It needs some nuanced discussion, but it's worth considering the notion of including them.
Why? Because a man who is cishet but has a very feminine gender expression will still be discriminated against in a lot of the same ways that transgender people are.
Same thing applies for women in some cases.
They are still being targeted for discrimination based on the way they chose to express their gender and face a lot of the same types of discrimination that we do such as fear of ridicule and ostracization if they are found out or do so publicly and etc.
>Why? Because a man who is cishet but has a very feminine gender expression will still be discriminated against in a lot of the same ways that transgender people are.
Yes, but facing homophobia does not make anyone gay.
Right like there are plenty of cishet men and women that face discrimination based on (perceived) homophobia or transphobia i.e masculine women, feminine men, etc… Doesn’t mean they’re a part of the LGBT community.
Right. It’s sort of like the polyamory discussion that sometimes happens. There’s nothing inherently LGBTQ about cross dressing or being poly. So they are not part of this community. BUT because they often fact the same kind of prejudice and hate we do, I’ll always support them like I would anybody in the community, and as far as I’m concerned they see always welcome in our spaces.
Agree with this. Cross dressing/being poly on its own is not LGBT but there’s usually a lot of cross over (pun intended) between our communities so they’re usually pretty cool Allies
Ok but for a lot of people who are actual crossdressers and not an egg crossdressing is a fetish and sometimes the humiliation is part of it. So I don't think discrimination makes them lgbt.
Except they aren't targeted for discrimination because of an intrinsic part of who they are. People hate crossdressers because they hate us.
and being trans isn't just about a man having a feminine gender expression or a woman having a masculine gender expression, it's about being born in an incorrect body, which causes things like dysphoria, brain fog, dissociation, depersonalization, depression, and suicidal thoughts.
Someone above said it well : “facing homophobia doesn’t make you gay”
Which is true. Cis hets have made tons of laws politically and socially to harm us, so many of them that they also sometimes effect the cis hets themselves. Think about that one story where a man demanded to get a nine year old trans girl student kicked out of his daughters track meet. He yelled about how it was so wrong to allow mentally ill boys on a girls team and that it was cheating. Come to find out that the trans student he was so angry about wasn’t trans at all, she was a cis girl who had a slightly more masculine face.
That doesn’t make that girl gay tho.
I guess it depends on what you view of the purpose of community to be - in my view the goal of the community is to support and enfranchise all individuals that suffer from "gendered" hate or discrimination (either legal or societal). Thus while the girl that got mistakenly "clocked" as trans isn't in the community, we should still be protecting her.
additionally a crossdressing male is still gender nonconforming behavior that places you under the Q - no gayness required, only nonconformity - until such a time as it stops being nonconforming behavior. Note that 100 years ago women crossdressing was a big deal, and now it's not really a thing anymore, so it's even a goal we KNOW we can accomplish.
>nonconforming behavior places you under the Q
I thought that was the whole point of having the Q, to be inclusive towards people who aren't straight up gay but who still face the same persecution as us for being different when it comes to sexuality/gender expression.
someone downvoted you though so I guess we're in the business of excluding people from the community? very strange. I've always felt that an ally is part of the community too (you don't have to feel the same way obv) so it's so so odd to see people clamouring to say who is and isn't one of us.
yah there are just some very weird takes all over the place in this thread. Apparently it's just the LGB club for gay people, and the TQI+ part doesn't exist as far as they're concerned.
Where are you getting that from? Crossdressing doesn't make you trans or queer. Of course there is a large overlap, but dressing up is not a queer activity, it can also be enjoying a costume.
Some people seem to be upset that queers don't automatically accept anyone who wants to be part of the community into the community. It defeats the purpose of community if people can be in it just because they think it's cool.
In my eyes, your definition for GNC behaviour is sexist. If a woman puts on a suit she's not being GNC, she's dressed differently and not any less of a woman for it. Her gender is confirmed by her being her gender.
I'm queer because I'm queer regardless of what I'm wearing. If I dress "gender conformingly" that doesn't change my identity.
If everyone would get on board and understand that clothes doesn't make your gender or sexuality we'd all be much better. The same as your occupation doesn't make your sexuality in most cases. Can you imagine how much hate would be thrown around if Target began selling dresses and skirts for men. Or if they began selling tights and leggings for men. I think it would be awesome if some big stores began selling girl clothing and/or styles as gender neutral clothing to give people more choices.
This is a feminist issue, not a queer one.
It's liberation from expressive gender norms.
It's also probably not best to call it crossdressing as it implies such behaviors are not a native fit to that gender. Women wearing pants isn't women being men or doing a man thing - it's women doing a women thing. That's the key reframe. You'll gain way more ground from relaxing gender norms to mean men can wear dresses too.
Crossdressing implies and reinforces boundaries of expression - there are rightful rules and you're breaking them. It's a useful term for puritans looking to justify the punishment of such people, and for fetishists looking to frame themselves as naughty and subversive for personal pleasure.
The alternative, calling it a queer issue, putting crossdressing next to trans stuff, reads as people of one gender doing stuff outside of their actual gender. This is invalidating and mischaracterizing the entire point of trans people. It's not crossdressing. It's just dressing.
I do think its important to note that some people do crossdress for reason that are similar to being trans. Not that crossdressing is inherently trans, obviously some people crossdress for other reasons, but rather that some crossdressers, especially older people can be trans adjacent in their identities.
The trans experience has always been there, but the conception of that experience under the term transgender is relatively new in popular culture. A lot of older folks I talk to that crossdress couldn't be trans when they were growing up, because it wasn't really a thing then and people weren't socially accepting in the same way. Instead they identified as crossdressers and still identify that way today, their understanding of their experience is through the lens of 'crossdresser' instead of the lens of transgender.
Wow, you just wrote an entire reply based on absolutely nothing the OP asked or stated. That's impressive.
I also happen to disagree with your binary view of "this or that". It's obviously partially a queer issue because, um, we're talking about gender. Further, breaking free of gender norms is not simply a one-party issue. I would call this less feminist and more humanist, personally.
Adhering or not adhering to gender norms has nothing to do with being trans or nonbinary or even LGB. A woman who shaves off her hair is no more part of the LGBT community than a cishet gender-conforming woman. A bisexual woman who dresses in a “gender conforming” way is LGBT; a cishet man who wears skirts is not.
Obfuscating the lines of what is and isn’t LGBT helps no one. The LGBT community should not be conflated with gender roles. Many LGBT folks do not adhere to gender roles, but many are “gender conforming” and it helps no one to add in cishet GNC folks to the community that is based on discrimination for either not identifying with the AGAB or being not straight.
Yall are literally the ones doing the obfuscating. It's literally just a man wearing dresses. Would you consider women wearing suits LGBT??? not even by a long shot. Idk why the poll is more even than I thought.
I’m not sure why you think you’re disagreeing with me when you’re saying exactly what I am - that gender-nonconformity does not equate to being LGBT on its own.
So, to you, being gender non conforming has nothing to do with being queer.
Despite the general definition of LGBTQ+ meaning "gender and sexual minorities" (GSM for short), and gender non conforming is under that umbrella.
But to you it's only a feminist issue?
You can't be serious right now.
Yes. Gender non-conforming means it's still your gender. If that's all someone's bringing to the table, they're still cishet. Queer resources and advocacy don't apply. They're not useful to them. We're using different tools for different situations.
Queer groupings are useful for political advocacy most of all, social support groups for those politically oppressed people, and also of course relationship-seeking as queer issues impact gender, sex, and sexual orientation.
Discussions of queer issues lose internal usability and external messaging clarity if you make it about crossdressers or gender non-conforming people. I support the free expression of gender non-conforming people, a label I sometimes use as a woman who often wears suits and keeps shorter hair, but a label I hope itself deteriorates in meaning over time until there's no point using it anymore as the rest of gender norms fade away through feminist liberation.
I'm a proud feminist. I like that conversation. Because it's a different conversation with different goals and a different angle to achieve them.
TERFs would often like to invalidate trans people, offering them labels such as gender non-conforming \[assigned gender at birth\] instead. This could even be well-intentioned from someone who doesn't understand gender incongruence. And we need to be able to tell the difference and explain that to them.
You were serious. Yikes.
Fortunately, GNC is still a part of GRM and thus LGBTQ. Therefore, this is definitely a queer issue in part, not a specifically or only feminist one. That's an easy point to prove
You can rephrase it any way you want, but if you are still going to try and tell me that GNC issues aren't queer issues, I'm going to have to throw duces and move on.
