Men dressing as women; what really motivates them.

[Teribus21]

Malcolm Clark does not hold back on what really motivates men dressing as women.
https://www.spiked-online.com/2026/04/02/kristi-noems-husband-and-the-dark-secret-of-trans/

You obviously haven’t met Tanya!

I think that part of what may be going on is that society is now producing more people with fetishes and other paraphilia than it used to. Even in women, though mainly in men. And I think it's important to look into what is going on with these people so we can understand what in society has created this. Porn is clearly x major part of it, but not the only thing. And the reason we see so much porn openly used is in part because of ideas we have adopted about sexual freedom and the psychological effects of sexual objectification.
If we don't start trying to till these things back it will be much more difficult to deal with increasingly common sexual problems.

What is going on, as @moto748e said, is that these things have become socially acceptable and normalised. People with fetishes and paraphilias are being created and encouraged by a society which says it's OK to behave in that way.

People's behaviour is shaped and constrained by the society they live in. If something is frowned on or illegal, fewer people will do it. If it's seen as socially acceptable, more people will do it.

If you think you're the only person in the world with a particular paraphilia, you might try to hide it. If you can go online and find loads of other people just like you, you're more likely to flaunt it yourself online or even in public.

One of the reasons the SC ruling is so important. Trans-identifying women, who want to be treated as men, still need maternity provision. If they are imprisoned they still need to be in a female jail. If they are competing in sport they still need to be able to compete against their physical peers.

We do not say that they lose their rights as women just because they have turned their backs on women. Feminism and women’s rights are for all female humans, for women and girls..

What if they're not guilty? Everyone jumped to believe Nick Beech and condemn Tory Politicians and generals and he turned out to be a liar. Did his victims deserve that because they didn't share the political beliefs of the people who gleefully condemned them?

What's karma if not punishment for wrong doing?

She did something wrong, therefore you have no sympathy when she is a victim of something else. There's no logic to the karma or proportion, it not a consequence just coincidence, but you are happy to gloat and repeatedly state you cannot find any sympathy for her.

So you think it's OK for a man to abuse his wife if you think she's a bad person because that's karma?

Will you also condemn the man for his abuse? You seem to be supporting his appalling behaviour because he's given his wife what you think she deserves.

Quite. No problem with the man's behaviour or treatment of another human. Merely whether or not the victim 'deserves' the abuse according to the poster's own personal politics.

That was the reasoning of the 3rd Reich. Those they politically disliked were subhuman and deserved all they got.

That was very disturbing. When police searched Carl Beech’s (‘Nick’) devices they found he had been making indecent images of children, possessed indecent images of children and engaged in voyeurism as he had recorded a boy going to the toilet. There were class A images amongst them, and he had hundreds and hundreds of images.

Now, remember he had trained as a paediatric nurse, was an NHS manager, and also spoke to youngsters as young as five (he volunteered of course) on behalf of the NSPCC in some sort of ‘stay safe’ programme discussing the dangers of abuse.

Now you think of how many people are invested in breaking down any barriers or safeguarding to allow men to go into women’s and girls changing rooms etc. All these people ostensibly doing this under the banner of being ‘progressive’. Stinks to high heaven, in my opinion anyway.

I have read that predatory men will be drawn to jobs and places which will give them access to their prey. Just give them a guise they can use, and by Jove they are being given carte Blanche at the moment.

K Noem had some sort of extra marital affair. I can’t imagine how awful it would be to have a fetishistic husband. It would make your skin crawl really. Then you think how these creepy, fetishistic men have been celebrated. There were some with a high profile in the last American administration. It is worrying too as fetishes in these men who have them can escalate. It could be very dangerous for women.

Yes, this is certainly true, but I think you have to go further downstream, before the paraphilias start to emerge. Though we should be thinking how we minimise the escalation of these things. Making them socially unacceptable is good, but I think individuals affected also need personal strategiies.

But what triggers this kind of sexual response in the first place? I think that it is happening more often, not just that it is allowed to escalate. We know it can happen young, when sexuality is first emergent, maybe even earlier in sexualised environments. It's not a situation such young people affected are creating, it's something they are being exposed to. We should try and minimise these kinds of triggers in our culture.

