Grayson Perry irks me

yep, those are boys in skirts. no parody, they're just wearing clothes.

Drag/transvestism isn't just wearing dresses. It's an over the top parody of stereotypically feminine presentation. Children in school wearing a school uniform skirt aren't the same.

It really shouldn't need saying.

That’s a pretty twisted and unfair analysis of the conversation taking place here.

sorry you feel that way. that's honestly what it looks like from here though

how anyone can see a man who openly admits that he is sexually aroused by 'dressing as a woman' because there is something inherently submissive about it and be completely cool with it is pretty mystifying to me. but if you're fine with it, knock yourself out kid.

Drag/transvestism isn't just wearing dresses. It's an over the top parody of stereotypically feminine presentation. Children in school wearing a school uniform skirt aren't the same.

If we did allow boys and girls free choice in a non-sexist culture I strongly suspect there wouldn’t be a cross dressing fetish to have. It only exists because we don’t.

So those little boys will grow into men, possibly having grown up wearing dresses

In our highly gendered society they'd be bloody lucky to get to manhood just wearing dresses because that's what they like, context free. But let's say they do.

great. they won't wear a stuffed bra, because they're just 'getting dressed'. they won't pop a boner because they're being topped by the whole of western civilization.

crack on

nah, come on. It's the difference between those poor little boys being paraded around in drag and buying sparkly unicorn t-shirts from the girls section at H&M for your son because that's what he likes.

But I have seen, many times, when anyone talks about a young boy expressing that he wants to be a girl, posters telling the mum to let him wear dresses, to wear dresses and skirts to school, to tell him that, as a boy, he can wear and be and do anything that a girl can, but that he can't change sex. They're not saying "oh buy him a unicorn top from H and M". So those little boys will grow into men, possibly having grown up wearing dresses, as advocated by people on here. But the as a man what happens? Suddenly they can't wear what they want because then that is a fetish?

GP's makeup is grotesque, it turns him into a grotesque parody of a woman. In the same way that blackface is a grotesque parody of traditionally black African features.

As someone said the other day, it’s a little different in that the former parodies something that women apply, not something we are.

Fake breasts and whatnot is more like the latter.

I can’t decide whether that’s just splitting hairs though; end of the day, you make an ‘other’ to carry a load of ideas for you.

I'm saying that all the women falling over themselves to say how fabulous GP is for his grotesque parody of womanhood and for using women's oppression to get himself off are suffering from the same 'eat me last' internalised misogyny as any trans applauding liberal feminist.

That’s a pretty twisted and unfair analysis of the conversation taking place here.

GP's makeup is grotesque, it turns him into a grotesque parody of a woman.

So the latest fashions for women to have lip fillers (trout pout) and tattooed eyebrows (that look not dissimilar to how GP does his, in that they are higher and more noticeable) is that also a parody?

Women that have breast and buttock implants? Is that a fetish or a parody?

What I am really not understanding is the argument for letting boys wear girls clothes and making it totally normal whilst insisting that men who wear women's clothes are fetishists

nah, come on. It's the difference between those poor little boys being paraded around in drag and buying sparkly unicorn t-shirts from the girls section at H&M for your son because that's what he likes.

So are you saying that women who have a problem with men wearing traditionally female clothes have internalised misogyny?

err no. I'm saying that all the women falling over themselves to say how fabulous GP is for his grotesque parody of womanhood and for using women's oppression to get himself off are suffering from the same 'eat me last' internalised misogyny as any trans applauding liberal feminist.

JessicaWakefieldSVH

That was really interesting. His reasons seem far more complex than just a way for him to get his jollies.

Why is he not just expressing different sides of himself? Like some days I get dressed up, wear make up and other days I just want to wear an old pair of jeans and a sweat shirt. There is no sexual meaning behind it (although maybe there is. Maybe Freud would see it differently, that women paint their faces to attract a mate or something?) it's just a case of dressing according to my mood. We happily accept that for women, so why not for men?

Why? Why can’t a man have dresses made for him and wear make up without it being womanface?

GP's makeup is grotesque, it turns him into a grotesque parody of a woman. In the same way that blackface is a grotesque parody of traditionally black African features.