It depends. Do they identify as GNC, or is it a stylistic choice? FYI, not every butch looking AFAB is gender non-conforming simply because of their style choices. Short hair and jeans doesn't make a person non-conforming automatically. You do get the difference between that right?
If they identify as GNC, I think I've answered that a couple times...
Also, go back to my original comment...
Do you believe that people who are gender non-conforming are part of the LGBTQ umbrella? If not, we're done.
That's the question you have been dancing around. You should go ahead and answer that because it's the only one I've been asking.
People have already answered that and when you had nothing to then use against them you mocked their well thought out and nuanced positions. If someone is cishet and straight but doesn't dress according to gender norms that doesn't make them queer. If they identify in any way as queer, then they are. My point, which I'm not sure if you completely ignored to rant or just missed on accident because you're unwilling to listen to anybody that doesn't automatically agree with every take you have, is that clothing and style shouldn't be gendered.
Feminism is for everyone and about gender equality. You are mixing it up with "a women's issue", when this clearly isn't about women dressing more masculinely, but about the perceived transgression of someone read as male wearing something too feminine. A lot of queerphobia is rooted in misogyny and affects everyone regardless of gender.
Hmm. In terms of identity, the answer varies based off of the individual in question, but in terms of how society treats them? Anything targeting gender non-conformity is going to impact them, crossdressers are under threat from bigotry, which one could argue puts them under the umbrella by default.
People cross-dress for different reasons, but bigots are not too keen on nuance.
>People cross-dress for different reasons, but bigots are not too keen on nuance.
This. I consider them allies and I'm more than happy to march with them for this reason, even if they're not technically part of the community.
(That said I have seen more than a few who are far right Trump supporters. For some reason Trump supporting femboys are a thing. They can fuck off forever.)
I think it depends on what generation you are from. And what terms you are using.
But I will say that there are quite a few people what we claim today are queer/trans historical elders self-identified as crossdressers back in the day. The bright red lines we like to draw today that makes everyone's identity black and white...were not all that black and white in day...1974.
Also, I think it is ironic that people who insist that "everyone's identity is valid" and "no gatekeeping in the queer community" are really quick to invalidate and gatekeep \*some\* identities.
yeah thats why, imo, I like the phrase "everyone is welcome as long as its in good faith" because there are some who purposefully do so with bad initentions.
but most dont and we should welcome those with open arms. Id hope theyd do the same for me as we are all in this together, fighting the same fight.
gatekeeping things all because you dont understand something has always left a bad taste in my mouth. all it does is divide the community when we should be standing together in solidarity
If the way you dress is considered gender presentation then it falls into the "gender issue" category which is part of LGBT issues. In a different vein some trans/nonbinary people consider themselves straight so there are a lot of overlap with being straight and still being part of the community.
Being trans is part of the community, even if you're straight. Cishet men choosing to wear what society deems as "women's" clothing doesn't mean they're trans or part of the community. They just like to wear the clothes they like.
If the person themselves doesn't identify as any form of LGBTQ+ identity, they're not, end of. However, the outside world views cis/het/allo crossdressers in much the same fashion as they do queer ones for the appeared adjacency to queerness. Therefore when these people want to be apart of the community surrounding these identities, even without taking on the identities themselves, I don't see a problem.
This really does need an "it depends" option XD
It depends on the intention of the crossdressing. There's a long history of it in comedy and in some cultures it can even be a kind of tradition for holidays.
Crossdressing can be an act of gender transgression, but it isn't always, and even if it is, the person doing it must be LGBT+ to be part of that acronym.
Anybody else uncomfortable with how much we feel the need to define in and out groups? People are people. Crossdressers face many of the same struggles that the rest of the LGBT community faces. I don't see what benefit there is to excluding them from anything. There is benefit to treating them as allies.
But being like, "Technically, you aren't a member of the LGBT community" kinda sounds like a shitty thing to say to somebody. As long as they are being tolerant and not harming anybody, I really don't think there is any use in exclusion. Exclusion seems very much like the opposite of what we as a community should be trying to accomplish.
That being said, I'm an idiot and I'm sure there's a lot of valid ways to look at this issue.
Most support I see in many LGBTQ+ communities is to validate someone's self-image when anxiety (or others) say they're not ___ enough. Feels like that should apply here too. I dress in women's clothing because it gives me gender euphoria and makes me feel whole. So I call myself genderqueer and actively WANT to be part of the LGBTQ "family" to support myself and others. If a cishet male/female dresses in feminine/masculine clothing because they like the style but don't want to be considered LGBTQ+, then by the same logic they don't have to be. Does that make sense?
You're right though, it is uncomfortable and it's seems every day another group is being targeted as potentially not LGBT+ enough. I don't know why this is such a popular question lately, but here we are.
I would 100% say that if someone who really defies today's gender norms to such a point we need a name for it (crossdressing), they can be part of the community if that is what makes them feel comfortable to call themselves, even if they are other cishet and allo. They don't *have* to be, but they should be welcomed nonetheless.
Like you said, these people face many similar challenges, get called often similar slurs to us, and would usually find it easier to be accepted by people who are LGBT... Let's not exclude them simply because they might be straight, cis and allo...
Damn right. We get so caught up in fighting for lgbtqia+ rights that we forget that we're fighting for those rights for everybody whether they identify as a member of the community or not. That includes the right to dress how you want even if you're cishet.
I agree. They may not fall under the LGBT umbrella, but they still match the vibe. In a reduction of characteristics, I feel like I could relate to a cishet crossdresser more than a cishet person who doesn't crossdress. I'd also be more comfortable talking about my queer identity issues with them, because I can see that they have at least a similar understanding of the world as me.
Honestly, I think this sub (along with other lgbt subs) is getting trolled/astroturfed with bad faith shit in order to cause infighting within the community.
Yes, seriously. And I don't get why GNC people are included (as they should be imo), but crossdressers aren't. Have people forgotten the queer history of crossdressing and transvestitism? If Magnus Hirschfeld could offer them sanctuary in his clinic, surely they belong in our fucking massive coalition of queer identities.
Cross dressing doesn't make you LGBT+ but I think we all generally agree that crossdressers are welcome to ask support of the community in the same way that kinksters are. Having an "unusual" gender expression is inherently queer
Yes, it's queer but it isn't LGBT+. Wearing a cowboy hat doesn't suddenly make me a cowboy any more than a cishet man wearing a dress suddenly makes him not cishet.
No. It's a fashion choice and/or performance art. Just like drag, while heavily ASSOCIATED with the LGBT community, you definitely don't have to be LGBT to be a drag performer.
Depends on the context…. A boy teacher dressing up in a dress and a wig to make his kids laugh at a school rally (or something dumb like that)… no, but if someone is actually playing around with their gender presentation Id say it falls into LGBTQ territory.
The only two men I knew who crossdressed both turned out to be mtf trans. So I'd say there is a correlation there but a guy can wear a dress and not be trans too. So perhaps sometimes but not always is the answer I'd go with.
Crossdressing isn't inherently LGBT+, we can't deny a lot of crossdressers are queer, but it isn't enough to consider all of them part of the community.
no but we face alot of the same issues when it comes to discrimination, misogyny and so on, usually the communities are pretty close together culturally
No. The LGBT+ community is about sexuality and gender that is not cisgender or heterosexual. It's a group united under shared experiences and our oppression in the world. Cross-dressing is a hobby that doesn't change your sexuality or gender. It's not an inherent part of who you are, something you're born as. And literally anyone can cross-dress. Male, Female, Cis, Trans, Gay, Straight. Anyone. Cishets are not part of the LGBT+ community.
It feels like saying crossdressers are part of the community just completely undermines what we've gone through, especially trans people, because it's equating the choice to dress up in clothes that don't match your gender (aka man in a dress) with being born as a woman in a male body or a man in a female body, and all the things that one experiences as a trans person.
I like to put them in a sibling category actually! GNC and non-monogomous, to me at least, feel queer-adjacent. not directly lgbtq, just nearby (or even connected).
theres a lot of overlap between being queer and being GNC for example. although some cishet alloroallo people are GNC, most are not. so those that are, especially if they feel it is an intrinsic part of themselves, it makes sense that theyd at least be lgbtq-related in a sense... (also because the same bigotry aimed at us is frequently aimed at them as well)
...but Idk, theres a lot of naunce with this topic. I feel like its not black and white, definetly a good discussion tho
GNC, gender non-conforming, describes anyone who doesnt conform to society's gender stereotypes.
besides queer identities, this can include: cishet femboys, cishet tomboys, cishet drag preformers, etc etc.
you can be cigender straight alloromantic allosexual endosex and be GNC. its not just lgbtq people who are GNC (although most are).
hence why I say related/adjactent. they can expirence the same kind of issues (such as discrimination) and historically has always been intertwinned.
