Having been crossdressing since I was five, I created Sally Watson in March 1996 at the age of 37, and "came out" as a tranny within the year. Two years later, I began to question the practice of masquerading as a woman, and started experimenting with mixed-gendered presentations. Since then, I've become a "man in a skirt" full-time. With this change in my philosophy has come an insatiable curiosity about why so many trannies repeatedly choose to adopt a full-femme disguise rather than simply wearing the clothes they love as men. This article contains the results of months of observation, discussion, and consideration, and comes to some rather uncomfortable conclusions.
I begin by examining the concept of "femininity" in the context of male crossdressing, and conclude that, in most cases, it's used as a smokescreen to cover the abrogation of a tranny's freedom of dress and the forfeit of his human rights. I then go on to discuss why this self-deprecation remains so widespread a phenomenon. The finger of guilt is pointed squarely at the transcommunity itself - paranoia, intimidation, and lies about the outside world's perceived hostility to crossdressers are the weapons it most commonly employs to maintain the status quo. Support group leaders are also found guilty, if not for active encouragement of this practice within their groups, then certainly for complicity in allowing it to continue.
I've heard many trannies claim that "dressing up brings out the woman in me", or that "dressing up makes me feel feminine". But what exactly does this mean? How can a man know what it's like to be a woman, or to feel feminine? Nevertheless, let's accept for a moment that this statement is true, and do a reductio ad absurdum analysis on it. We'll assume that today a tranny wears trousers, a shirt, has a balding head, calls himself Jim and claims to be masculine, and that tomorrow he wears a dress, false breasts, a wig, calls himself Jane, and says he's feminine. But is this true femininity?
Most trannies would say "Of course not. Femininity is much more than just wearing women's clothes - it comes from within", and as if to prove a point, they place a hand on their (false) left breast, behind which lies a male heart, of course. But a male heart can still feel compassion, tenderness, joy, and all the other so-called "feminine" emotions, male eyes can still cry, and male arms can still hug. So why do trannies insist on the need for a female disguise to allow them to do this? The logical extension of this argument is the implication that non-tranny men are incapable of expressing their "feminine" side because they never don the female clothes which allow them to do so. This is clearly absurd.
So what about those other trannies who maintain that merely wearing women's clothes is enough to make them feel feminine? In this case, that wonderful thing called "femininity", for which some trannies supposedly spend their life searching, is available for a few pounds at the local store. A dress, some court shoes, a bit of make-up, a wig, and hey presto - femininity on demand! But this claim is even more ridiculous than the first, because it implies not only that a tranny can express "femininity" through a particular type of clothing, but also that he can switch it on and off at a moment's notice.
I have to conclude that there's no justification to the assertion that wearing women's clothes makes a tranny "feel like a woman", or "feel feminine"; in other words, feelings are feelings and clothes are clothes. It's obvious really - you might as well try to argue that wearing spats, a sharp suit, and a trilby makes you feel like a gangster. In any case, women don't wear trousers, false beards and fake penises to make themselves "feel more masculine", do they? I'll discuss shortly why I believe that trannies feel the need to proclaim their alleged femininity in this way; but first, let's look at the effects of this self-delusion on the wider transcommunity.
Of the few trannies with the courage to "come out", a small fraction seem to develop militant tendencies about their newly-found lifestyle. They bore their fellow trannies with stories about how they went here and there, and did this and that - maybe they were read, but they didn't care because they were exercising their newly-discovered freedom of choice to dress how they wish. But what does this "freedom of choice" mean for the transcommunity?
Well, at the present time, the answer is "not much". There's a long-standing and universally-observed rule in western society that anyone who wears women's clothes must be, or must at least look like, a woman; I'll discuss the origin of this rule later, but for the moment, let's call it "Graham's Law". So while even the most overt wig-wearing tranny will enthuse about how lucky he is to have the freedom to wear whatever clothes he wishes, he doesn't in reality have any such freedom at all - in fact, he has less freedom than a non-tranny man, because the latter will probably never feel an irresistible urge to wear something unconventional. In fact, whether or not they realise it, the vast majority of trannies automatically and unquestioningly obey Graham's Law, so they're obliged to go through the pretence of trying to look like women just so they can wear women's clothes. But that's fascism, not freedom! Then, to make themselves feel better about this forfeit of their basic human rights, they make some all-too-familiar excuse like "it makes me feel more feminine". This "reason" sounds sufficiently plausible that it's been passed down from one tranny generation to the next without ever being challenged, and has long-since become accepted as The Truth - but, for the reasons discussed above, it's pure self-delusion.
