How long did you think about crossdressing ?

[Elizabeth]

Wendy,

How long did you think about crossdressing before you actually did it? I realize that it does not apply to everyone but I thought about wearing girls clothes long before I got up the courage to do it.

I can only speak directly for myself and my experience, but I am a crossdresser whether I am dressed or not. And I have gone years without dressing, but that did not change the fact that I was a crossdresser.

I have witnessed a large variety of personal acceptance of ones own crossdressing since I have been here. I have personally been in denial about my own status as a crossdresser. There are many crossdressers that have never told anyone of thier secret desires, but are in a circumstance where the fear of gettting caught. or the consequences of getting caught are so great, that they refrain from dressing. This act of refraining does not change thier status as a crossdresser, in my opinion. As far as I can tell, being a crossderesser is a state of being, not an act of wearing clothes. I don't stop being a crossdresser everytime I am in drab.

Wendy Seymone wrote:
Maybe I am missing something, but I don't see where Heidi ever asked anyone to leave this forum.

Quote:
I have a new T-Girl forum and would love for you girls to stop bye and join us..

I guess I am behind on the technology and everyone but me has two desktops, because if I am reading a thread that asks me to visit a site, at some point I will have to stop reading the one I am reading, and go to the other site. Leaving is only a phrase stating I personally(because of my lack of two desktops and ability to read two threads simultaniously)can not be reading two sites at the same time. I never intended that phrase to mean actually quitting this one. Sorry for not wording everything perfectly. I thought that was a common phrase to mean being at a different site.

If I were opening a new restaurant I would not go into another restaurant to invite people to mine. Regardless of the quality of food at either restaurant. But that is just me.

Love always,
Elizabeth

[Kathy]

OK, my penny's worth...

The last figure I read, in a published, non-internet, book by a reasonably reliable member of the medical profession was that about 5% of the world's male population are crossdressers. It was also stated that, for much the same reasons given by Elizabeth, this was considered to be a very conservative understatement of the real figure. Now, if that doesn't translate into a number of 7 figures or more, then I don't know what will.

It is also well known that many people use laughter as a mask for suffering. It is also well known that many people will mask their true nature on internet forums. Thus it is not surprising to see a lot of *giggling*. But it doesn't take much to read many of the posts on this forum alone, let alone many of the other forums, to see that there is a whole lot of suffering going on out there caused either in whole or in part by crossdressing.

As for Heidi's post, I too found this forum because someone else had posted a link to it on another CD forum. Had Heidi worded her post differently, like "...I found another CD forum that looks like it might be fun to check out...", would it then have been more accepted? The end result would have been the same.

That she was honest about what she posted should be applauded rather than derided. That her intentions were honorable, I accept as she gave no reason for me to believe otherwise.

Marda, if a tree falls in the forrest and there is no one around to hear it, does it make any noise?

If a man speaks in the forrest and there is no woman to hear him, is he still wrong?

[Wendy Seymone]

It is no big Elizabeth... If you are happy, then I am definitely happy for you.

I do believe the term crossdresser, and please correct me if I am wrong, is commonly defined as "someone who enjoys wearing clothing and accessories intended for a different gender role."

[Kathy]

Wendy, if a person would enjoy it but, due to circumstances beyond his/her control, is unable to partake, is s/he not still a crossdresser?

[Marda]

~
Well, Your Honour ... The People Rest ...
We present an estimate from a usually reliable source ... and people laughing to disguise their suffering ...

Will That Be Guilty or Not Guilty
Your Honour ???

~
If we are talking actual "World Population" ... since China is a billion or so strong ... *and* the fastest growing world economy these days ...
maybe that's where all the CDs are hiding these days ...
reports in my area from people *actually visiting* China for pleasure and/or business (orientals & caucasians) is that the majority of Chinese citizens are so poor they can't afford bras & panties ...

That could explain the numbers we can't find ... the suffering ... and why we don't see them on American CD Forums ... hmmmmm ... fascinating ...
~

Love / Marda

ps: the "two" cases of "suffering" I "read about" on an Internet forum recently didn't involve any laughing or giggling ... rather, people confessing to substance abuse to dull the pain of facing the "CD issue" in the "typical domestic" situation ...

