Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

"men dressing in women's clothes is offensive...

176 replies

newrubylane · 20/10/2021 07:29

... to the LGBT community."

www.worcesternews.co.uk/news/19657416.st-richards-warn-men-dressing-womens-clothes-fundraiser-offensive/

I don't even know where to start.

OP posts:
brokenbiscuitsx · 21/10/2021 11:13

@LonginesPrime

This (sort of) reminds me of the outcry on SM about the John Lewis advert (the one where a boy wears a dress) if it was a girl wearing ‘boys’ clothes no one would bat an eyelid.

Now why is that? Why is it acceptable for girls to wear ‘boy’ clothes but not boys to wear ‘girl’ clothes?

Well, if you take away the dress from the John Lewis advert, it's still incredibly sexist and old-fashioned in terms of gender roles and expectations.

The fact that the boy was wearing a dress was the only part of it that wasn't sexist, IMO.

Well yes you’re not wrong there Grin
AlfonsoTheDinosaur · 21/10/2021 12:39

I am amused by the outrage.

alreadytaken · 21/10/2021 12:56

"I have no problem at all with men wearing whatever the fuck they want, so long as they don't claim it magically makes them women."

Agree with this.

Beowulfa · 21/10/2021 13:03

This was written up in this morning's Metro. I found the piece interesting; it explained the lads' side of the story (that they were allowed to wear their own underwear, but every other item of clothing had to come from the hospice charity shop, that two of them had tragic personal reasons for supporting the hospice, and ended with the main organiser stating he would continue to fundraise in this manner, but for a different charity) and the quoted the robotic wokespeak of the charity "we aim to be as inclusive as possible diversity inclusion blah blah blah". A reader new to the topic would be totally puzzed as to why they were in the wrong.

MrGHardy · 21/10/2021 13:58

I thought Drag was cool and and drag queens should even read to children.

KimikosNightmare · 21/10/2021 15:03

I'm stressing this point because there are some who would read this thread and make a bad faith argument about the views of MNers "laughing at men in dresses" as if that's a general position

Many posters on here seem to have no problem with the idea of laughing at men in dresses. These men aren't in the same category as Terry Jones or Les Dawson who created comic characters. All these men have done is put on dresses which no one look twice at if worn by a woman.

How on earth is the idea that that is funny remotely compatible with Blibbyblobby's ideal world? It's only funny if you, general you think, clothing should remain gendered and clothing gendered female merits being laughed at.

LonginesPrime · 21/10/2021 15:27

These men aren't in the same category as Terry Jones or Les Dawson who created comic characters. All these men have done is put on dresses which no one look twice at if worn by a woman.

Are you saying that drag is acceptable when performed by people with certain status/resources but not when people put in less effort? Who decides where that boundary is though?

Obviously humour is subjective and different people find different things funny, so why is it acceptable for famous people to dress up in drag with the backing of the BBC or whoever, but not ok when Dave and his mates from Yorkshire do it?

What's the actual distinction here? It can't simply be that if an established comedian does it, then it's funny by definition because that's their job, and conversely if a random person does it, it's not funny by definition as they're not a comedian.

ArtemesiaK · 21/10/2021 15:51

I've been deleted (twice) on another thread for just mentioning blokes in dresses. How are you all getting away with it!? :) I love the rugby cross-dressers, I'm not offended at all... :)

KimikosNightmare · 21/10/2021 16:39

@LonginesPrime

These men aren't in the same category as Terry Jones or Les Dawson who created comic characters. All these men have done is put on dresses which no one look twice at if worn by a woman.

Are you saying that drag is acceptable when performed by people with certain status/resources but not when people put in less effort? Who decides where that boundary is though?

Obviously humour is subjective and different people find different things funny, so why is it acceptable for famous people to dress up in drag with the backing of the BBC or whoever, but not ok when Dave and his mates from Yorkshire do it?

What's the actual distinction here? It can't simply be that if an established comedian does it, then it's funny by definition because that's their job, and conversely if a random person does it, it's not funny by definition as they're not a comedian.

The distinction is that a comedian, Dawson in particular, put effort into creating a character and writing comic dialogue for that character. These men have done nothing except put on dress- yet that's somehow funny.