As an aside, the observant reader may have noticed that men's perceived lack of freedom to appear in public as men wearing women's clothes is similar to the restriction imposed on black people during the years of racial apartheid. I hate to think what Martin Luther King would've said to the suggestion that blacks should use make-up to try to pass as whites in the interests of racial harmony - or indeed what any thinking person would say about it today - but this parallels what virtually all trannies are doing in the gender arena. Every time a black person sat quietly at the back of the bus for fear of being arrested and beaten up, that was a step backwards for racial freedom - similarly, every time a tranny dresses to look like a woman in public for fear of being seen as a crossdressing man, that's a step backwards for transgender freedom. So the next time an "out" tranny decides to exercise his "freedom" to dress en femme, he'd do well to remember that he's simply perpetuating a discriminatory system, and until this system is completely overturned, none of us has any freedom.
A couple of months ago, I was asked to write an article for a local support group magazine. The editor knew of my strongly-held opinions, and asked me not to go on about rights. But why not? Frankly, crossdressing at any level is all about rights. It's about our right to dress as we please, our right to equal opportunities and non-discrimination, and our right to protection from physical and mental abuse under the law. I suspect that the reason the editor didn't want to hear that a man already has as much right as a woman to wear a skirt is because the "knowledge" that "we're not supposed to dress like that" is the only excuse that most crossdressers have for remaining in the closet. Look at it this way: over the last couple of years, I and a few others country-wide have provided ample proof that men can lead perfectly normal lives whatever they choose to wear, yet the pages of support group magazines are still filled with trannies "discovering" this fact. Why don't we learn from each other? Because we don't want to - if we all acknowledged our rights, then none of us would have any excuse for remaining complacent.
Of course, if we want to allow others to continue to dictate to us what we're allowed to wear in the street, that's certainly one avenue open to us. But should we consider this option seriously? Do we really want crossdressers a hundred years hence to feel as persecuted as we feel now? That's an unthinkable scenario - and yet we're doing absolutely nothing to prevent it! To effect change, we have to start presenting the public with images of men wearing women's clothes. Masquerading as women won't achieve anything, because it simply perpetuates the status quo in a world where men don't wear skirts - and crossdressing by its very nature ought to be trying to expose this inequality.
It's worth remembering that women have enjoyed the right of freedom of dress for decades - and they've never resorted to pretending to be men to make their wearing of trousers more publicly acceptable. Why are wig-wearing trannies so certain that this direct approach won't work for them?
Naturally, most support groups' work is carried out on behalf of those trannies who wish to hide their activities and desires from the public at large; unfortunately, much of the membership of these groups has interpreted this as being the only reason that the groups exist. In fact, this misapprehension is held so strongly that any new concept which threatens to undermine it is attacked. Consequently, my innocent arrival at the Beaumont Society's Rotherham conference in 1998 as a man in a skirt had been condemned before I'd even finished unpacking my car, and the view was subsequently put forward in very strongly-worded terms (usually anonymously) that the outside world won't accept men wearing skirts. This is Graham's Law in action.
But hang on a moment - Graham's Law being enforced from within the transcommunity? But of course - think about it. While most trannies try to present realistic images of women, only a tiny fraction actually succeeds. Naturally, no-one in the transcommunity has the courage to say so out loud, but most dressed trannies look exactly like what they are, namely men in wigs. So who's kidding whom? Understand this - the public doesn't give a damn whether a tranny wears a wig with his skirt and heels or not! No - Graham's Law was invented by trannies, for trannies, with the sole purpose of generating and maintaining a climate of fear within the transcommunity. It has nothing to do with public expectations concerning how men should dress, and that's why it's only trannies who get upset when anyone breaks it. I know this is true: I'm out there proving the fallacy of Graham's Law every day - and despite disinterest from the person in the street and a commendation from my employer, I'm still subjected to abuse from (mostly closeted) trannies claiming to speak on behalf of their support groups! Clearly, they're simply regurgitating the teachings of their peers, most of whom are equally inexperienced and unknowledgeable.