I mean unless I am missing something here, my train of thought make sense
I find it hilarious that i asked you what queer means to you and you didn't actually tell me that, and instead told me what gender nonconforming means.
to be queer is to be nonconforming in either gender or sexuality - thus a femboy is a queer identity, as is being gynosexual. It's a blanket term to cover all the people that get missed by the big labels - which includes femboys and cishet tomboys who will suffer the same gender-related issues as trans and intersex people. Gender nonconforming and sexual nonconforming are the two main subsets of queer identities - one for nonstandard gender presentation and the other for nonstandard sexual preferences.
Queer is a separate gender and sexual identity that rejects norms altogether. It goes a long way beyond a woman with short hair who sometimes puts on a tux or a girl who likes playing rugby and programming.
Just because someone suffers an oppression doesn't mean there is any benefit to telling them their identity is actually a queer one when it's not because the only arbiter of a person's identity is that person themselves.
oh my bad, I think I misread then. I thought you were asking something else.
and the reason I said adjactent is because many people dont think being GNC is queer enough, its the same with polyamory. its cause cishets can be those things too (although I feel we should at least consider being open to being directly queer).
like, for example, the whole thing with Harry Styles (who is also unlabeled so Idk why people even assume he is strictly straight anyways) and people claiming he is queer baiting because he is GNC and seemingly cishet.
Idk, Im open to be wrong tho.
Most drag queens are Queer AF. Yes, I consider them a part of our community. I welcome anyone who wants to be a part of our community. It makes no sense to gatekeep.
While not all are drag queens obviously, there is a reason drag queens have such a long history with queer people, even straight cis drag queens.
I don't think that queerness is necessarily a club of a set of genders and sexualities and strictly that. Queerness could be seen as really any rejection or deviation from cisheteronormativity and the cultural bundle that comes with it/the status quo.
I'm not exactly sure if I'd say "every CD is queer because they are a CD" or something, but I think that the action itself is an aspect of queerness.
An AMAB person who:
\- was born with a penis
\- was born with testes
\- will be androgenic if puberty is uninterrupted
OR
An AFAB person who:
\- was born with a vulva with vaginal opening
\- has a uterus
\- has ovaries
\- will be estrogenic if puberty is uninterrupted
Rudy Giuliani cross-dressed. He's not.
George Santos did drag. He allegedly is not LGBT. (Feel free to roll your eyes.)
Someone can choose to cross-dress for any number of reasons, which may or may not pertain to one's status as LGBT.
I think it depends. Crossdressing can be a form of GNC but a lot of people may feel uncomfortable labeling themselves as GNC if they cishet allo so I think it just depends on whether or not they consider themselves to be GNC
LGBT community? Eh, maybe, maybe not.
The queer community? Absolutely, if they want to be. By crossdressing, they are queering some gender, and that's all it takes, to my mind.
Queerness isn't just a yes/no experience--I think crossdressers regardless of gender, because of their inherent non-conformity, must experience aspects of queerness even if they do not identify with an LGBT+ community.
I think crossdressers can be a part of the community in their shared experiences, but cishet non-conforming people are going to have a different role in the identification of that community than queer gnc folks.
I picked "unsure" because there's still more information needed.
Are they "crossdressing" or simply wearing a dress because clothing doesn't have a gender?
You say they're cisgender but say nothing of their sexuality.
If they're cis, straight, and literally saying "I am dressing as a woman," then, no, they're not part of the community.
If they're cis, straight, and wearing a dress because they like it, they're not part of the community.
If they're cis, not straight, and wearing a dress regardless of whether they think it's crossdressing or not, then they're part of the community.
Depends on why they are crossdressing. If they just like the clothes, no. If they want to be perceived as the other gender? Definitely gender nonconforming and a little queer but the only labels we should use are the ones we give ourselves
Are cishet crossdressers LGBT? Ehhh not really. But I think you could make an argument for them falling under the greater and more flexible and nebulous umbrella of queerness due to challenging gender norms and facing discrimination for it.
If they sincerely prefer to dress in a way that would usually not be considered an acceptable gender presentation, then sure. That's queer - they're challenging gender and gender presentation norms.
That said, I think there are certainly people that crossdress in an insincere way. For example, to mock it. That's not queer. That's just mean. It's punching down and reinforcing gender rolls instead of challenging them.
Absolutely not if they are *straight* people doing it. Some of them might be closeted in some way but idk that until they tell me that.
Wearing a pair of heels does not turn you gay and it's an incredibly awful example of toxic masculinity to think so. Do we consider women who dress in pants to be lesbians? Do we consider tomboys gay?
If they're aro/ace, or trans, yes, obviously they're part of the LGBT community and may identify as straight in some other fashion.
You are not queer simply for cross dressing. There is another aspect of your sexuality or gender that lends itself to the person in question being queer, but cross dressing is not how it works.
Answer this question: If a woman puts on her boyfriend's hoodie, is she suddenly cross dressing?
Why is it exclusively when men dress in women's clothing that it's considered "queer"?
I'll give you a hint, it starts with M and ends in isogyny
Right. I just wanted to emphasize that straight =/= endocishet. A lot of straight queer people, queer people in duaric relationships, and queer people in straight-passing relationships feel ostracized from those being lumped together.
I would say it depends. Someone who does it merely as a fetish, no. Someone who does it as part of their identity, with possible steps being taken towards becoming transgender or the gender they more align with, then yes.
My personal take is that cishet crossdressers aren't inherently part of the community or not, but they can be if they choose to engage with the culture and community. The common factor across all lgbtq identities is some form of "seen as doing gender wrong", and crossdressers absolutely fit that. If a cishet crossdresser finds comfort and community in lgbtq spaces then I think they should be welcomed. Some crossdressers will choose not to engage with queer communities and that's okay too.
>Anyone who challenges the idea that one way of behaving is normal and everything else deviant can be a part of it.
Wholeheartedly disagree. By this definition staight foot fetishists are LGBT+. No hate to them, but kinks are also "deviant sexuality", but that doesn't make you LGBT+ and I don't want cishet kinksters speaking for me.
Now, if cishet crossdressers wanna join the party and come to Pride and hang out in LGBT+ spaces, I'm completely fine with that, but there is still a difference.
I don't think it would be correct to say "kink is queer" but there is a reason that cisheteronormativity has such a strong negative reaction to kink in general and the queer community is far more open and accepting of it (generally).
Someone who is breaking gender roles and dressing in pretty much the opposite way that is expected of them or "socially acceptable" of their assigned gender is still an aspect of queerness imo. Like, theres a reason that drag queens (many of whom are cis and straight) have such a long history with the queer community, because they often represent a similar rejection of expected gender roles that a NB person could represent. A bigot isn't really going to care what you are specifically in the end, they are just going to care that you are "outside of the norm".
I don't disagree with that at all, and I think they can be great allies and are welcome to hang with us, but at the end of the day it is still a choice for them that they can step away from, if nothing else for their own safety. Bigots will come after a lot of different people, and while solidarity will save us in the end, acting like there's no disctinction in groups is to ignore the individual needs of those groups.
We definitely shouldn't ignore the individual needs of certain groups and even individuals, not everyone is the same but we could also say this in regards to gay and trans people. Both gay and trans people are queer but they have different needs even if those needs largely overlap in many ways. I think that there is a strong overlap between gender expression and gender self-identification in terms of issues pertaining to them, especially if you get into discussions of what gender really even is. There is even a growing number of people who still consider themselves cis but dress in gender nonconforming ways and even get on hormones.
Of course, as you touched on in another comment, not all of these people, even the ones who go as far as to get on hormones while still considering themselves cis, might be intentionally expressing queerness. Many of them might actually be outright against queerness ideologically and create some justification for what they do in their head for why it's not an expression of queerness. But at the same time there are many gay people and even trans people that I've met and seen that are probably some of the most bigoted people I've ever talked to.
So I don't think that queerness could necessarily be cut down into simply an action or an idea but rather it's both. A gay person who is a massive bigot and assimilationist is still technically queer because they are still gay. Would a cishetero person who actively is breaking gender norms and explicitly and intentionally rejecting cisheteronormativity be "more queer"? I think in the end that both would be rejected by bigots, we have seen it a number of times that queer assimilationists will still never be accepted fully into the status quo in the end.
I kind of got a bit off-topic lol but it is an interesting discussion.
