Grayson Perry irks me

Please watch the clip I posted, he’s not performing woman at all, it’s just Grayson talking while wearing a dress made for him. He even says Claire isn’t real and he wouldn’t go down that route today, he was young and influenced by the accepted idea of what cross dressers should be.

I really like GP's art work and his writing on art: so refreshing. I don't really understand why men dress as women, but as long as his family are ok with it, and he doesn't threaten women I don't see what the problem is.

Can I just point out, Grayson is not wearing women’s clothes, they are made specifically for him and are just his clothes.

it’s not just a skirt, it’s the hair flicking, the simpering, the fake high pitched voice, the coquettish glances. In other words, the grotesque, harmfully stereotypical, demonstrative performance of “woman” that makes me bristle.

I agree. For me it's when the line is crossed between 'a man wearing a dress', and when it becomes a man impersonating a woman or parodying a woman.

We seem to be talking about two things which to my mind, are quite different: 1) men wearing women's clothes because they like them or to challenge gender norms. And 2) men wearing women's clothes because it gets them off.

As far as I'm concerned, 1) is fine. 2) is also fine if done in private or with consenting adults. But expecting women to play along unwittingly while you get off - well call me uncool but that leaves me pretty .

However I suspect that, if I knew even half of what goes on in some men's heads, I would be in a perpetual state of Perry has been honest when he didn't have to be and I do appreciate that and I still believe it's highly dangerous to judge anyone by their thoughts alone.

Just because a man with a fetish isn't saying 'kill all TERFS' - doesn't mean we shouldn't object to being incorporated in his fetish without his permission.

Perry is definitely not a transactivist and he's not helpful to the TRA cause in any way. Still, I don't think everything needs to be looked at from the pov of the current TRA madness.

He did refer to self ID in a guardian q&a a few years ago and said something along the lines of 'identity is co-constructed, you can't just identify as something it relies on society accepting that identity'. Which seemed to show some understanding. And although he has avoided the issue since I think there is at least a fair chance he is onside.

No I don't think it's that. I'm quite happy with existing gendered norms. I don't want men muscling in on female clothing.

I find that to be really sexist. Gender norms are oppressive to women and men.

No I don't think it's that. I'm quite happy with existing gendered norms. I don't want men muscling in on female clothing.

So seeing as women wearing trousers is a relatively modern phenomenon, we should just go back to wearing skirts and dresses all the time so that we don't 'muscle in'? What is your issue? Are you worried there won't be enough clothes left for you or something?

I think it's more to do with the visceral hatred some feminists have for anything feminine (aka "all that pink shit") so that even if men embrace it , it still has to be criticised in some way.

I don't have visceral hatred for pink things. It's a colour. I don't like the associations that are made between pink and certain personality traits though. Also, the pink thing again is a total social construct because pink used to be a 'boy' colour.

Cross dressing is a sex fetish. Look here is Wikipedia with an explanation of how it's in the DSM

So you keep saying. Not sure what point you are making in the context of GP. I really don't care if it is.

Good on him I say (and people like the OP are revealing signs that they are probably relatively happy with existing gendered norms relating to appearance, but realise it makes them look better if they claim not to be)

No I don't think it's that. I'm quite happy with existing gendered norms. I don't want men muscling in on female clothing.

I think it's more to do with the visceral hatred some feminists have for anything feminine (aka "all that pink shit") so that even if men embrace it , it still has to be criticised in some way.

Funky men's tailored shirts do not fit women. That is why shops like Thomas Pink have separate sections for men and women. It isn't just a question of sizing.

Blimey. Cross dressing is a sex fetish. Look here is Wikipedia with an explanation of how it's in the DSM.
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transvestic_fetishism
It's perfectly okay to talk about this. It does not reveal anything about feminists that talk about it other than they know about fetishists. Perry being one.

It is sexual behaviour. Unwanted sexual behaviour is sexual harassment. These are just unemotional facts. Not judgements.

I am amazed at how judgmental it gets when this comes up.

Nope, there's nothing inherently womanly about a half slip, especially when a cross dressing fetishist is wearing it. Deny, deny deny. I buy half slips for dads and brothers every Christmas, along with silky stockings. Just stocking fillers. Nothing womanly at all.