The latter is only funny if one (a) has a rigid belief of what clothes men and women should wear and (b) men automatically become figures of fun just by putting on a dress. Otherwise a man wearing a dress is no more funny than a woman wearing a dress or a woman wearing a tailored suit.

LonginesPrime · 21/10/2021 16:59

The distinction is that a comedian, Dawson in particular, put effort into creating a character and writing comic dialogue for that character. These men have done nothing except put on dress- yet that's somehow funny.

How much effort would these men need to make for it to be deemed funny, then?

If, in addition to wearing dresses, they also said stupid things that men think women think while wearing a dress (like Les Dawson did), would that make it funny and therefore acceptable?

KimikosNightmare · 21/10/2021 17:56

How much effort would these men need to make for it to be deemed funny, then?

They didn't do anything except put on dresses it's fascinating that a poster on here is adhering so rigidly to the idea of gendered clothing.

LonginesPrime · 21/10/2021 18:08

it's fascinating that a poster on here is adhering so rigidly to the idea of gendered clothing.

I'm not sure how my challenging the view that the acceptability of men in drag depends upon the effort the man in question has made suggests that I'm in favour of gender stereotyped clothing?!

I think all drag is misogynistic and I find the fact that Les Dawson's "naive stupid woman" routine is being held up as an example of the acceptable form of drag rather bizarre myself.

LonginesPrime · 21/10/2021 18:19

Also, had male comedians like Dawson et al not put on dresses and pretended to be silly women for decades, then perhaps the sight of a man in a dress would not in itself be as hilarious to the people who find it funny now.

Les Dawson and other men who got a laugh by exploring the patriarchy paved the way for men not even needing to write a script in order for people to get the 'joke' - people get it because it's an entrenched part of our collective comedic history.

BlueBrush · 21/10/2021 19:20

They didn't do anything except put on dresses it's fascinating that a poster on here is adhering so rigidly to the idea of gendered clothing.

Should we have gendered stereotypes for clothing? No.
Do we (society in general) have gendered stereotypes for clothing? Yes, clearly.
Given that we have those stereotypes , do people ever transgress them with the intention of creating a humorous effect? Yes.
Is it actually funny? Opinions vary.
Is it misogynistic? Complicated.

Kimikos That's my summary of the thread so far, but what I'm interested to know, and I'll ask it again, whether anyone thinks the charity's concern that this could be offensive to the LGBTQ community is well-founded, and if so, in what way? Why? What does that tell us about stereotypes and gendered norms of clothing?

AlfonsoTheDinosaur · 22/10/2021 09:42

It's the Emperor's New Clothes Syndrome. We all have to admire the beautiful new clothes are and not dare to be the little boy who tells the truth.

FreeBritnee · 22/10/2021 09:45

Pmsl. So men aping women isn’t been deemed offensive to women?!!! It’s being seen as offensive to men. My god just when I think I’ve hear it all some more shit rolls out of the arsehole.

Beowulfa · 22/10/2021 12:58

This was followed up in today's Metro Letters section, with a missive from a gay reader saying they were not offended by the fundraisers in dresses and that the charity was not speaking on their behalf.

The Metro is a free, cheery paper light on politics with a large audience and I think this is quite significant.

AlfonsoTheDinosaur · 22/10/2021 12:58

It's just more of TRAs appropriating everything for their own ends.

The word "women" can't be used to describe women, because it's "not inclusive". So then the term "cis women" was used. Women used the term "female" to distinguish themselves from transwomen. Now the word "female" to describe transwomen. Women are now "birthing people" and "cervix havers" but it won't be long before those terms are offensive because they're not inclusive. Let's not forget that David Lammy claimed that transwomen could "grow cervixes through cross-sex hormones and other stuff".

And don't forget how TRAs claim it was a transwoman who started the Stonewall riots (although said person was, by their own account, not trans and was sleeping off the effects of illegal drugs in a park when the first riot occurred). And how the feminist movement was "built on the backs of transwomen". (Wonder what the suffragettes would say to that!)

