I think he looks like a cross between David Beckham and Gordon Ramsay, hes probably their secret love child (what's the emoticon for "Shakes head confidently"?)!

I think it's his smile that's creppy.

He looks like someone from telly but I can't identify who it was. Wow, that's helpful huh?

Reading that 'don't be an airhead' article from yesterday. I think it's less a problem about a type of presentation, rather that he sounds like a bit of a prick.

But presumably they've worked something out if he's dressing up around her? If she doesn't like what he's doing then maybe they should renegotiate instead, agree that he does it when she's not in or something.

A vast proportion of dressing up goes for the stereotype of that person, whether it's the little girl dressing up 'like Mummy' or an actor taking on a role, it's just the piece they are acting in that determines how much of the 'stereotype' in their brain they let out.

Gah, I guess I'm being typically liberal and trying to find a way to blame both of them while feeling superior myself.

Erm, yes.

That is...

< treading very carefully >

An actor playing a policeman in a panto is going to go broader than if he was doing Pinter.

I meant that an actor is going to have an idea of the behavioural characteristics in his brain that signifies what will make the audience think 'he's a policeman' beyond his costume. How much he let's into his performance is going to depend on the work.

Tying this into TVs and TGs and their performance of gender however, I think I need to be a lot less tired or a lot more drunk. Let me come back to you on this...

Maybe that's where the issue some natal women have with TVs come from — in the mannerisms that are adopted, along with the clothing.

Checking her website it seems that at some point she transitioned, so there's also the issue of those transsexual women who start off as male transvestites, as opposed to the various ways male transvestite does not equal pre-op MtF transsexual...

Perhaps I should stop while I'm behind...

I see the little character. It's....cute?

Okay. I'm not at my typical computer and this is a long, and old rant. But I'm gonna throw my hat in for a minute.

I have an interesting perspective kind of like Koan does. I'm a pre-op MTF transsexual who used to be a male transvestite till I sorted my stuff out.

I've discovered that as I've moved farther into my time IDing as a transsexual I've felt less need to be outlandish like some TVs (myself included at that time) were. I've realized that being glam and done up for parties and such can be done, but you can't live that way. I've begun developing a more solid female identity and as that's happened I've become more 3D and less of a caracature if you will. Not that all TVs are bad caracatures. It's just that living day to day as a woman you.....flesh out. You drop impractical things and pick up other stuff. I'm younger than most on here at the ripe age of 19 and so I do on occasion (and can afford to on occasion) gasp act like a teenage girl. It happens. Sometimes I'm too deadly serious. But I think going back to what Koan said, I've begun to move to a place where I can define myself as a woman without all the trappings.

Sorry...that's a bit shite as far as how it's said.

Sorry...that's a bit shite as far as how it's said.

Well, it made perfect sense to me!

Something I've read or heard, over and over, is that "genital reconstruction surgery can't turn a man into a woman, or a woman into a man". I agree — but genital reconstruction surgery can turn a woman into a much happier woman, or a man into a much happier man. (Assuming, of course, that one accepts that men and women are defined by more than just whether they were born with an innie or an outie).

Personally, I don't believe that transvestism (as I understand it) and transsexuality are related, or different points on a scale, or the like. But maybe they look alike to people who are neither — and perhaps the (understandable?) fact that experimenting with the clothing and presentation of the non-natal sex is one of the first ways that a transsexual person can explore their identity — that's not the same as saying, "I began as a transvestite, but turned transsexual". More like, "I began presenting as a transvestite, before I began presenting as me".

In other words, I don't think that you can start off as a transvestite, and then become transsexual. Which means that, on the occasions that I wore women's clothing before transitioning, I wasn't engaging in transvestic practices — I was trying to ease the disconnect between body and soul in the only way I knew how, or could face, then. Once I'd begun to transition, that easing was available in different forms (social interactions, hormones, surgery) and dressing / make-up became matters of camouflage (in the early days) and "box-ticking", for want of a better phrase. Over the last year, I've worn make-up, or dressed in characteristically female external clothes, much less than I used to — because I don't need to, any more. The disconnect has been removed.

I sense that some of the writer of that original piece's frustration might have its roots in this — and I think it's unfair if transvestites are blamed for the actions and attitudes of people who are not transvestites, but appear to be.

Those transvestites who embody gross stereotypes, though — they deserve all the derision they get! <- Tongue very firmly in cheek!

If a comment of mine spans more than a page, it's a sure sign of a brain fart, not an intelligent response. I think what I was trying to say is this:

• Transvestism — putting on a mask (periodically in practise, maybe more frequently in spirit);

• Transsexuality — taking off a mask (permanently).

Neither is "better" nor "worse" than the other — but they're not the same, and problems occur if people think that they are the same (or try to make them appear the same).

IMHO.

Anyone else think the new 'link' icon (which I am seeing in Firefox 2/WinXP Pro, BTW) looks like handcuffs?

Hmm. Just me, perhaps.

I have to disagree with Koan. What she says comes perilously close, I feel, to saying that only men wear masks or can be camp or be fetishistic — which is manifestly untrue. Not all women dress sensibly.

I don't have a problem with anybody disagreeing with me — I expressed an opinion. But I don't see how what I said "perilously close" to what you're implying I said — I didn't say that, didn't mean to say that, nor do I believe that.

It wouldn’t hurt if people are looking for what constitutes being a woman, to go to a lesbian bar and see the different forms that being a woman takes (from stone butch to high femme).

Also I would say at least as Brighton goes both camp and particularly drag are dieing out, odd but true.

I thought what Koan said was pretty simple:

• The transvestite 'mask' is their 'alter ego', their 'other self'. For example: G's mask is Siobhan.

• The transsexual 'mask', the mask that is 'permanently removed', is the outward signs of their birth gender, which is at odds with their, for want of a better word, 'spiritual' gender.

As for women wearing 'masks'; what about, as Ciara pointed out, the 'stone butch'? Or the 'drag king'? Both female and not necessarily in the process of transitioning, but wearing 'masks'; and, if I may be so bold, exhibiting 'transvestite' behaviour. Which brings us back to...

Then again, I've probably got a firm grasp on the wrong end of the stick (wouldn't be the first time); so I'll leave you all to mull this over while I put the kettle on.