This is such an interesting discussion.
I don't think anyone is 'policing' anything, but what about impulse control wrt crossdressing as sexual behaviour?
One of my first jobs was working in a bar with a manager who crossdressed for work. His frocks didn't conceal his frequent erections (he thought they did*). Sure, it wouldn't have been so bad if he had hidden his boners, but I think there's a time and place for sexual behaviour, and it's about impulse control rather than the thickness of fabric. (I'm not chastising men for having kinks or involuntary erections, and I'm not saying that all crossdressers walk around with a boner all the time.

• I had a brief relationship with this guy, but that's for another thread.) Does Perry get a free pass because he is an artist and social commentator? I don't know why some posters insist that Perry does it just for fun and entertainment, when he has said it himself that he gets off on it. I do agree that he has explored toxic masculinity in an interesting and intelligent way, but I see his female persona as a symptom rather than a meaningful response to sex stereotypes. As social commentary goes, 'Claire' is pretty crap imo.

LassofFyvie you're talking about sizing. There is is no standard women's body. Some women have wide hips, some have hips that resemble men's hips. Some have huge boobs, some are flat-chested. A skirt can be tailored to fit either a man or a woman.

There's no such thing as women's clothes so it's moot

That is not true. Women's bodies are not the same shape as men's. My chest measurement is the same as my son's. If I buy a tailored shirt from the men's section it will be too large in the shoulder, too long in the sleeve, baggy at the waist at too tight round the hips. The reverse will apply if he were to buy a women's tailorec shirt.

My take is he's an honest transvestite. He stands in contrast to males who are essentially the same as him(albeit generally less talented) who are nowadays claiming to be transwomen.

He exposes the lie of someone like Pips Bunce being in any way brave or admirable while stealing awards from women, by turning up at the palace for an honour he's won by his abilities wearing an outfit which looks like something the Duchess of Cornwall might wear.

Eddie Izzard, that's who irks me - someone who's gone from being an honest 'man in a dress' to claims of being a 'Male lesbian'.

However GP wants to dress is up to him. Who cares if he wears 'female' clothes, if this is an issue why aren't people banging on about women wearing trousers. I'm always surprised at how narrow minded people are in the 21st Century.

I don't get this. So many GC feminists claim they are against stereotypical and enforced femininity and want a world where boys and men can do and wear things that were traditionally considered for girls or women? What precisely is the issue with a man wearing women's clothes? How does it offend you? There is nothing inherently womanly about a dress or makeup- it's a social construct.
Good on him I say (and people like the OP are revealing signs that they are probably relatively happy with existing gendered norms relating to appearance, but realise it makes them look better if they claim not to be).

That's a really great interview, Jessica, thank you. He doesn't strike me as creepy at all, and never has. When he talks about dressing up he talks about it being fun and entertaining rather than sexy.

He has made it clear he's a man in a dress and has no wish to invade women's spaces. I don't think he's an "advance guard" - he represents exactly the opposite to what the TRAs are trying to push. His work on masculinity is excellent and important.

Also yes, there are tons of female cross-dressers, especially in lesbian history.

As it goes on, he discusses the limited options for a transvestite, either comedy or sex maniac in his words,.. he concludes he’s happy to be the one people laugh at. He also doesn’t go shopping in women’s departments, his clothes are made for him.

I can't be the only one here familiar with drag kings:

www.stylist.co.uk/people/drag-kings-queens-gender-neutral-transvestite-art-performance-uk/29914

Norah Vincent has done interesting work on the year or so she spent as a male 'alter ego':

www.theguardian.com/books/2006/mar/19/biography.features1

I’m just watching this. At 19 minutes he talks about how he wouldn’t create the alter ego of Claire if he was starting out now, that he is not into deceiving anyone etc and that he is a man in a dress. I’m still watching to see if anything else interesting and relevant comes up:

It is perhaps his likeability that is the problem - his lack of a direct threat to womens spaces, his deliberately non-confrontational stance, his disarming openess. He is perhaps part of the advance guard - to soften hearts and minds and open up a big door in the popular consciousness - this is why he is so beloved of the BBC.