Frankly, I'm angered and disgusted at this grave abuse of trust. Support groups should be fora in which open discussion can take place about finding solutions to the problems faced by our minority, but instead, they've become breeding grounds for hysteria, paranoia, and lies about the alleged hostility of the outside world, designed to intimidate one generation of tranny after another into remaining in the closet. I fail to understand what those responsible for maintaining this oppressive environment think that their actions are achieving; however, it's my belief that the transcommunity's failure to respond to the changing social climate of the last twenty or thirty years has been deliberately engineered, and this is the primary reason why so little progress has been made towards the public acceptance of the male crossdressing lifestyle. Support group leaders are undoubtedly guilty of complicity by turning a blind eye to this dishonest behaviour - or do they not realise what's going on under their noses? In any event, they can't be held entirely responsible - individual group members must open their eyes, use their brains, and start challenging the lies if we're to move forward.
This is perhaps an appropriate point to talk about the practice of passing, which is an area where I believe that support groups and the message they're conveying are seriously in error. Whichever way you look at it, passing is fundamentally dishonest - it's an attempt by a man in a skirt to deceive the public into thinking he's a real woman. How is such an activity supposed to help bring about the acceptance of our lifestyle by the very people we're trying to deceive? Clearly it can't and it won't, because the public will be justifiably suspicious of what we're trying to hide. Let's face it - you'd be suspicious too if the tables were turned. Nevertheless, when high-profile support groups promote the idea that passing is a worthwhile goal, it's little surprise that so many trannies buy into it - at first sight, it seems to be a positive way of dealing with the feelings of fear, guilt, shame, and self-denial which crossdressing holds for so many of our number. Sadly, those who embark on this path don't realise that trying to pass actually does nothing to alleviate these negative feelings. I've read numerous accounts of how quickly a tranny's elation and confidence has given way to fear, shame and outright panic following a well-aimed comment from a schoolboy in the street; support groups are silent on coping with this situation!
Unfortunately, support groups also fail to tell us something far more important - namely that we may be risking our lives every time we play the passing game. Contrary to what some in the transcommunity would have us believe, the UK is actually a relatively safe place for trannies who behave responsibly in public, but hate crimes including murder are regularly perpetrated against so-called "stealth" (passing) trannies and transsexuals in many other countries of the world. The fact that UK trannies are actually praised for being able to pull off a stunt like passing shows an appalling lack of responsibility. Must it take the murder of a high-profile member of a UK support group to force us to re-evaluate our priorities?
So what should support groups be doing for us? Well, in my opinion, real support isn't about organising monthly meetings or annual weekends for trannies en femme behind closed doors. It isn't about patting someone on the back for a successful midnight trip en femme to the post-box at the corner of the street. It isn't even about encouraging trannies to go shopping en femme on a Saturday afternoon. Certainly, all these are laudable activities, and many trannies rely on support groups for just these sorts of lifelines. But this should be a temporary arrangement - no-one should expect to rely on support groups indefinitely. We should all aim to move on, and support groups ought to be helping and encouraging us to do so. Real support is about changing the status quo in our favour. It's about cultivating a sense of "tranny pride" to replace the unhealthy fear and paranoia currently pervading the transcommunity. It's about dissociating the image of crossdressers from the less savoury elements in our society, and taking the gutter media to court when they persist in making libellous accusations. It's about talking to discriminating employers to get their conditions of employment changed. It's about lobbying oppressive administrations who suppress human rights, and who torture, imprison and execute men simply for wearing women's clothes. In short, real support is about making support unnecessary - an interesting paradox which requires support groups to work towards their own demise. It could be argued that support groups have too much invested in the status quo to let this happen - which might explain why they seem to turn a blind eye to their members' intimidatory tactics concerning the observance of Graham's Law ......
I know that much of the abuse I've recently suffered at the hands of other trannies has been the result of their fear of being "outed" by someone like me with strong political views and a big mouth. However, I'm sympathetic to the fact that many of these trannies have built themselves cosy little closets over the years, and that they don't appreciate a young upstart coming along and trying to dismantle them. I know - I've been there myself. It's a sad reflection on the nature of society that many of us have felt condemned to live that way almost as a matter of personal survival - but that's history, and none of us can change it. However, it'd be a monstrous crime to permit this situation to continue any longer, simply through our fear of challenging the outdated philosophy on which the transcommunity operates, and our failure to demand better respect and integrity from those we trust.
Published in TransLiving International, June 2001.