Grayson Perry irks me

First of all I think that I should say that I think Grayson Perry has every right to dress as he likes, as does a woman in a niqab, or at the other end of the scale a girl in daisy duke shorts.

The freedom to dress as you like comes with the flip side of other people being free to judge and hypotheses why you choose to wear clothes that go against the ethos of the main or dominant society.

I saw Grayson's Rosetta pot in the British Museum and it is a great peice of art, and on it he has a self portrait of "the artist" he labels his penis as "power", which is telling.

I really think women have no idea of the overriding sexual drive men have at times. How it is the end goal for everything they do at times. I also think men themselves are overwhelmed by this and feel shame as it goes against their ego as "the good guy".

Healthy sexualities are being warped in modern day - you could argue its porn culture, too much status in the masculine or even the hang-over of a too rigid religious ethos from the past. But this is a philosophical debate all on its own.

Here is a link to the Rosetta pot:

www.britishmuseum.org/research/collection_online/collection_object_details/collection_image_gallery.aspx?assetId=1204630001&objectId=3464588&partId=1

What difference does it make if I know, or not??

Whether I know it or not, a cross dressing fetish still relies on the oppression of women and their unwitting participation.

It's like men who go on to make up and beauty forums, discussing clothes and make up. Many of the women won't realise they are men, and many others won't realise they are getting off on it.

Them not knowing, makes no difference to the critique of it.

Okay. So how would you know? With anonymous people we won’t know what they’re thinking. I highlighted someone else’s comments earlier this morning that elaborates on that.

If Grayson says that’s not what it’s about now, is it ok?

When is a man not cross dressing, and simply just wearing what he wants?

When he's not doing it to get aroused.

Could you elaborate on what you mean by ‘dressing as women’? Putting on a dress and make-up isn’t necessarily dressing as a woman. I replied elsewhere why my friends dressed feminine, or in dresses ( they’d usually made ), because they liked them and to shock. Lots of people dress to shock.

Well perhaps he no longer gets a sexual kick out of it. If people are calling you amazing, stunning, clever, and breaking through gender boxes, when really you're trying to be submissive and humiliated, it's not going to work.

I'll be interested to know what other reason you think there is for men dressing 'as women'.

How could men challenge the gender norms associated with clothing, without it being a fetish or it being some kind of insult to women? When is a man not cross dressing, and simply just wearing what he wants?

It's the fact that cross dressing men wiil typically be leveraging women's oppression for their own pleasure. I understand this point as you have indeed said that before, but I replied not every ‘cross dresser’ will be. Grayson states he’s not dressing ‘as a woman or female’ anymore.

SophoclesTheFox thanks for explaining that again, I can’t argue with that. Do you think he’s actively challenging the idea men are superior? Overall I mean, not just in the act of cross dressing. I’ve ordered the book as someone else here recommended it and it may give me a better idea of what he thinks on this whole thing.

JessicaWakefieldSVH

Every cross dresser isn't the problem. It's the fact that cross dressing men wiil typically be leveraging women's oppression for their own pleasure.

It's well documented. The fetish is plastered from one end of the Internet to the other. The social taboo and 'naughtiness' of being part of the oppressed class is a turn on. Knowing that they are getting turned on by having women participate unwittingly is part of their additional power (being served in shops by women when they're buying female clothes, trying on shoes, forcing pronoun usage, etc).

It's misogynistic from top to bottom.

These men aren't wearing these clothes because they like florals, or silky fabrics. That's wearing feminine clothes. These men are dressing 'as women'. It's completely different. And yes, it relies on seeing women are something you can 'dress as'.

I haven't been rude, at all. I've explained my point of view and why I have it, several times. Including again in this post.

I can't keep reacting to you just 'disagreeing'. You are welcome to disagree. But being acquainted with someone who dresses as a woman for some other reason (I have no idea what that could be, by the way, other than drag, but that's a different thread), doesn't alter the fact a cross dressing fetish serves as an indictment on society's attitude to women.

The opening post was talking about Grayson Perry, specifically. Grayson Perry, specifically, has said he enjoys the sexual humiliation of dressing as a female.