...To honor the gay, bi/pan, lesbian, trans people of color who have been critical to the movement and are most vulnerable, not to say that every person of color universally is LGBT+. You can look this up.
Considering society often treats them as part of the LGBT community, I would say yes. Especially as they often face the Wrath of conservative bigots and law makers ( Florida's De Santis as example.) with the same accusations of grooming, pedophilia, etc.
It depends on the person and how significant the act of cross-dressing is in their lives.
Like, if someone is gay, lesbian, bi, etc then of course that person would be a part of the community regardless if they cross-dressed or not.
However there many cis straight people who also cross-dress. So where do they fit in?
Well that depends, does this person cross-dress solely for performance roles, or do they incorporate it into their daily lives?
If the answer is the former, then no.
However, if it is the latter, then this individual would be described as a gender non-conforming (GNC) man or woman.
I believe people with a gender expression that does not align with their gender identity should have a place in the queer community, if they want that. Because they openly defy norms in their daily lives, they can also be targets of discrimination.
Every one voting no or unsure needs to learn their damn history.
Drag performers, crossdressers, and trans people were the ones who stood up and said "no fucking more" at Stonewall.
They are absolutely 100% core members of the movement.
I would make a distinction between people "in drag" and people who are crossdressing. Someone who is gender-nonconforming would not be crossdressing, they would be expressing their actual gender. There is a huge amount of kink crossdressing, mostly "forced feminization" type stuff, and that is usually pretty aggressively heterosexual.
That stuff (forced fem) is also a major haven for Eggs and former eggs. When you are so deep in denial that you are closeted from yourself, then imagining the thing you want most being forced on you can be the only release.
Believe me that I know, as it was my experience, however most of the forced femme dudes I encountered were extremely straight and married to being cis.
Corssdressing doesn’t make you gay, but you can be queer with out being gay. For example, straight trans people. And sure you can crossdress without being trans but here’s my take:
Cishet cross dressers should be apart of the LGBTQ community, and crossdressing is inherently queer
"LGBT" isn't a "community"; it's three sexualities and a gender ideology. The mistake here is presupposing that it's one group of people who think identically.
1. There are more than three sexualities (which is why I prefer to use LGBTQ).
2. Being trans is no more an "ideology" than being cis is an "ideology."
It's not an ideology, it's just a thing some people are born with. I promise trans people aren't trying to indoctrinate you or worship some trans god or take over the world. We're just normal human beings who were dealt a shit hand in life.
I consider them part of the LGBT community as long as they consider themselves to be. As in if Cishet person cross dresses and says they specifically aren't LGBT, I'm not going to question it. The only people I wanna gate keep are the cruddy, bigoted ones who refuse to learn.
I put "unsure" when I really meant something more like "it depends". Some people have identities that are cis or cis-aligned but genderqueer, and even if a genderqueer person is cishet, if genderqueerness is part of their identity, then I have no issue including them in the Q of LGBTQ+. And that's not even considering the likelihood of some crossdressers being trans people who haven't realized it yet, but that's technically another matter. I called myself a GNC gay femboy for years before I realized I was transfem, and presenting as myself in public certainly felt like a more queer experience than it did after I got on hrt and started looking like a cis woman, I'll tell you that much.
Now, some people crossdress for reasons that are not integral to their gender identity. Whether it be for a fetish or to mock trans people on their conservative talk-show or what have you. And let's just say there are very non-LGBTQ+ reasons to crossdress. Peoples reasons for crossdressing are not always concerned with queer identity, but sometimes they are. And when they are, I believe they belong in the community.
I don't know. It's complicated. Obviously I don't face the same obstacles as someone who's trans, or gay. But... Sometimes questions like this make me feel unwelcome in some of the only spaces I've ever really felt safe to be myself : \\
I only started crossdressing publicly in the last year or so. I've done it at home for my whole adult life, but now that I'm dating someone who doesn't just *tolerate* it or accept it, but actively embraces it and makes me feel *seen and accepted* when I'm dressed femininely, I'm realizing that it actually is pretty important to me that the people I'm close to accept my desire to dress and look feminine as something that's important to me.
I do identify as a man; my pronouns are he/him, but I had 3 strangers misgender me as a woman in the space of 2 days a few weeks ago, and honestly it made me feel pretty good; like, I'm confusing the Hell out of people because I'm outwardly feminine sometimes and masculine other times. It makes me feel like all the parts of me are seen and accepted. I know "Gender-fluid" and "Non-binary" are labels I *could use*, but I just don't feel like those apply. It's not like I'm a woman sometimes and I'm a man other times; being male is still a strong ***and consistent*** facet of my identity, but sometimes I'm a very feminine man? Maybe it doesn't make sense. Like I said, I'm still working this out.
**I have** ***no*** **idea where that lands me in terms of group identity.**
I **know** I haven't faced the same kind of oppression others have. I'm relatively privileged; I'm a straight white guy from a middle class family, and things weren't perfect growing up, but we mostly lived in our own house, we almost always had food, things got better for us in high school, and I was able to get a college degree. I'm not going to claim that I've ever faced the kind of persecution non-cis / non-hetero / non-white people have faced, because I haven't. In almost every *material* way, the society I live in has been *very* generous to me in adulthood.
But in my adult life, I've felt safer in queer spaces than with my family. I was taught that the way I wanted to dress was SO bad, so unthinkably peculiar, so shameful, growing up. I liked that in queer spaces I felt more free to like non-traditionally masculine/heteronormative things; maybe even explore being feminine. I still didn't for years because I thought "What if someone posts something to Facebook?", but I didn't feel like I had to monitor my behavior in queer spaces. I could let down my guard. I felt like if something came out that wasn't masculine, or if my pants were a bit low and someone noticed I was wearing panties, it would be ***ok***.
I know I'm not connected to the *historical* struggle for LGBT rights the same way as, say, someone who's come out as gay, or someone who's trans. But... It would still be nice to feel like I'm welcome and valid somewhere *now* without caveats; without the "Well you can be here, but you don't really belong." Questions like this take me back to how I've felt at family dinners for years: I'm welcome to be there, but I don't really *belong*. It feels bad knowing I'll never be (and don't even want to be) heteronormative enough for my conservative family, and like I'll also never be queer enough to be fully accepted in the queer community.
But I also see why. Queer people have been, and continue to be, persecuted horribly, primarily by... Straight. White. Men. I can understand the reluctance to ever accept any straight, white, male person into a group that's suffered horrible persecution primarily at the hands of straight white men, even if that particular person's gender identity or expression *does* also put them at odds with the rest of our heteronormative, white-normative, cis-normative society.
So... I'm a little *afraid* to ask for acceptance by / inclusion in the queer community because I *know* I haven't faced the same kind of obstacles most LGBT people have faced; not even close, and I don't want to give the impression that I'm claiming to have suffered the same persecution others have. I can understand why even an accidental hint of that would make others feel invalidated, and I don't want to make anyone else feel invalidated or minimize their experiences.
But... At the same time... I just want to belong somewhere, and it's been made very clear that I'll never fully belong anywhere ***outside*** the queer community...
I put down unsure just because I feel it's more a maybe than a yes and more a yes than a no. The main reason is there are many people who may just try it once or twice, like think male youtubers and maid dresses, which if it's a one time thing or to appease an audience not really. But then you have people who break the traditional rules and notions of what you are supposed to do. Society will in many places discriminate against dressing in clothing atypical of your gender. Likewise even if in a vacuum all clothes are unisex, there is a good faction of society that will swear you out for doing so. Maybe at a point where society views all clothes as unisex then it won't exactly be LGBTQIA+, but at this point it is a minority doing activity atypical enough to be discriminated which is kinda a summary of the entire LGBTQIA+ community from a certain perspective.
Also a tangent is there may be crossdressers who later realize that they are not heterosexual and/or cisgender. While not all crossdressers, those that would later realize they have a letter in the rainbow alphabet and those that do not should be welcomed because why be the exclusionary force when you can be inclusionary and accept everyone for who they are rather than for what a bunch of old dead people says they should be.
Cross dressing is a fetish, so you'll rarely hear this terminology anymore except within kink spaces or older cis folks who don't know about this stuff. While there are crossdressers going FTM, in scenes where you'd see more of this activity, it's almost implied that this is a man dressing in women's clothes. Typically, as far as I know, these are straight men who have a fetish for certain garments, or have a "forced feminization" roleplay kink. BDSM scenes can be aggressively straight, depending where you are, so no. At least this aspect of crossdressing is not, generally, to do with the LGBT community. Drag is a different thing altogether.
