Grayson Perry irks me

I like Grayson Perry. He makes me laugh and some of his work makes me think. But I don't think that should make him immune from questioning and criticism.

I love clothes and I've worn loads of outfits that have made me feel fabulous but never, as far as I can recall, sexually aroused. So yeah, I was discomforted to read Perry say this and I can't pretend otherwise.

However we only know this about him because he's said so. I think judging people by their thoughts and their fantasies is a very dangerous path indeed so I'm going to stick to judging Perry by what he says and by what he does. From what I have seen, he doesn't lay claim to be a woman or to have any special insight into being a woman and he's not going to try and follow me into the women's changing room. If any of that changes then that's when my views will change.

*wish there were not which sorry

I'd rather stick to issues than judge specific people, though I am prepared to judge their actions.
There's no such thing as women's clothes so it's moot. Wear what the hell you want.
'feminine' or 'masculine' (which there were better words that weren't associated with either sex) behaviour is acceptable in anyone.
I don't like anyone's sexual preferences or fetishes displaying in public, whatever their flavour, not interested, keep it safe and respectful and stfu about it.

Perry has spoken before about the risk of going out and about dressed being the exhilarating thing (ie will he get beaten up). I think this is quite instructive when one thinks so many middle aged transitioners have been in highly masculine professions such as the military. It seems to fit in with getting a semi-sexual thrill out of extreme sports etc.

I don't really think this is forcing women to participate in a fetish, even though it is clearly sexual behaviour.

I'm usually quite hard line on most of this stuff but I like Perry. He knows he's a man. He's interested in unusual expressions of masculinity. He doesn't transgress women's space or services.

My question is how do you differentiate? If he hadn't said it was a fetish would that be ok then? In accordance with no 1 on your list? Although it could still be a fetish but he just hadn't admitted it. Does that make it better or worse?

My instinctive reaction if I saw someone like 'Clare' walking down a crowded street would be to laugh - I'd assume they were doing it for a joke or a fetish. And if I saw them in the ladies' toilets I'd want them removed.

If I saw someone looking like Kurt Cobain in a dress, I'd think it was great that they were breaking down stereotypes. And if I saw them in the ladies' toilets I'd want them removed.

Well I think so long as people aren't acting on their fetish in public ie masturbating, exposing themselves etc I don't care.

I think I'd go along with that. Although I do have an issue with the individual in the Guardian article I linked to earlier, who gets off on making shop assistants feel uncomfortable. That sort of non consensual participation is unacceptable to me - and it is a sort of acting out of their fetish in public.

I'm actually quite vanilla, but I can't get in a tizz about the fact that putting on a pair of women's frillys will get some men going, or that young lesbians get off on dressing in boys clothes.

I’m very similar and Grayson Perry doesn’t bother me, and nor do most drag queens really.

The thing is though, there are shades of grey for me.

Where I draw the line is someone like “part-time” Pips Bunce. There is something about working in a similar environment with all its issues, and really knowing that I’m on some level obliged, not freely choosing, to dress in heels, make-up etc in the workplace that makes me bristle at his/her performative feminity (as well as their hideous taste in clothes!)

wearethecity.com/inspirational-profile-pips-bunce-director-credit-suisse/

That is when I really do feel that being female is treated as a fetish or something you “do”, and it doesn’t sit well with me.

Well I think so long as people aren't acting on their fetish in public ie masturbating, exposing themselves etc I don't care

That seems fair. And clearly the OP's hypothetical gimp boss has crossed the line.

Unless they've stated in an interview with a national newspaper that they have a fetish

In which case those of you who are bothered can avoid going to events featuring Perry.

So for you, which fetishes are OK to flaunt in public and which ones aren't?

One would have to make one's own mind up. At the extreme there are still people who object to gay couples holding hands or kissing in public. I'm not keen on nudity. I woould not like to have met the Naked Rambler for example.

As I said before I'm not a mind reader as to the motives of all cross dressers. Perry doesn't make me feel in the least bit uncomfortable.

OldCrone

Yes, I did read it. My question is how do you differentiate? If he hadn't said it was a fetish would that be ok then? In accordance with no 1 on your list? Although it could still be a fetish but he just hadn't admitted it. Does that make it better or worse?

Well I think so long as people aren't acting on their fetish in public ie masturbating, exposing themselves etc I don't care.

Are you advocating a kind of thought police ready to arrest someone for improper thoughts?

What actually constitutes a fetish anyway? Some people develop fetishes around normal every day objects don't they, or feet or things - how are you going to police them?