You cannot read the accounts of men who dress as women in order to enjoy pretending that they are submissive, whilst demanding that you treat them as submissive, without seeing this as patriarchy on steroids.

Cross dressing fetishists used to confine it to clubs, parties, and their own house. Now, with the advent of transgenderism, it's much more in the public.

And it's being billed as progressive, inclusive and celebrating diversity.

It's tying women's hands, and stifling their voices to the misogyny.

So yes, I will bloody tut.

I’m not sure we could know that he thinks he’s superior as a man in his head, but I take your point

Yes, you’re right, I think I could have phrased that better. What I mean is that he goes back to occupying the superior, male position (which he’d have to think it is, or there would be no sexual charge by downgrading temporarily to female, would there?). It might not be that explicit in his head, or any mans head who does this, but without that being the subtext, the behaviour doesn’t make any sense.

SophoclesTheFox Thanks, that’s interesting and I’ll have a good think about what you’ve written. I’m not sure we could know that he thinks he’s superior as a man in his head, but I take your point.

To me, the issue isn’t necessarily that Perry gets his jollies by the humiliation he feels at dressing as a woman.

It’s the societal acceptance that to be feminine or womanly is humiliating for a man because it is lesser that is rightly up for feminist critique. A man degrades himself by being feminine. Its a space that he can occupy playfully, and sexually, then opt back up to being a man, and being superior again in his head. It’s why a woman wearing trousers doesn’t have the same impact or meaning.

I object to that thought process being sanitised into “just a kink”. I still have to ask if that attitude and thought process really never leaks through into real life. Can someone with that paraphilia really, honestly truly see and treat women as his equal? I have to wonder.

As usual with feminist critique, it’s less about what an individual does, and more about what the broader meaning is.

As for the fetish aspect - we can't police someone's thoughts or sexual impulses. People can wear whatever they like, it's their words and actions that matter. Any one of us could be part of a thousand passersby's sexual fantasies/thrills; I'm afraid there's not a huge amount anyone can do about it. Besides, is everyone just to ensure they never entertain a sexual thought while out in public? What do you propose? Anyone who looks like they're wearing unorthodox clothing and enjoying it should be tutted at?

I don’t think you’ve shown why every cross dresser thinks the way you keep stating. Like I say, I don’t think wearing feminine clothes should be called cross dressing even. I know men who have worn dresses and it’s not as a fetish. Why the attitude? Can’t you converse with people with different opinions without being passive aggressive and patronising? I’ve been here years under diff usernames and you’re typically respectful, only I usually share the same opinions so maybe that’s it.

I object to it when he's working, sexual fetishes don't belong in the workplace. Would it be appropriate for a teacher to teach children when dressed as their sexual fetish ?

good, I’m glad that’s clear. What is not clear is why you do.

What even after I've explained it three different ways in three different posts?

I must be slipping.

He's taking society's view of women as lesser than, and subverting it, in order to inhabit it. In order to be temporarily aroused. But only while he inhabits that persona. Or thinks about it.

Actual sexual humiliation is not what he's after. He's after the theatre of pretend humiliation in order to be aroused.

And being a woman is worse than anything. It's degrading, humiliating. Women are victims.

Thank you for that post, Datun. This is what I was trying to say.

good, I’m glad that’s clear. What is not clear is why you do.

I don’t agree that a ‘cross dressing fetish’ is always a problem.

Clearly!

I don’t agree that a ‘cross dressing fetish’ is always a problem.

What has that got to do with GP? He’s not transgender.

It doesn't matter what label you give it.

He's got a cross dressing fetish that he is happy to own.

Other men have a cross dressing fetish which they are determined to get sanitised by calling it transgender. (And yes there are other men who have gender dysphoria and call it transgender).

It has been enlightening to see how many people aren't familiar with crossdressing as a fetish!

I’m aware of it, I don’t think it’s exclusively a fetishise for all, it certainly isn’t for my friends who do.

I just don't see anything positive in the Claire persona
He no longer does and doesn’t use it, in the link I posted he said she doesn’t exist and he’s just Grayson.

Have you not read the transwidows thread?

What has that got to do with GP? He’s not transgender.