Saw a response by Tony F to an innocent question, and was inspired to ask this question.
I like many transvestites, it just seemed an interesting question to ask.
2007-06-26 04:55:40 · 23 answers · asked by Sprinkle 5 in Society & Culture ➔ Cultures & Groups ➔ Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender
no clothes = no shoes.
2007-06-26 05:11:27 · update #1
No clothes= no wearing leafs.
2007-06-26 05:12:32 · update #2
No clothes =n no ornaments to be worn.
I am literally laughing out loud at your answers.
2007-06-26 05:15:51 · update #3
They could still sit down to go to the toilet.
2007-06-26 05:17:03 · update #4
Anyone at all who wears the clothes associated with the opposite gender for any reason what-so-ever is technically a transvestite, this question suits all.
There is nothing offensive about the term transvestite trans (Opposite) vest (Clothes) but most transvestites are far more interesting than just the clothes they wear..
2007-06-26 05:48:44 · update #5
What is wrong with the word transvestite Mikael?
http://uk.answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=AsX0U0.zNasnNKFafGk7X90gBgx.?qid=20070626100432AAUEUfM
2007-06-26 08:47:34 · update #6
Wow, great question, I'd never thought of that! Probably not in the literal definition of a transvestite, but there could be guys who enjoyed doing girl-type things. People are people are people.
2007-06-26 04:59:58 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 0⤋
The word transvestite is a lable, mostly given by traditional homophobic discourse. There is no such thing as transvestites. There are people who impersonate the opposite gender for various reasons. Would you call a male actor doing a female role in a theater a transvestite? Would you call a woman who dresses like a man on a daily basis a transvestite? I guess not.
We should stop using this word, as it does not reflect anything good, only negative feelings about people who prefer to wear dresses and not trousers (pants). What about traditional scottish kilts? Are those people transvestites?
Well, as for your questions, if there were no clothes there would be no transvestites, but at the same time it is not the clothes that make the transvestite, it is their identity.
Transwomen and transmen are more than transvestites, they are an identity, just like gay men and gay women, bisexuals and all the constelation of sexualities that exist in the world?
Why is heterosexuality the norm? Who said that a woman needs to wear a skirt and dress all the time, and a man needs to wear shirt and trousers (pants) in all occasions? Is blue a male colour and pink a female colour? Who said it?
I truly think that our societies need to change the way we try to normalize everything and try to pathologize everything else that does not fit the norm.
But this is just me.
2007-06-26 12:30:23 · answer #2 · answered by Mikhael 2 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Yes, interesting...I would imagine if there were no clothes, any term that identified with style/type of dress would be defined by something else...ornamenting the body (see 3rd world inhabitants that wear little/no clothing) with flowers, paint, mud, beads, feathers...have always been different between the sexes, and defining each...Transvestites would then, most likely emulate whatever ornamentation defined femininity.
2007-06-26 12:13:20 · answer #3 · answered by lil_fem_mommie 2 · 2⤊ 0⤋
It would depend on if there were other gender cues, like movement or speech, but if the society were both nudist and gender-neutral I really don't think the desire for transvestism would exist, though there would probably still be transsexuality because the physical differences would remain.
2007-06-26 13:59:29 · answer #4 · answered by geramd4040 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋
There'd probably be some type of prostesis if that were the cause. Seeing as how we don't have quite as great a motivation to make genitals look genuine, we don't really have any. But, being naked would bring about plenty of advances in genital prosthetics, I'm sure.
2007-06-26 12:34:58 · answer #5 · answered by pjonkml 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Whenever someone tries to change their appearance through style and mannerisms, they're doing drag. And there's no rule among the nudists against wearing make-up, styling your hair, or carrying yourself in a way that states one gender while your biological material states another.
2007-06-26 12:04:49 · answer #6 · answered by NHBaritone 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
I am sure there would still be men and women alike out there who express their sexuality in different ways whether it be by hairstyle, make up and the way in which they carry themselves. Gender is only partly expressed via clothes. a great part of gender is attitude.
2007-06-26 12:16:45 · answer #7 · answered by smedrik 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Wow good question, as a transvetite i would say no as if there were no pretty and sensual clothes then there would be nothing there to desire.
2007-06-26 12:23:58 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
Great question... I suppose they could wear leaves right? Just for the performance...
2007-06-26 12:02:58 · answer #9 · answered by blatinofreak 2 · 4⤊ 0⤋
You get a star because that is an excellent question and now my brains hurts!!
2007-06-26 12:04:18 · answer #10 · answered by . 6 · 4⤊ 0⤋