A transwoman gloated about breaking a women's skull. A transwoman took the place of a woman in the Olympics. A transwoman playing rugby "folded opponents like deckchairs". A transwoman bullied a shop employee and smashed up a shop for being misgendered. Rapists are allowed into women's prisons because they identify as women. Pips Bunce goes to work on 'woman days' (not sure what the correct term is) dressed in a way that no woman would ever do and wins an award for women in the workplace. JK Rowling has received rape and death threats for writing a sensible essay on why women need defined spaces. Women are beaten and threatened and taken to court for standing up to TRAs. A certain individual in Canada took minority women to a tribunal because they refused to wax that person's male genitalia. (Individual claimed to have both male and female genitalia but it was the male bit that they wanted waxed.) Now, TRAs are appropriating Black Lives Matter so that the focus is on black transwomen. And let's not forget how one person (forgotten their name) said that transpeople are the victims of a holocaust and other such hyperbolic nonsense. A man recently risked his life - no exaggeration - for carrying a sign that read "Jokes are funny" because someone shouted in a crowded area where tensions were running high that the man "ha[d] a weapon", the weapon being the wooden stick that the accuser took from him and broke in half. The sign carrier was physically harassed by two other individuals who took exception to his sign.

But transpeople are "the most oppressed minority ever" because GC people "deny transpeople their right to exist". Hunh? How can you deny someone's right to exist? How don't they have any rights? Although, when pressed, no one can list a right that they don't have. And who is "oppressing" transpeople? It ain't women, that's for sure.

Sex is determined at time of conception. Humans cannot change sex.
Women are women and transwomen are transwomen.

This is the longest message I have ever written on MN and probably the longest one I ever will write. But you know what? I have been pushed too far.

Apologies for the typos.

KimikosNightmare · 22/10/2021 13:11

@BlueBrush

They didn't do anything except put on dresses it's fascinating that a poster on here is adhering so rigidly to the idea of gendered clothing.

Should we have gendered stereotypes for clothing? No.
Do we (society in general) have gendered stereotypes for clothing? Yes, clearly.
Given that we have those stereotypes , do people ever transgress them with the intention of creating a humorous effect? Yes.
Is it actually funny? Opinions vary.
Is it misogynistic? Complicated.

Kimikos That's my summary of the thread so far, but what I'm interested to know, and I'll ask it again, whether anyone thinks the charity's concern that this could be offensive to the LGBTQ community is well-founded, and if so, in what way? Why? What does that tell us about stereotypes and gendered norms of clothing?

I think the misogyny is being overlooked because the objection was made on LGBT grounds. Had the objection been made by a women's rights group I doubt the misogyny would be overlooked.
AlfonsoTheDinosaur · 22/10/2021 13:23

It wasn't made on LGBT grounds. It was made on T grounds.

LonginesPrime · 22/10/2021 14:11

It wasn't made on LGBT grounds. It was made on T grounds.

That's another problematic element of this though - the charity was worried about offending the LGBT community as if LGB and T people are a homogeneous group.

They were clearly thinking about the T grounds of this, but since everyone listens to Stonewall and Stonewall purports to speak for the majority of LGB people as well as T people, well-meaning charities think they're doing what LGB and T people would want, and that LGB and T issues are closely related, because Stonewall says so and no-one has thought to check with anyone else.

AlfonsoTheDinosaur · 22/10/2021 15:58

I can't remember the last time gay men or bisexual people or even lesbians were offended by the sight of men wearing charity shop dresses to earn money for charity.

LonginesPrime · 22/10/2021 16:10

Well exactly, Alfonso - I wish people would stop trampling people's rights in the name of LGB people.

The fact people associate trans ideology with gay rights is the only reason half of this stuff gains traction, and it's so awful because gender ideology effectively hurts lesbian and gay people under the guise of specifically helping lesbian and gay people - you couldn't make it up!

AlfonsoTheDinosaur · 22/10/2021 16:12

I know! It doesn't matter how may times GC people say "T" has nothing to do with sexual orientation, it is seen as being not only the equivalent but the most important of the four groups.

Joystir59 · 23/10/2021 13:22

Trans ideology is homophobic. How the TQI got tacked onto the LGB is a mystery to me. I as a lesbian have absolutely nothing in common with womanface.