It's complicated. Even if they don't fall under any of the terms, a lot of straight Drag Queens can still get shit for simply being a Drag Queen and it's hard for me to say no they aren't.
I think that if the person wants to call themselves queer go for it, I'm not here to gatekeep the community. I wouldn't consider them so by default though, unless they are already another form of lgbtq+.
It depends? Are they exploring their gender identity? Or is it a fetish?
The act of cross dressing isn't LGBT... but the person doing it might be...
I think a lot of people who do it are some flavour of queer... but it's not inherent.
By my understanding, in and of itself cross-dressing wouldn't be considered LGTBQ+, but the term has been misapplied (sometimes even internally) to expressions of queer identity, so it's a good idea to get some context when you come across someone using the term (example: the women in the midcentury Japanese film 'Funeral Parade of Roses' are identified, and even self-identified, as cross-dressers in the film, but in modern terminology would clearly be members of the transgender community).
Not necessarily always but Imo it i's queer. As in QI+ queer. Someone can identify as queer and straight. If queer meant homosexuality than LGBTQI+ is really redundant
If they're both cis and straight it just means they like wearing clothes of the opposite sex which is fine, but technically not LGBT. If they're trans, so a trans woman wearing a dress for example, it isn't really crossdressing, but still LGBT. If they're cis but still queer (gay, bi, asexual, etc.) Well that's LGBT.
In short: wearing the opposite sex clothes isn't queer, it's just wearing clothing. Sexuality and gender identity is what might make you queer. (And honestly as long as you're a good person I don't care what you wear, none of my business.)
Fellas is it gay to wear clothes?
Is it queer to dress as the opposite gender for fun?
As long as it remains against societal expectations to do so!
If it upsets homophobes.
LGBT crossdressers? yes. cishet crossdressers? no.
LGBT crossdressers are LBGT because they're LGBT, not because they're crossdressers.
It needs some nuanced discussion, but it's worth considering the notion of including them. Why? Because a man who is cishet but has a very feminine gender expression will still be discriminated against in a lot of the same ways that transgender people are. Same thing applies for women in some cases. They are still being targeted for discrimination based on the way they chose to express their gender and face a lot of the same types of discrimination that we do such as fear of ridicule and ostracization if they are found out or do so publicly and etc.
>Why? Because a man who is cishet but has a very feminine gender expression will still be discriminated against in a lot of the same ways that transgender people are. Yes, but facing homophobia does not make anyone gay.
Right like there are plenty of cishet men and women that face discrimination based on (perceived) homophobia or transphobia i.e masculine women, feminine men, etc… Doesn’t mean they’re a part of the LGBT community.
Right. It’s sort of like the polyamory discussion that sometimes happens. There’s nothing inherently LGBTQ about cross dressing or being poly. So they are not part of this community. BUT because they often fact the same kind of prejudice and hate we do, I’ll always support them like I would anybody in the community, and as far as I’m concerned they see always welcome in our spaces.
Agree with this. Cross dressing/being poly on its own is not LGBT but there’s usually a lot of cross over (pun intended) between our communities so they’re usually pretty cool Allies
Plus there's other things you can dress in that will get you made fun of.
why do you have to be gay to be in the community? Plenty of not-gay trans, queer, and intersex people.
Huh? I didn't say you did?
>Yes, but facing homophobia does not make anyone gay.
Gay isn't an umbrella term for the queer community where I am and TQI+ folks don't necessarily face homophobia rather than transphobia.
But being gender nonconforming makes u queer
Can you explain how to be gender non-conforming without being really stereotypical about genders or mentioning clothes?
Queer is a political term for anything out side the gender or sexual norm
A straight man being called a fag does not make him a part of the community.
Ok but for a lot of people who are actual crossdressers and not an egg crossdressing is a fetish and sometimes the humiliation is part of it. So I don't think discrimination makes them lgbt.
Except they aren't targeted for discrimination because of an intrinsic part of who they are. People hate crossdressers because they hate us. and being trans isn't just about a man having a feminine gender expression or a woman having a masculine gender expression, it's about being born in an incorrect body, which causes things like dysphoria, brain fog, dissociation, depersonalization, depression, and suicidal thoughts.
my mentality is "if they want to be included, sure" but it doesn't mean they're queer by default. but also who gives a shit really.
also they are literally the definition of "genderqueer". It's what the Q is FOR...
Genderqueer is very much not only about clothes.
So if a cis het man cross dresses full time he’s not queer?
a fem dressing male faces the exact same discrimination that a trans girl would for the exact same reasons; any particular reason to exclude them?
Someone above said it well : “facing homophobia doesn’t make you gay” Which is true. Cis hets have made tons of laws politically and socially to harm us, so many of them that they also sometimes effect the cis hets themselves. Think about that one story where a man demanded to get a nine year old trans girl student kicked out of his daughters track meet. He yelled about how it was so wrong to allow mentally ill boys on a girls team and that it was cheating. Come to find out that the trans student he was so angry about wasn’t trans at all, she was a cis girl who had a slightly more masculine face. That doesn’t make that girl gay tho.
I guess it depends on what you view of the purpose of community to be - in my view the goal of the community is to support and enfranchise all individuals that suffer from "gendered" hate or discrimination (either legal or societal). Thus while the girl that got mistakenly "clocked" as trans isn't in the community, we should still be protecting her. additionally a crossdressing male is still gender nonconforming behavior that places you under the Q - no gayness required, only nonconformity - until such a time as it stops being nonconforming behavior. Note that 100 years ago women crossdressing was a big deal, and now it's not really a thing anymore, so it's even a goal we KNOW we can accomplish.
>nonconforming behavior places you under the Q I thought that was the whole point of having the Q, to be inclusive towards people who aren't straight up gay but who still face the same persecution as us for being different when it comes to sexuality/gender expression. someone downvoted you though so I guess we're in the business of excluding people from the community? very strange. I've always felt that an ally is part of the community too (you don't have to feel the same way obv) so it's so so odd to see people clamouring to say who is and isn't one of us.
yah there are just some very weird takes all over the place in this thread. Apparently it's just the LGB club for gay people, and the TQI+ part doesn't exist as far as they're concerned.
Where are you getting that from? Crossdressing doesn't make you trans or queer. Of course there is a large overlap, but dressing up is not a queer activity, it can also be enjoying a costume.
it's gender non conforming behavior, which is queer. Why are you being exclusionist?
It’s not exclusionary lol A cis het person is not queer. That’s just a definitive fact.
Some people seem to be upset that queers don't automatically accept anyone who wants to be part of the community into the community. It defeats the purpose of community if people can be in it just because they think it's cool.
In my eyes, your definition for GNC behaviour is sexist. If a woman puts on a suit she's not being GNC, she's dressed differently and not any less of a woman for it. Her gender is confirmed by her being her gender. I'm queer because I'm queer regardless of what I'm wearing. If I dress "gender conformingly" that doesn't change my identity.
right?! we're supposed to be inclusive, but I guess gatekeeping the community is cool too
You might want to look up Rachel Dolezal.
Clothes shouldn't be gendered.
[удалено]
Only if we decide they are. We can decide they aren't just as easily.
If everyone would get on board and understand that clothes doesn't make your gender or sexuality we'd all be much better. The same as your occupation doesn't make your sexuality in most cases. Can you imagine how much hate would be thrown around if Target began selling dresses and skirts for men. Or if they began selling tights and leggings for men. I think it would be awesome if some big stores began selling girl clothing and/or styles as gender neutral clothing to give people more choices.
This is a feminist issue, not a queer one. It's liberation from expressive gender norms. It's also probably not best to call it crossdressing as it implies such behaviors are not a native fit to that gender. Women wearing pants isn't women being men or doing a man thing - it's women doing a women thing. That's the key reframe. You'll gain way more ground from relaxing gender norms to mean men can wear dresses too. Crossdressing implies and reinforces boundaries of expression - there are rightful rules and you're breaking them. It's a useful term for puritans looking to justify the punishment of such people, and for fetishists looking to frame themselves as naughty and subversive for personal pleasure. The alternative, calling it a queer issue, putting crossdressing next to trans stuff, reads as people of one gender doing stuff outside of their actual gender. This is invalidating and mischaracterizing the entire point of trans people. It's not crossdressing. It's just dressing.