What I am really not understanding is the argument for letting boys wear girls clothes and making it totally normal whilst insisting that men who wear women's clothes are fetishists.

Well Grayson does refer to himself as a fetishist. I think the distinction has been made by some that the issue is with it being a sexual thrill, to pretend to be a woman.

Why do women assume the reason is non-sexual, why do women want to be seen as kind and understanding when there is a whole wealth of information showing the Wolf in Sheep's Clothing.

I don't want to be kind and understanding in a "pushover" sense. I just think that if you want to challenge stereotypes then you have to accept relinquishing those stereotypes. So you can't argue that a man wearing high heels, make up and a dress is dressing as a woman whilst simultaneously arguing that high heels and make up are not linked to being a woman.

What I am really not understanding is the argument for letting boys wear girls clothes and making it totally normal whilst insisting that men who wear women's clothes are fetishists. How are the people saying this going to address todays little boys tomorrow when they are men?

This has a couple of interesting things in it. He definitely started off thinking of it as ‘dressing as a woman’, when he was 12. He also isn’t exactly welcome in the trans community

www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2018/oct/13/grayson-perry-im-an-unapologetic-fetishist-

Why do women assume the reason is non-sexual?
Speaking strictly for myself, it's because the reasons why I sometimes wear men's clothes are entirely non sexual for me, so the possibility that it might be otherwise had never entered my head. Men really are another country to me sometimes!

This is literally just come up on my Facebook.

Care homes are going to, amongst other things, facilitate cross dressing. Facilitate the subordination of women and men's arousal to it.

In a care home.

Fetishes like this are harmful to women. They're not a cheeky bit of art, or a bit of British eccentricity.

mobile.twitter.com/ThrupennyBit/status/1104429992329572352?s=19

It is a fetish for a lot of crossdressers, some are too ashamed to admit it, others own it.

Here is a redditt community highlighting how they revel in the crossdressers fetish.

Reddit It's A Fetish

The most obvious reason men crossdress, wear leather, wear bondage gear, are adult babies or furries is sexual. The major reason IS sexual, a minority would do it for artistic or anarcic reason, but MOST don't.

Why do women assume the reason is non-sexual, why do women want to be seen as kind and understanding when there is a whole wealth of information showing the Wolf in Sheep's Clothing. (FYI I don't care about any bodies kink as it's none of my business, just wish that they would respect boundaries and be a bit private or with groups of like minded people).

Grayson Perry raises interesting issues because I think he originally was the stereotype of a cross dresser, or a fetishist. I believe it’s possible that it is now different for him.

I agree. I do also wonder whether some of it is also performance art and a way of challenging thoughts and conceptions? I sort of view him as you would a painting - people take different things from paintings don't they? They interpret the same piece of art in different ways and that is how I feel when I look at him. I find that it challenges me to think about why I feel in a certain way about his appearance. So why he does it or what he gets from it is separate to how I feel about it. Does that make any sense?

it seems that women have basically been helping him masturbate without even knowing it.

Over their own oppression.

Yeah that's possible, Weetabix. But Perry has openly admitted his motivation is sexual. Plus he's not just been pleasuring himself at home with other consenting adults - it seems that women have basically been helping him masturbate without even knowing it. That's a big difference for me and I'm not sure yet what I'll do with that knowledge.

The only time I can remember wearing actual men's clothing was during pregnancy when for a while the waist-hip ratio on a pair of DHs jeans fit me. I had to roll the bottom up a couple of times.

Perry Grayson at the palace was dressing quite specifically as a transvestite.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/entertainment-arts-25878193/grayson-perry-dresses-down-for-palace-date

I think Datuns point is that a lot of cross dressers and the whole idea of being a ‘cross dresser’ is about parodying women, and some use it as a sexual fetish.
Then there is the other points about gender stereotypes and how do men challenge them without humiliating or denigrating women.
There are fair points on both sides and I don’t think there’s a clear cut answer or position.
Grayson Perry raises interesting issues because I think he originally was the stereotype of a cross dresser, or a fetishist. I believe it’s possible that it is now different for him.