Defintion of "Cross-Dressing"?

[NotEnglish]

Question is in the title, really.

What is the definition of cross-dressing?

Is it just wearing clothes that "mainstream culture" would deem as belonging to the opposite sex?
Or does it have to have an element of sexual titillation or "expressing your inner woman/man" or something?

Or to rephrase:
If I wear my husbands underpants (in Germany we call them Boxershorts, I'm not sure if they are called the same in english?) because they are more comfortable than the woman's "boyshorts", or if I buy a pyjama top from the men's collection because it's warmer and has a more covering neckline, do I cross dress?

If my husband wears a sarong-style skirt in the house when the temperature gets really high in summer, is that cross dressing?

I have to repeat that putting on my beautiful wool and silk satin tuxedo does not change my sex. Now, that rather belies the tentative claim that clothes represent the alchemic properties which some profess and want to force me to profess, despite me being a gender atheist .

I wonder how other countries have done this? Countries with Self ID I mean.

In some countries and religions, womens clothing is controlled by custom or even by law. But not mens

There are some cases where men are subject to dress according to custom- sikhs for example. Sikh women cover their heads in solidarity, but it’s the men that have to. Much rarer, and usually far less about control, but it does happen.

From the reading I’ve done some cross dressing can be sensory, and that’s why it’s nearly always a male->female thing. Womens clothes tend to have softer fabric, silks, jersey etc- i don’t like the style of womens clothes generally, but hate the feel of jeans and would much rather wear loose soft jersey or cotton trousers. Skirts and dresses I also like because they are loose- dresses don’t have restrictive waists and i like the feel of less fabric against the skin.

So for me while I would probably choose to wear mens clothes for practicality and fit, i do tend to wear womens because I prefer the feel of the fabrics and the less restrictive form.

Lucky for me I’m female so I have the choice. But I could imaging feeling the same if my genitalia were different.

@Franca123

Can anyone draft a suggested legal definition of crossdressing without mentioning agp or using regressive gender stereotypes?

It's basically men wearing dresses, skirts, high heels and make up. So no, you can't define it without using regressive stereotypes which is why it should not be a matter of law.

I think my scepticism in the belief that clothes change you sex or represent any change at all stems from my own experience.

Dear readers, I have even run out of clean clothing and have had to grab some of my OH's. Did it do anything or mean anything other than clean clothing. No. Therefore, I know from my own experience (we can call it evidence) that such claims or professed beliefs are not rooted in fact.

I remain open to the fact (not really, but apparently I have to say this) that others people are completely and utterly transformed at molecular level when they are clothed by certain items. Isn't it odd how highly novel and unsubstantiated claims are not censored?

@Whatiswrongwithmyknee ,It's basically men wearing dresses, skirts, high heels and make up. So no, you can't define it without using regressive stereotypes which is why it should not be a matter of law.

Oh dear, I'm not wearing any of those stylised fabrics or potions today. Does that mean that according to this belief system that I'm not a woman today? And moreover, in contrast a man wearing such stylised fabrics and potions is a woman today?

[quote Cailleach1]@Whatiswrongwithmyknee ,It's basically men wearing dresses, skirts, high heels and make up. So no, you can't define it without using regressive stereotypes which is why it should not be a matter of law.

Oh dear, I'm not wearing any of those stylised fabrics or potions today. Does that mean that according to this belief system that I'm not a woman today? And moreover, in contrast a man wearing such stylised fabrics and potions is a woman today?[/quote]
I'm afraid so. A man who does not see himself as trans who wears a dress because he likes to is more of a woman than a woman in jeans. If you want to be accepted as a woman false eyelashes and shoes too high to walk in are a good place to start. Sadly, I don't wear any of those but thank god I put a dress on today or I wouldn't know if I was arthur or martha.

The practicality part explains women in trousers and male items. I used to love second hand men’s overcoat because of the inside breast pocket and I was living in a country where you had to carry passport/ID with you at all times.
The only practical items that were traditionally coded female - in the home at least - were pinnies or aprons - I can remember male relatives wearing them when doing the washing up after Christmas dinner or similar rare occasions and the jokes made

If a man wears lacy knickers/suspender belts/stockings that's definitely cross dressing to me.
I think the performative aspect is important. My OH wears a sarong in summer because he thinks it's comfortable/airy, I don't think he cross dresses.
If he was wearing lacy thongs I'd have a different opinion

It's not really definable, is it?

Noting that this is, for some unfathomable reason, a topic that women discussing attracts many reports and thus deletions are common.

We have had instances of deletions for being too general, and also for being too specific.

This demonstrates that certain topics really do seem to make people angry, I wonder why.

Anyway, Franca, exactly. It's exactly the same issue as we come up against as 'gender'. It's undefinable. We can't have an agreed, verifiable, testable definition of 'gender' nor one of 'cross dressing'. Not a practical one, anyway.

We cannot base legislation and law on things that can't be defined. At least, I don't bloody see how that's not going to create a horrendous mess.

Any law in this area would avoid specifics about agp, gender stereotypes etc....... it would necessarily be so broad as to me meaningless. However, the broadness would give license to all men to enter women's sports, prisons and changing rooms. And that's the truth of the matter.