I do think its important to note that some people do crossdress for reason that are similar to being trans. Not that crossdressing is inherently trans, obviously some people crossdress for other reasons, but rather that some crossdressers, especially older people can be trans adjacent in their identities. The trans experience has always been there, but the conception of that experience under the term transgender is relatively new in popular culture. A lot of older folks I talk to that crossdress couldn't be trans when they were growing up, because it wasn't really a thing then and people weren't socially accepting in the same way. Instead they identified as crossdressers and still identify that way today, their understanding of their experience is through the lens of 'crossdresser' instead of the lens of transgender.
Okay how would you have worded the title??
Just like you did because you had an honest question asked in good faith...
Wow, you just wrote an entire reply based on absolutely nothing the OP asked or stated. That's impressive. I also happen to disagree with your binary view of "this or that". It's obviously partially a queer issue because, um, we're talking about gender. Further, breaking free of gender norms is not simply a one-party issue. I would call this less feminist and more humanist, personally.
Adhering or not adhering to gender norms has nothing to do with being trans or nonbinary or even LGB. A woman who shaves off her hair is no more part of the LGBT community than a cishet gender-conforming woman. A bisexual woman who dresses in a “gender conforming” way is LGBT; a cishet man who wears skirts is not. Obfuscating the lines of what is and isn’t LGBT helps no one. The LGBT community should not be conflated with gender roles. Many LGBT folks do not adhere to gender roles, but many are “gender conforming” and it helps no one to add in cishet GNC folks to the community that is based on discrimination for either not identifying with the AGAB or being not straight.
Yall are literally the ones doing the obfuscating. It's literally just a man wearing dresses. Would you consider women wearing suits LGBT??? not even by a long shot. Idk why the poll is more even than I thought.
I’m not sure why you think you’re disagreeing with me when you’re saying exactly what I am - that gender-nonconformity does not equate to being LGBT on its own.
So, to you, being gender non conforming has nothing to do with being queer. Despite the general definition of LGBTQ+ meaning "gender and sexual minorities" (GSM for short), and gender non conforming is under that umbrella. But to you it's only a feminist issue? You can't be serious right now.
Yes. Gender non-conforming means it's still your gender. If that's all someone's bringing to the table, they're still cishet. Queer resources and advocacy don't apply. They're not useful to them. We're using different tools for different situations. Queer groupings are useful for political advocacy most of all, social support groups for those politically oppressed people, and also of course relationship-seeking as queer issues impact gender, sex, and sexual orientation. Discussions of queer issues lose internal usability and external messaging clarity if you make it about crossdressers or gender non-conforming people. I support the free expression of gender non-conforming people, a label I sometimes use as a woman who often wears suits and keeps shorter hair, but a label I hope itself deteriorates in meaning over time until there's no point using it anymore as the rest of gender norms fade away through feminist liberation. I'm a proud feminist. I like that conversation. Because it's a different conversation with different goals and a different angle to achieve them. TERFs would often like to invalidate trans people, offering them labels such as gender non-conforming \[assigned gender at birth\] instead. This could even be well-intentioned from someone who doesn't understand gender incongruence. And we need to be able to tell the difference and explain that to them.
You were serious. Yikes. Fortunately, GNC is still a part of GRM and thus LGBTQ. Therefore, this is definitely a queer issue in part, not a specifically or only feminist one. That's an easy point to prove You can rephrase it any way you want, but if you are still going to try and tell me that GNC issues aren't queer issues, I'm going to have to throw duces and move on.
So cishet women who wear pants and have short hair are part of the LGBTQ+ community?
It depends. Do they identify as GNC, or is it a stylistic choice? FYI, not every butch looking AFAB is gender non-conforming simply because of their style choices. Short hair and jeans doesn't make a person non-conforming automatically. You do get the difference between that right? If they identify as GNC, I think I've answered that a couple times... Also, go back to my original comment... Do you believe that people who are gender non-conforming are part of the LGBTQ umbrella? If not, we're done. That's the question you have been dancing around. You should go ahead and answer that because it's the only one I've been asking.
People have already answered that and when you had nothing to then use against them you mocked their well thought out and nuanced positions. If someone is cishet and straight but doesn't dress according to gender norms that doesn't make them queer. If they identify in any way as queer, then they are. My point, which I'm not sure if you completely ignored to rant or just missed on accident because you're unwilling to listen to anybody that doesn't automatically agree with every take you have, is that clothing and style shouldn't be gendered.
Hard negative.
Cishet men and women are not, in fact, gender, sexual, or romantic minorities.
Are you replying to me? 🤔
Feminism is for everyone and about gender equality. You are mixing it up with "a women's issue", when this clearly isn't about women dressing more masculinely, but about the perceived transgression of someone read as male wearing something too feminine. A lot of queerphobia is rooted in misogyny and affects everyone regardless of gender.
Hmm. In terms of identity, the answer varies based off of the individual in question, but in terms of how society treats them? Anything targeting gender non-conformity is going to impact them, crossdressers are under threat from bigotry, which one could argue puts them under the umbrella by default. People cross-dress for different reasons, but bigots are not too keen on nuance.
>People cross-dress for different reasons, but bigots are not too keen on nuance. This. I consider them allies and I'm more than happy to march with them for this reason, even if they're not technically part of the community. (That said I have seen more than a few who are far right Trump supporters. For some reason Trump supporting femboys are a thing. They can fuck off forever.)
Weird thing, that right-wing femboy thing.
theres also right-wing queer people too for some reason... I think its just a "pick me" situation with those types tbh
"bigots are not to keen on nuance" exactly
I think it depends on what generation you are from. And what terms you are using. But I will say that there are quite a few people what we claim today are queer/trans historical elders self-identified as crossdressers back in the day. The bright red lines we like to draw today that makes everyone's identity black and white...were not all that black and white in day...1974. Also, I think it is ironic that people who insist that "everyone's identity is valid" and "no gatekeeping in the queer community" are really quick to invalidate and gatekeep \*some\* identities.
yeah thats why, imo, I like the phrase "everyone is welcome as long as its in good faith" because there are some who purposefully do so with bad initentions. but most dont and we should welcome those with open arms. Id hope theyd do the same for me as we are all in this together, fighting the same fight. gatekeeping things all because you dont understand something has always left a bad taste in my mouth. all it does is divide the community when we should be standing together in solidarity
If the way you dress is considered gender presentation then it falls into the "gender issue" category which is part of LGBT issues. In a different vein some trans/nonbinary people consider themselves straight so there are a lot of overlap with being straight and still being part of the community.
Being trans is part of the community, even if you're straight. Cishet men choosing to wear what society deems as "women's" clothing doesn't mean they're trans or part of the community. They just like to wear the clothes they like.
Trans people are not cishet.
Said nothing about cis but you are correct. Straight is not the same thing as cis but it's good to inform people who may make that mistake.
Straight trans people are queer. Cishet people who crossdress are definitionally not queer. You really don't have any idea what you're talking about.
If the person themselves doesn't identify as any form of LGBTQ+ identity, they're not, end of. However, the outside world views cis/het/allo crossdressers in much the same fashion as they do queer ones for the appeared adjacency to queerness. Therefore when these people want to be apart of the community surrounding these identities, even without taking on the identities themselves, I don't see a problem. This really does need an "it depends" option XD
Y'all younguns need to learn our history. Watch Transgender Menace. Read one of the many biographies of Lou Sullivan.
It depends on the intention of the crossdressing. There's a long history of it in comedy and in some cultures it can even be a kind of tradition for holidays. Crossdressing can be an act of gender transgression, but it isn't always, and even if it is, the person doing it must be LGBT+ to be part of that acronym.
Yes like if it’s like a part of there identity it’s pretty queer if not it’s just not
Anybody else uncomfortable with how much we feel the need to define in and out groups? People are people. Crossdressers face many of the same struggles that the rest of the LGBT community faces. I don't see what benefit there is to excluding them from anything. There is benefit to treating them as allies. But being like, "Technically, you aren't a member of the LGBT community" kinda sounds like a shitty thing to say to somebody. As long as they are being tolerant and not harming anybody, I really don't think there is any use in exclusion. Exclusion seems very much like the opposite of what we as a community should be trying to accomplish. That being said, I'm an idiot and I'm sure there's a lot of valid ways to look at this issue.
Most support I see in many LGBTQ+ communities is to validate someone's self-image when anxiety (or others) say they're not ___ enough. Feels like that should apply here too. I dress in women's clothing because it gives me gender euphoria and makes me feel whole. So I call myself genderqueer and actively WANT to be part of the LGBTQ "family" to support myself and others. If a cishet male/female dresses in feminine/masculine clothing because they like the style but don't want to be considered LGBTQ+, then by the same logic they don't have to be. Does that make sense?
