believing that you should drive the car, just because you are the man. The same prejudices that make us think that secretaries, nurses and elementary school teachers are women, while police officers, construction workers and airline pilots are men are subliminally at play.
What disappointed me with Amy Bloom's analysis is that she doesn't pick it
up, (and I add in a way that will offend women) probably because she is a
woman. While she does pick up that sexual identity and preference of sexual
partner are not the same, not on the same branches of the tree, she misses
(almost deliberately) what becomes so evident as you read the anecdotes of
the people she met to write about in her book. Crossdressing is a manly
thing to do.
Transsexualism and Hermaphroditism is not on the same branch. Where she
does an excellent job explaining the intersexed, and a fair job with the
transsexuals, it seems she was somewhat confused, even though amused, by
crossdressers. Even in the order of her book, she presents transsexuals,
then crossdressers, then intersexed. Yet, her own discussions show that
professional medical intervention is almost always required for intersexed
individuals and almost always sought by transsexuals, while crossdressers
never need medical attention simply for crossdressing. (Which is not to say
that crossdressing can not be a manifestation of some other physiological or psychological condition requiring professional intervention. In other words, if you are crossdressing because you are a transsexual or if you crossdress as a part of MPD or other issue.)
Her book makes it clear, even if she doesn't acknowledge it, that gender
identity and sexual preference is not a spectrum. It is a tree with
branches.
A P.S.
NORMAL only deals with F-t-M transsexuals "The Body Lies: F-t-M
Transsexuals", who are segregated from "Conservative Men in Conservative
Dresses, Heterosexual Crossdressers." The third section of the book refers
to "Hermaphrodites with Attitude: The Intersexed" and the book concludes
with her discussion "Afterword: On Nature." She makes statement which
assume facts not in evidence, particularly when it comes to crossdressing.
"No one knows why the loss of the mother early in life lead some men to have
extramarital affairs and others to crossdress." [NORMAL pg. 134] Tiger
Woods and I still both have our mothers.
If the proper word for crossdressing people on the sexual entertainment
branch is transvestism, I can take that. After all, I call my self a
trans-dress-tight. Sexual entertainment, by my definition, does not mean
that the person is necessarily actually having sex, but that they are
engaged in some desired activity where sex is a component, either because of
sexual identity, sexual orientation, sexually stimulating acts as a
participant or observer or some combination thereof.
Amy Bloom writes: "The crossdressers of Tri-Ess insist that crossdressing
is not about sexuality, and therefore not about sex. They are right about
the first, and we can all stop assuming that any man who wears a dress is
gay. But they are not right about the second, and their assertion that
crossdressing is their creative expression of both genders is unsettling
because it is at such odds with their behavior, their natures, and their
marriages. These men are as far from gender warriors and feminists as
George W. himself." [NORMAL, pg 95] I do not agree that you can generally
say it is at odds with their behavior, their nature and their marriages.
Instead, I believe that you will find specific instances of conflict if that
is all you seek. If you look for harmony, I believe you can find that as
well. I'd be willing to bet that there are men who dress up like a maid to
clean around the house on a fairly regular basis. But like Amy, I didn't do
the research or ask the questions to support that conclusion.
My point is that Amy Bloom has adopted this continuous spectrum belief. I
say our sexuality, both in how we express gender and the sexual practices we
find preferable, are individual choices based upon the radical concept of:
What We Each Individually Like. Therefore, when she looks at a group that
has crossdressing in common, and concludes that everyone who crossdresses fits neatly on a line between the straightest straight guy and the gayest gay guy, (which is not exactly what she says but is a fairly drawn summary of where she leaves it,) she is wrong.
But, to be fair to Ms. Bloom, her article on the Intersexed really got me to
thinking and taking more seriously the biophysical component of gender
assignment, expression and sexual practice. We are not simply the creatures
of our minds. Too many presumptions are drawn too quickly about sexual
orientation and identity. Too many people are too eager to enforce what
their experiences have told them is NORMAL on others.
What I realized, contrary to Ms. Bloom's analysis, is that crossdressing was
more NORMAL than even I thought prior to reading her book. Not because of
her statements, but because I realized that she took a position that, (and I
know this is sexist sounding) only a woman could take. She was blind to the
fact that the men she interviewed who were crossdressing enjoyed
crossdressing. What became obvious to me was that the guy sitting in the
jiggly room or watching porn on the big screen at home is really doing the
same thing as (at least some) crossdressers, enjoying a form of sexual
entertainment.
I think the key is to refrain from judging anyone. But, one more thing is
key, to have compassion for people who experience internal conflict over who
they are simply because they occasionally put something on the outside of
their body which may not be consistent with their genetic sexual identity.
Compassion is too lacking in almost every aspect of our society anyway, so
it is no wonder that it is missing here.
--
Enjoy,
Wenjoy.
Who made up these fashion rules, anyhow?
I first began wearing stockings, then high heels and followed by everything else...panties, bra, miniskirts, perfume and make up. I loved the way it felt being dressed up and feeling sexy. The most significant part of the excitement was the visual aspect...seeing myself in the mirror.