Yep. Any male who has hair longer than four inches, or wears a brightly coloured scarf, or a pink shirt?

Sex is the only logical, obvious, checkable, practical, ethical basis for basing legislation/laws.

@Franca123

Any law in this area would avoid specifics about agp, gender stereotypes etc....... it would necessarily be so broad as to me meaningless. However, the broadness would give license to all men to enter women's sports, prisons and changing rooms. And that's the truth of the matter.

They have that opportunity now.

All they have to do is identify, or say they identify, as a woman.

Sport, a bit more complicated but the IOC have actually downgraded the requirement to lower testosterone, so…,

Oh dear, I'm not wearing any of those stylised fabrics or potions
today. Does that mean that according to this belief system that I'm
not a woman today? And moreover, in contrast a man wearing such stylised fabrics and potions is a woman today

Well there at least one such person, who amazingly won a woman's award. Pips bunce who is part time at both sexes. Famous for it in fact. And accordingly is a woman when wearing coded female clothing.
If pips can do it, you can too.

Had a few deletions, have we?

Plus ca change ...

@Double3xposure

I am intrigued by your sports centre incident. Surely you are who you say you are and that must be accepted without exception. How dare the staff member question your trans-ness.

[quote purplebutterflybiscuits]@Double3xposure

I am intrigued by your sports centre incident. Surely you are who you say you are and that must be accepted without exception. How dare the staff member question your trans-ness.[/quote]
I know, I was shocked to the core. As you say, what happened to acceptance without exception?

We boring middle aged XX people don’t owe anyone gender non conformity.

Who are my local Council to decide who is and who isn’t trans ? Can they see my soul and my inner essence ?

The manager just got more and more angry when I asked him to explain why I wasn’t trans and didn’t count as a cross dresser.

I have a transgender title and first name, I was wearing mens clothes . I work in a man’s job and have a man’s hobbies and interests. I play sport and I hate spas . I never get my nails done or tilt my head girlishly to the side and giggle. I hate soap operas and housework.

So I’ve been living as a man for decades. And yet some unfathomable reason I’m excluded from all the specialness and star dust.

So I’d really love to see a legal definition of cross dressing. I’m not an expert but I assume it would need to start with definitions of the key terms

eg man, woman, man’s clothes, woman’s clothes.

AFAIK there is no legal definition of gender in Uk law, so that’s an issue.

As PP have pointed out, there are many cultures in the UK, so it’s not as simple as , for example , saying that a skirt is woman’s clothing. What about the Indian man in the sarong or the Scotsman in his kilt ? Should the special privileges accorded to cross dressers be given to them ?

From the reading I’ve done some cross dressing can be sensory, and that’s why it’s nearly always a male->female thing. Womens clothes tend to have softer fabric, silks, jersey etc- i don’t like the style of womens clothes generally, but hate the feel of jeans and would much rather wear loose soft jersey or cotton trousers. Skirts and dresses I also like because they are loose- dresses don’t have restrictive waists and i like the feel of less fabric against the skin

So for me while I would probably choose to wear mens clothes for practicality and fit, i do tend to wear womens because I prefer the feel of the fabrics and the less restrictive form

Lucky for me I’m female so I have the choice. But I could imaging feeling the same if my genitalia were different

Well I have good news for you - there IS a choice. I spend most of yesterday afternoon in a very obscure and unknown shop that sells clothes exactly as you describe in sizes that fit men. Or as you call them, people with different genitalia.

It’s called Zara - you won’t have heard of it and no doubt it’s just local our town. I bought about a dozen items of clothing for my son who has sensory issues.

Trousers with loose waists and no zips and buttons in soft cotton. Soft tops in cotton jersey, thick and thin and fine knit and with short and long sleeves.

If you Google the words “ joggers” “ t shirts “ and “ hoodies “ you mayfind them elsewhere.

For some reason my son’s sensory issues have never made him feel like wearing a tight shiny skirt, bra, lace pants and high heels and suspenders. But I’m sure you are right that sensory issues are the main motivations for many XY cross dressers.

I like you double, wickedly funny. Can you be my new best friend?

@Terfydactyl

The law wouldn't have to define cross-dresser, though. It would only have to define trans.

@ErrolTheDragon

Or maybe it is...Ive looked up a few definitions, which seem quite broad. Which may be fine. The problem is associating cross dressing with being transgender; the wiki page states 'Cross-dressing is not synonymous with being transgender.'

I would say this is one of those things that is on the line a bit.

It's not sexual obviously, but in some cases a woman in a tux or something similar playing with gender norms, someone like Annie Lennox back in the day. You were meant to see her as doing something, not quite subversive, but certainly flipping what was expected.

Now we see women's formal ware of that type more often, and often more tailored to flatter the female form and just more feminine in terms of fabric or colours. It doesn't clearly say "mensware,"

I would say cross dressing has to have that element of gender bending, but it doesn't have to be sexual though that is a type of cross dressing for sure. And some people just use the term for the sexual type so it's good to clarify..