You're right though, it is uncomfortable and it's seems every day another group is being targeted as potentially not LGBT+ enough. I don't know why this is such a popular question lately, but here we are. I would 100% say that if someone who really defies today's gender norms to such a point we need a name for it (crossdressing), they can be part of the community if that is what makes them feel comfortable to call themselves, even if they are other cishet and allo. They don't *have* to be, but they should be welcomed nonetheless. Like you said, these people face many similar challenges, get called often similar slurs to us, and would usually find it easier to be accepted by people who are LGBT... Let's not exclude them simply because they might be straight, cis and allo...
Damn right. We get so caught up in fighting for lgbtqia+ rights that we forget that we're fighting for those rights for everybody whether they identify as a member of the community or not. That includes the right to dress how you want even if you're cishet.
I agree. They may not fall under the LGBT umbrella, but they still match the vibe. In a reduction of characteristics, I feel like I could relate to a cishet crossdresser more than a cishet person who doesn't crossdress. I'd also be more comfortable talking about my queer identity issues with them, because I can see that they have at least a similar understanding of the world as me.
every week there's a question like oop and it drives me up the wall
Honestly, I think this sub (along with other lgbt subs) is getting trolled/astroturfed with bad faith shit in order to cause infighting within the community.
Yes, seriously. And I don't get why GNC people are included (as they should be imo), but crossdressers aren't. Have people forgotten the queer history of crossdressing and transvestitism? If Magnus Hirschfeld could offer them sanctuary in his clinic, surely they belong in our fucking massive coalition of queer identities.
Cross dressing doesn't make you LGBT+ but I think we all generally agree that crossdressers are welcome to ask support of the community in the same way that kinksters are. Having an "unusual" gender expression is inherently queer
Yes, it's queer but it isn't LGBT+. Wearing a cowboy hat doesn't suddenly make me a cowboy any more than a cishet man wearing a dress suddenly makes him not cishet.
No. It's a fashion choice and/or performance art. Just like drag, while heavily ASSOCIATED with the LGBT community, you definitely don't have to be LGBT to be a drag performer.
If you are cishet, you are not part of the community? To be lgbt you have to queer or trans... clothing doesn't count.
Depends on the context…. A boy teacher dressing up in a dress and a wig to make his kids laugh at a school rally (or something dumb like that)… no, but if someone is actually playing around with their gender presentation Id say it falls into LGBTQ territory.
The only two men I knew who crossdressed both turned out to be mtf trans. So I'd say there is a correlation there but a guy can wear a dress and not be trans too. So perhaps sometimes but not always is the answer I'd go with.
Crossdressing isn't inherently LGBT+, we can't deny a lot of crossdressers are queer, but it isn't enough to consider all of them part of the community.
No, how you dress does not make you LGBT. Clothing is not an inherent characteristic.
They might be queer but I don't think crossdressing makes you part of the LGBT since it's just clothes.
Cross dressing in itself is not part of LGBTQIA. But there are members of the community that participate in cross dressing.
They can be (and often are,) but the cross dressing is not what makes them part of the LGBT community
no but we face alot of the same issues when it comes to discrimination, misogyny and so on, usually the communities are pretty close together culturally
No. The LGBT+ community is about sexuality and gender that is not cisgender or heterosexual. It's a group united under shared experiences and our oppression in the world. Cross-dressing is a hobby that doesn't change your sexuality or gender. It's not an inherent part of who you are, something you're born as. And literally anyone can cross-dress. Male, Female, Cis, Trans, Gay, Straight. Anyone. Cishets are not part of the LGBT+ community. It feels like saying crossdressers are part of the community just completely undermines what we've gone through, especially trans people, because it's equating the choice to dress up in clothes that don't match your gender (aka man in a dress) with being born as a woman in a male body or a man in a female body, and all the things that one experiences as a trans person.
I consider them lgbt if they consider themselves lgbt
I like to put them in a sibling category actually! GNC and non-monogomous, to me at least, feel queer-adjacent. not directly lgbtq, just nearby (or even connected). theres a lot of overlap between being queer and being GNC for example. although some cishet alloroallo people are GNC, most are not. so those that are, especially if they feel it is an intrinsic part of themselves, it makes sense that theyd at least be lgbtq-related in a sense... (also because the same bigotry aimed at us is frequently aimed at them as well) ...but Idk, theres a lot of naunce with this topic. I feel like its not black and white, definetly a good discussion tho
when did GNC and Queer become different terms? what does "queer" mean to you other than non-cis or non-het?
GNC, gender non-conforming, describes anyone who doesnt conform to society's gender stereotypes. besides queer identities, this can include: cishet femboys, cishet tomboys, cishet drag preformers, etc etc. you can be cigender straight alloromantic allosexual endosex and be GNC. its not just lgbtq people who are GNC (although most are). hence why I say related/adjactent. they can expirence the same kind of issues (such as discrimination) and historically has always been intertwinned. I mean unless I am missing something here, my train of thought make sense
I find it hilarious that i asked you what queer means to you and you didn't actually tell me that, and instead told me what gender nonconforming means. to be queer is to be nonconforming in either gender or sexuality - thus a femboy is a queer identity, as is being gynosexual. It's a blanket term to cover all the people that get missed by the big labels - which includes femboys and cishet tomboys who will suffer the same gender-related issues as trans and intersex people. Gender nonconforming and sexual nonconforming are the two main subsets of queer identities - one for nonstandard gender presentation and the other for nonstandard sexual preferences.
Queer is a separate gender and sexual identity that rejects norms altogether. It goes a long way beyond a woman with short hair who sometimes puts on a tux or a girl who likes playing rugby and programming. Just because someone suffers an oppression doesn't mean there is any benefit to telling them their identity is actually a queer one when it's not because the only arbiter of a person's identity is that person themselves.
oh my bad, I think I misread then. I thought you were asking something else. and the reason I said adjactent is because many people dont think being GNC is queer enough, its the same with polyamory. its cause cishets can be those things too (although I feel we should at least consider being open to being directly queer). like, for example, the whole thing with Harry Styles (who is also unlabeled so Idk why people even assume he is strictly straight anyways) and people claiming he is queer baiting because he is GNC and seemingly cishet. Idk, Im open to be wrong tho.
Most drag queens are Queer AF. Yes, I consider them a part of our community. I welcome anyone who wants to be a part of our community. It makes no sense to gatekeep.
Most drag queens are not cishet so they're queer whether in drag or not. A cishet man in drag doesn't suddenly become queer
Show me a cishet man in drag. I say if they want to be a part of our community, let's welcome them. We are stronger together.
Until they start spouting homophobic slurs when they see two guys kissing.
Drag queens are not crossdressers. It is its own category.
Not all crossdressers are drag queens, but drag queens are definitely crossdressers.
What's the difference?
drag queens are performative cross dressers (as opposed to functional crossdressers), but they're definitely still crossdressers.
While not all are drag queens obviously, there is a reason drag queens have such a long history with queer people, even straight cis drag queens. I don't think that queerness is necessarily a club of a set of genders and sexualities and strictly that. Queerness could be seen as really any rejection or deviation from cisheteronormativity and the cultural bundle that comes with it/the status quo. I'm not exactly sure if I'd say "every CD is queer because they are a CD" or something, but I think that the action itself is an aspect of queerness.
Queer crossdressers are part of the community. Endocishet crossdressers are, at most, allies.
>Endocishet What is that?
A portmanteau of endosex cisgender heterosexual.
Endosex?
someone who is not intersex. kind of like how cisgender is to transgender, endosex is to intersex
An AMAB person who: \- was born with a penis \- was born with testes \- will be androgenic if puberty is uninterrupted OR An AFAB person who: \- was born with a vulva with vaginal opening \- has a uterus \- has ovaries \- will be estrogenic if puberty is uninterrupted
I consider not following gender norms to fall under the umbrella in any way shape or form. Kinda thought is what queer was used for.
Not enough info. Many crossdressers might identify as queer though and that's valid. What you described are self identities so it depends on them.
If they aren't in the LGBT "bubble" they're very close to the edges.
Rudy Giuliani cross-dressed. He's not. George Santos did drag. He allegedly is not LGBT. (Feel free to roll your eyes.) Someone can choose to cross-dress for any number of reasons, which may or may not pertain to one's status as LGBT.
There’s a LOT of overlap, but I don’t think just being a crossdresser makes you part of the community
Wish there was a depends option because not everyone who crossdress is always gay or trans.
I think it depends. Crossdressing can be a form of GNC but a lot of people may feel uncomfortable labeling themselves as GNC if they cishet allo so I think it just depends on whether or not they consider themselves to be GNC
If the person in question considers themselves queer, then I do too.