~
pss: this is all said with full respect for one of our own members here who has recently "sought opinions" and reported "action taken" to pursue outside support ...
"That" to me is something "I" could feel comfortable presenting "in court" !
The rest to me is just Internet_Chatter
/M

[Wendy Seymone]

Very good question Kathy.

My answer would be no, if a person does not crossdress I would not label them a crossdresser. Their reasons for not dressing, or any enjoyment they think they might obtain from dressing are irrelevant.
Until that person actually crossdresses they are simply curious about crossdressing.

[Kathy]

Hi Wendy,

Interesting answer. Given the situation I presented I can see the validity in your arguement.

However, going back to your definition as "someone who enjoys wearing clothing and accessories intended for a different gender role", let me ask just one more question.

It has now been more than two months since I wore any kind of female garment or accessory. Whether this is simply a temporary down time as I have had before or something else, I cannot say. But, the fact is, I do not now enjoy dressing in female clothing.

Am I not now a crossdresser?

[Wendy Seymone]

Too funny... Does Dolly Parton sleep on her back??

You can be anything you want to be sweetie!!

If you are just taking some time away from crossdressing, you can still be a crossdresser...
Unless of course, you would prefer to be known as a former crossdresser until you dress again.

[Kathy]

Hi Marda,

Just a couple of thoughts here.

The number of people who are known to be crossdressers is, obviously, quantifiable and with a bit of research can be verified. The number of people who are treated for HIV is, obviously, quantifiable and verifiable. But, what of the people who are carrying HIV and don't know it? They are invisible to the medical community and society at large. They cannot be quantified. They cannot be verified. All we have to go on is that "usually reliable" members of the medical community tell us they are out there. Just because we don't see them, does that mean they don't exist? Just because we don't see those closet CDs, does that mean they don't exist?

I was 16 when Neil Armstrong took his first steps on the moon. My eyes were glued to the TV screen along with millions ("usually reliable" people said there were millions watching around the world) of others around the world. But, were we watching Armstrong? Was he really on the moon? Or were we really watching some actor on some elaborate movie set? All we have to go on is that "usually reliable" people tell us that Neil Armstrong actually did walk on the moon.

Or is it just internet-chatter? Oh, that's right, in 1969 Al Gore hadn't invented the internet yet.

[Alexandra]

Kathy,

I'm with you on your figures . . . if I recall, one publication estimated the CD/TG size about half the gay population. If 10% of the population is gay, then that 5% figure is in the ballpark if not spot on.

At any rate, the "not many CDrs/not many suffering" argument has been addressed. Members and lurkers can follow up with their own research and come to their own conclusions.

I'd also point out a "Being There" effect. It is possible for some CD/TGrs to go through life and be exposed only to positive experiences. I personally don't know of one, nor ever read about one.

[Marda]

Hi Folks,
~
Last week I read a report by a "usually reliable" source which declared an "estimated" 125,000 people protesting against Bush last Sunday in downtown NYC according to one observer, and 500,000 according to another observer ...

*Now* we'll have to get into "definitions" of *what is a protester?* ... it may also help to analyze the *agendas* and *motives* of the various "observers" ... and we're *Obviously* going to have to conduct a test of "observer's" *Numeracy* ...
~

Maybe there's even some *Career* potential here
~

/ Marda

[Ahzz]

Either way you look at the posited methods of counting "our" populations, and our reference populations, it's still seems like it is quite a large number.

The same problem of cencus taking exists for the wiccan and other pagan social groups. If a group is inherantly hidden, then it's very hard to get a census with any sort of moderate margin of error. The only way to get that margin of error down would be if the census was taken by someone that is a part of that hidden group IMO. For they are the only ones with a decent chance of getting honest answers out of people. Even on blind surveys, people will still tend to shy away from admitting to being something that is publicly (or percieved to be) derided or seen as "demented". That's our human nature of shying away from being a part of somethign that our psyche is telling us is wrong, whether it is or not. Even if it's a compulsion that we can't ignore.

I also believe that the borderless phenomenon of the Internet leads to false inflation of the numbers due to it's inherant globalizing of groups vs localizing of groups.

SO we have many factors acting against us getting a true sense of our numbers IMO. So how DO we get a realistic sense of our numbers without hitting a margin of error that makes the census worthless by mathematical statistics standards?