And adolescents are not taught to think that some sexual thoughts can be unhealthy or dangerous, or that it might be a good idea to control them, or how they might do that. Quite the opposite actually, they are taught that they are not dangerous, it is dangerous to suppress them, and they won't be successful in doing so anyway. All after creating a society riddled with sexualised content in everyday life.

So these kids, when ther are first aware of these feelings or urges, before anyone else is aware, are working from a position of, all sexual urges are ok if you aren't hurting other people, and they are even a part of "who you are" and need to be honoured. And they don't yet have the insight or experience to question that at a time when they might be most likely to be able to do something about it. Because years down the road when it's very established it will be much harder to do anything about it.

Kristi Noem isn't a victim. Her husband didn't abuse her by having a secret perversion that people found out about. People aren't abusing her by not accepting that she's a victim. Nobody is trying to take her civil rights away. This couple, Kristi and Bryon Noem, are as bad as each other. They get votes by pretending they believe in family values.

In this scenario she is. She's found out her husband has an abhorrent fetish in a horrible way.

It's possible to feel sympathy for that while hating her politics.

I felt similarly about Charlie Kirk. I disagreed with pretty much everything he said, but at least he sat down to debate it, and killing him was not OK. The gloaters disgusted me.

Whether or not someone is a victim is dependant on the scenario under discussion. It is not some sort of permanent status awarded to someone only if they are nice. Being a victim doesn’t involve a moral judgement on someone’s character.

The most horrible person in the world can be the victim of an incident such as assault, fraud, burglary, murder, domestic violence. Just because they are horrible, it doesn’t mean they are not also a victim.

If I punch you in the face, you are the victim of an assault, no matter how much we dislike each other, or disagree on other topics.

Yep, feedback on how my post broke guidelines would be helpful, because whilst I don’t remember exactly what I said, I’m pretty sure it wasn’t nasty, just honest.

I don't know about cross-dressing or drag etc, but in terms of transgenderism, here's what I've read up about the brain of a "transsexual". I'll link the document I've taken most of this from at the bottom.
The general findings of neuroscientists relate to an area of the brain known as the 'central subdivision of the bed nucleus of the stria terminalis' (BSTc), a collection of cells in the hypothalamus. Zhou, Hofman, Gooren and Swaab (1997) suggest that there are differences in the brain based on sex, and their research suggests that the BSTc is larger in volume in males than females. Various neuroscientists have discovered that in transsexual females, those considered male at birth, but who had a strong conviction that they were female, the BSTc region was similar in size to the female BSTc and transsexuals considered female at birth, but who were certain they were male, had a BSTc volume similar to the male BSTc (Chung et al. 2002).
Furthermore, experiments showed that hormone levels in adulthood did not affect BSTc size. A 46-year-old female with high levels of testosterone due to a tumour had a normal sized BSTc, as did a 31-year-old man with high levels of oestrogen due to a feminizing adrenal tumour.
Anyway this is just some interesting psychological insight into a potential reason or at least a factor. Do I think this is the sole reason for people identifying as transgender? Probably not. But still.

philarchive.org/archive/KILBGA-2

Don't know them personally but the first person who comes to mind is Brianna Ghey, a 16-year-old trans girl (biologically male) who was murdered. The photos of her suggest she dressed normally. Believe it or not, most trans people are "normal people", not drag queens.

And so notable the sympathy and condolences that were offered on MN to Brianna's family. An awful tragedy which shows how many fucked-up kids there are out there. How different to some of the reactions in other SM.

This.

Exactly! Murder is never OK in a civilised society!

I think that's key. You get the reverse issue where someone being a victim of one thing means they get treated less critically in other areas. Victimhood needs to be disentangled from general morality.

AGP is always abuse if the person's in a relationship.

I think it's a bit much to say TIFs have turned their backs on women. They may not suppprt roling back women's rights - you could argue they have via identifying out of womanhood, though...