Logo

Is it socially acceptable for individuals to wear clothing typically associated with the opposite gender? What are some reasons for or against this practice?

Last Updated: 19.06.2025 04:52

Is it socially acceptable for individuals to wear clothing typically associated with the opposite gender? What are some reasons for or against this practice?

If it’s merely your sexual fetish — see 3) above — don’t do it in public. You’ll look ridiculous and possible offend decency laws.

In Lancaster County, Pennsylvania or Salt Lake City it won’t be accepted. In Rio or Douarnenez at Mardi Gras it’s practically compulsory. (Seriously, I counted the men in skirts in a bar in Douarnenez: one in six.)

3) Fetish crossdressers - who use clothes as a substitute for, or an essential precursor to, sex. This is commonest among teenage boys, but usually disappears or develops into transvestism later. It is rarely seen in public, although the word "fetish" is often misapplied by those who should know better.

Atheists who said that reading the Bible made them an atheist, how? Literally there are millions of people who read the Bible daily and still believe in God. So why say that? I mean unless you want to sound smart & edgy

b) In light entertainment: female impersonators/comedians; pantomime dames in British theatre.

If you’re going to do it, do it 100% and do it well. You’ll enjoy it all the more and so will the people around you. It’s often good for a round of applause or a free drink.

Socially acceptable? It depends on which bit of society you live in.

Can you fly an American flag in the UK in your own private property there? What is the UK’s government stance on that? And if yes, do you also have to fly the UK flag or the American flag can fly solo?

7) Transsexuals – for many of them the cross-dressing is merely an incidental stage in their transition of identity. Once achieved, the wearing of the clothes of the other sex becomes the norm, and can no longer be called crossdressing.

6) Transvestites – what most people first think of. For transvestites, crossdressing is an end in itself; motives many and various. For most, these go back to childhood or before birth and are obsessive.

a) In serious entertainment, actors playing a role. From Mark Rylance as Cleopatra or Judi Dench as Olivia to Antony Perkins in Psycho. Japanese Kabuki and Nō players. Sopranos singing "breeches" roles in opera.

If the Red Pill is supposed to be so bad, why are so many young men buying into it? What about Red Pill makes it appealing to them?

1) Occasional crossdressers - Hallowe'en, practical jokers, fancy dress parties, students' rags... etc.

Ignore people who will quote their religion at you (unless it’s your religion too).

4) Entertainers.

Why are Americans obese? Is it the food or is it the psychology?

Reasons against it? Basically,

c) Drag queens and Drag kings – an exaggerated satirical sub-section of the light entertainment field.

Don’t do it in places where it’s illegal, like Russia.

What causes you to be tired all the time and major headaches?

8) Those forced into crossdressing. This category is included for completeness but barely seems to exist in real life today. It was however observed in the period 1850-1950 when boys were occasionally forced into girls' clothes as a punishment at school or in the home. It is a staple of fiction – to escape from danger (Some Like It Hot), to obtain a job (Tootsie, Mrs Doubtfire), or forced by a sadistic female relative (much transvestite erotic fiction).

d) Stunt doubles.

Don’t do it unless you want to.

What are the main issues that have historically and currently divided Republicans and Democrats?

5) Other professionals: the occasional spy/undercover policeman/criminal in disguise. Gay prostitutes.

2) Fashion crossdressers - some metrosexuals and most women fall into this category. Women in trousers – seen as a sexual and social aberration in 1900 – had become the norm by 2000.

There are many reasons. This can be broken down into the eight broad categories below, though most people only think of no.6:

How could NASA possibly land on the moon when it's impossible to reach the moon through the Earth's dome? Why are they making up such an obvious lie?