It's no good saying, as is always said on FWR, that boys should be encouraged to wear whatever they want but that wearing a dress doesn't make them female and then scream "fetish" when they wear a dress. Obviously you don't believe that boys can wear dresses at all.

I suggest you read the post I made at 13.23, Weetabix.

My boss posting out before a meeting that he intends to turn up in full gimp gear so he can nip off to the loo for a quick wank at my discomfort doesn't make it ok

That really isn't the same as GP.

No it's not - or is it? You've been asking why people on here think some crossdressers are OK and others aren't, and I've told you my views. So for you, which fetishes are OK to flaunt in public and which ones aren't?

Anyone else hoping that Grayson himself rocks up on the thread for a Q&A?

There seems to be a distinction between "good" cross dressers who wear dresses simply because dresses are just so much nicer than boring jeans and "bad" cross dressers who wear them as a fetish.

One would need to see inside the individual's head to determine if a cross dresser was "good" or "bad".

Unless they've stated in an interview with a national newspaper that they have a fetish.

Nah. Someone, anyone, dressing to humiliate others in a public arena so they can masturbate to it isn't a good thing. That's a major power trip

Presuming consent is so dangerous

But by the argument on here he isn't presuming consent. The argument is he is openly in the "bad" category. No one need ever engage with him if they don't want to.

My boss posting out before a meeting that he intends to turn up in full gimp gear so he can nip off to the loo for a quick wank at my discomfort doesn't make it ok

That really isn't the same as GP.

How is he forcing someone to interact with him any more than say the women who go out for the night round here dressed in mini skirts, bras, sky high platform shoes with the obligatory trout pout and odd eyebrows that seem to be in fashion? Is there a sexual element in how they dress?

I already answered that question when Jessica said something similar. But just to add to that response, I think another thing for me is to do with the asymmetry in sexual relationships between men and women. Men are more likely to be able to overpower women than the other way round. A man who presents and behaves in an excessively sexual way is more of a threat to women than a woman who dresses provocatively is to anyone (she may simply be putting herself in a vulnerable position).

In short, if a man his flaunting his fetish, I might feel threatened by it. If a woman is, I don't think many people of either sex would feel threatened, and some men might simply take it as an invitation.

I'm actually quite vanilla, but I can't get in a tizz about the fact that putting on a pair of women's frillys will get some men going, or that young lesbians get off on dressing in boys clothes
Obviously if Perry gets done for frottaging or something I'll change my opinion, but he's not invading women's spaces and he knows he's a man, so for now , however unappealing I might think he looks, he's not bothering me

I'm extremely vanilla and I feel the same way.

My gay friends dressed in a similar way because they enjoy it, they enjoy shocking others by breaking out of gender norms, and they did enjoy making others uncomfortable, partially because that had been done to them for so long just for expressing themselves in ways most men did not.

I think I'll have to make 'just to shock' (without a sexual fetish element) no. 6 on my list of reasons to cross dress. And like no.1 I think this reason is OK. Young people have dressed 'just to shock' their elders since forever, and I don't see anything wrong with trying to shake up the world a bit.

How many female to male cross dressers are there? It seems to me its male to female. Strange

I don't know but I once worked in a restaurant where a large part of the clientele were (mostly young) lesbians. They had a very specific "boy" look:
Low slung boys jeans, studded belts, white vests (looked like boys vests), army dog tags, leather jackets or Dickies type utilitarian work wear. Men's sneakers or boots.
There was definitely a sexual element to this look-they dressed in what they found sexy, and was sexy to each other.
I think it's quite a sexy look too (think Shane from the L Word).

I get what pp are saying about men practising their fetish without consent, and the idea of being a woman=humiliation, but I think human sexuality is qutte odd sometimes. Lots of people of both sexes can get turned on by weird things. That sounds like an admission haha!
I'm actually quite vanilla, but I can't get in a tizz about the fact that putting on a pair of women's frillys will get some men going, or that young lesbians get off on dressing in boys clothes.
Obviously if Perry gets done for frottaging or something I'll change my opinion, but he's not invading women's spaces and he knows he's a man, so for now , however unappealing I might think he looks, he's not bothering me.

LassOfFyvie

Exactly.

Though I don't think they would ever accept someone as a "good" cross dresser, despite what they argue when protesting against young people transing. Then, exploring gender, disbanding stereotypes is all good, so long as they stay out of the ladies toilets. Now it seems that there's an invisible point at which the same person becomes a cross dressing fetishist. It's quite bizarre really.

If I were cynical I might think that it's just an attempt to control other people and how they look, enforcing stereotypes rather than breaking them down.