Logo

Is it socially acceptable for individuals to wear clothing typically associated with the opposite gender? What are some reasons for or against this practice?

09.06.2025 03:06

Is it socially acceptable for individuals to wear clothing typically associated with the opposite gender? What are some reasons for or against this practice?

6) Transvestites – what most people first think of. For transvestites, crossdressing is an end in itself; motives many and various. For most, these go back to childhood or before birth and are obsessive.

If you’re going to do it, do it 100% and do it well. You’ll enjoy it all the more and so will the people around you. It’s often good for a round of applause or a free drink.

Reasons against it? Basically,

ispace's Resilience spacecraft lands on the moon this week: Here's how to see the landing zone on the lunar surface - Space

Socially acceptable? It depends on which bit of society you live in.

1) Occasional crossdressers - Hallowe'en, practical jokers, fancy dress parties, students' rags... etc.

5) Other professionals: the occasional spy/undercover policeman/criminal in disguise. Gay prostitutes.

AI could solve puzzles posed by twin stars in 'mere minutes or seconds on a single laptop' - Space

a) In serious entertainment, actors playing a role. From Mark Rylance as Cleopatra or Judi Dench as Olivia to Antony Perkins in Psycho. Japanese Kabuki and Nō players. Sopranos singing "breeches" roles in opera.

Don’t do it in places where it’s illegal, like Russia.

4) Entertainers.

Why did you choose not to join Mensa?

3) Fetish crossdressers - who use clothes as a substitute for, or an essential precursor to, sex. This is commonest among teenage boys, but usually disappears or develops into transvestism later. It is rarely seen in public, although the word "fetish" is often misapplied by those who should know better.

In Lancaster County, Pennsylvania or Salt Lake City it won’t be accepted. In Rio or Douarnenez at Mardi Gras it’s practically compulsory. (Seriously, I counted the men in skirts in a bar in Douarnenez: one in six.)

2) Fashion crossdressers - some metrosexuals and most women fall into this category. Women in trousers – seen as a sexual and social aberration in 1900 – had become the norm by 2000.

Why do Trump supporters believe Trump should deport the immigrants? These people you call "illegal immigrants" have lived here for many years, they have houses, jobs, how can you think they will just go back to their country, where they have nothing?

c) Drag queens and Drag kings – an exaggerated satirical sub-section of the light entertainment field.

d) Stunt doubles.

If it’s merely your sexual fetish — see 3) above — don’t do it in public. You’ll look ridiculous and possible offend decency laws.

Google Photos albums redesign adds Material 3 Expressive toolbar, QR code sharing - 9to5Google

Don’t do it unless you want to.

7) Transsexuals – for many of them the cross-dressing is merely an incidental stage in their transition of identity. Once achieved, the wearing of the clothes of the other sex becomes the norm, and can no longer be called crossdressing.

b) In light entertainment: female impersonators/comedians; pantomime dames in British theatre.

J.K. Rowling said that 65% of people in Britain are transgender. Where did she come up with that statistic?

There are many reasons. This can be broken down into the eight broad categories below, though most people only think of no.6:

Ignore people who will quote their religion at you (unless it’s your religion too).

8) Those forced into crossdressing. This category is included for completeness but barely seems to exist in real life today. It was however observed in the period 1850-1950 when boys were occasionally forced into girls' clothes as a punishment at school or in the home. It is a staple of fiction – to escape from danger (Some Like It Hot), to obtain a job (Tootsie, Mrs Doubtfire), or forced by a sadistic female relative (much transvestite erotic fiction).

Do you agree that firearms are the most common weapon used in homicides of spouses, intimate partners, children or relatives? Should this data influence gun control policies?