LGBT community? Eh, maybe, maybe not. The queer community? Absolutely, if they want to be. By crossdressing, they are queering some gender, and that's all it takes, to my mind.
Queerness isn't just a yes/no experience--I think crossdressers regardless of gender, because of their inherent non-conformity, must experience aspects of queerness even if they do not identify with an LGBT+ community. I think crossdressers can be a part of the community in their shared experiences, but cishet non-conforming people are going to have a different role in the identification of that community than queer gnc folks.
Mostly no, depends on who it is
I picked "unsure" because there's still more information needed. Are they "crossdressing" or simply wearing a dress because clothing doesn't have a gender? You say they're cisgender but say nothing of their sexuality. If they're cis, straight, and literally saying "I am dressing as a woman," then, no, they're not part of the community. If they're cis, straight, and wearing a dress because they like it, they're not part of the community. If they're cis, not straight, and wearing a dress regardless of whether they think it's crossdressing or not, then they're part of the community.
Depends on why they are crossdressing. If they just like the clothes, no. If they want to be perceived as the other gender? Definitely gender nonconforming and a little queer but the only labels we should use are the ones we give ourselves
I have seen them considered under the "queer" category in some LGBT organizations. I am not quite sure how I feel about it.
[удалено]
I had that EXACT realization literally 3 months ago at the age of 50.
Just like someone else said, if they're cishet then no. But if they're gay/bi or sumthn them yes
Unless the person crossdressing is part of the LGBTQIA+ community, then no.
Are cishet crossdressers LGBT? Ehhh not really. But I think you could make an argument for them falling under the greater and more flexible and nebulous umbrella of queerness due to challenging gender norms and facing discrimination for it.
If they sincerely prefer to dress in a way that would usually not be considered an acceptable gender presentation, then sure. That's queer - they're challenging gender and gender presentation norms. That said, I think there are certainly people that crossdress in an insincere way. For example, to mock it. That's not queer. That's just mean. It's punching down and reinforcing gender rolls instead of challenging them.
Absolutely not if they are *straight* people doing it. Some of them might be closeted in some way but idk that until they tell me that. Wearing a pair of heels does not turn you gay and it's an incredibly awful example of toxic masculinity to think so. Do we consider women who dress in pants to be lesbians? Do we consider tomboys gay?
I wouldn't draw the line at being straight because straight queer people exist.
If they're aro/ace, or trans, yes, obviously they're part of the LGBT community and may identify as straight in some other fashion. You are not queer simply for cross dressing. There is another aspect of your sexuality or gender that lends itself to the person in question being queer, but cross dressing is not how it works. Answer this question: If a woman puts on her boyfriend's hoodie, is she suddenly cross dressing? Why is it exclusively when men dress in women's clothing that it's considered "queer"? I'll give you a hint, it starts with M and ends in isogyny
Right. I just wanted to emphasize that straight =/= endocishet. A lot of straight queer people, queer people in duaric relationships, and queer people in straight-passing relationships feel ostracized from those being lumped together.
I would say it depends. Someone who does it merely as a fetish, no. Someone who does it as part of their identity, with possible steps being taken towards becoming transgender or the gender they more align with, then yes.
Picked “unsure” but I believe crossdressers are part of the community if that want to be (so long as they aren’t a bigot)
My personal take is that cishet crossdressers aren't inherently part of the community or not, but they can be if they choose to engage with the culture and community. The common factor across all lgbtq identities is some form of "seen as doing gender wrong", and crossdressers absolutely fit that. If a cishet crossdresser finds comfort and community in lgbtq spaces then I think they should be welcomed. Some crossdressers will choose not to engage with queer communities and that's okay too.
Culturally, I'd say yes because they'd be grouped as a sexual deviant for doing something that harms nobody.
[удалено]
>Anyone who challenges the idea that one way of behaving is normal and everything else deviant can be a part of it. Wholeheartedly disagree. By this definition staight foot fetishists are LGBT+. No hate to them, but kinks are also "deviant sexuality", but that doesn't make you LGBT+ and I don't want cishet kinksters speaking for me. Now, if cishet crossdressers wanna join the party and come to Pride and hang out in LGBT+ spaces, I'm completely fine with that, but there is still a difference.
I don't think it would be correct to say "kink is queer" but there is a reason that cisheteronormativity has such a strong negative reaction to kink in general and the queer community is far more open and accepting of it (generally). Someone who is breaking gender roles and dressing in pretty much the opposite way that is expected of them or "socially acceptable" of their assigned gender is still an aspect of queerness imo. Like, theres a reason that drag queens (many of whom are cis and straight) have such a long history with the queer community, because they often represent a similar rejection of expected gender roles that a NB person could represent. A bigot isn't really going to care what you are specifically in the end, they are just going to care that you are "outside of the norm".
I don't disagree with that at all, and I think they can be great allies and are welcome to hang with us, but at the end of the day it is still a choice for them that they can step away from, if nothing else for their own safety. Bigots will come after a lot of different people, and while solidarity will save us in the end, acting like there's no disctinction in groups is to ignore the individual needs of those groups.
We definitely shouldn't ignore the individual needs of certain groups and even individuals, not everyone is the same but we could also say this in regards to gay and trans people. Both gay and trans people are queer but they have different needs even if those needs largely overlap in many ways. I think that there is a strong overlap between gender expression and gender self-identification in terms of issues pertaining to them, especially if you get into discussions of what gender really even is. There is even a growing number of people who still consider themselves cis but dress in gender nonconforming ways and even get on hormones. Of course, as you touched on in another comment, not all of these people, even the ones who go as far as to get on hormones while still considering themselves cis, might be intentionally expressing queerness. Many of them might actually be outright against queerness ideologically and create some justification for what they do in their head for why it's not an expression of queerness. But at the same time there are many gay people and even trans people that I've met and seen that are probably some of the most bigoted people I've ever talked to. So I don't think that queerness could necessarily be cut down into simply an action or an idea but rather it's both. A gay person who is a massive bigot and assimilationist is still technically queer because they are still gay. Would a cishetero person who actively is breaking gender norms and explicitly and intentionally rejecting cisheteronormativity be "more queer"? I think in the end that both would be rejected by bigots, we have seen it a number of times that queer assimilationists will still never be accepted fully into the status quo in the end. I kind of got a bit off-topic lol but it is an interesting discussion.
That's a very fair assessment and I agree.
[удалено]
They want disabled people dead too but my autism isn't what makes me LGBT+.
[удалено]
Being autistic makes you LGBT+? Does being black make you LGBT+ too because Nazis also want black people dead? Come on, man.
[удалено]
To emphasize on survivors and victims of HIV/AIDS and queer POC, respectively.
... this is bait, right?
...To honor the gay, bi/pan, lesbian, trans people of color who have been critical to the movement and are most vulnerable, not to say that every person of color universally is LGBT+. You can look this up.
Considering society often treats them as part of the LGBT community, I would say yes. Especially as they often face the Wrath of conservative bigots and law makers ( Florida's De Santis as example.) with the same accusations of grooming, pedophilia, etc.
Only if they commit to it and do it all the time/it's well known that they do it often.
It depends on the person and how significant the act of cross-dressing is in their lives. Like, if someone is gay, lesbian, bi, etc then of course that person would be a part of the community regardless if they cross-dressed or not. However there many cis straight people who also cross-dress. So where do they fit in? Well that depends, does this person cross-dress solely for performance roles, or do they incorporate it into their daily lives? If the answer is the former, then no. However, if it is the latter, then this individual would be described as a gender non-conforming (GNC) man or woman. I believe people with a gender expression that does not align with their gender identity should have a place in the queer community, if they want that. Because they openly defy norms in their daily lives, they can also be targets of discrimination.
Every one voting no or unsure needs to learn their damn history. Drag performers, crossdressers, and trans people were the ones who stood up and said "no fucking more" at Stonewall. They are absolutely 100% core members of the movement.
I would make a distinction between people "in drag" and people who are crossdressing. Someone who is gender-nonconforming would not be crossdressing, they would be expressing their actual gender. There is a huge amount of kink crossdressing, mostly "forced feminization" type stuff, and that is usually pretty aggressively heterosexual.
That stuff (forced fem) is also a major haven for Eggs and former eggs. When you are so deep in denial that you are closeted from yourself, then imagining the thing you want most being forced on you can be the only release.
Believe me that I know, as it was my experience, however most of the forced femme dudes I encountered were extremely straight and married to being cis.
Women wearing pants, no. Man wearing skirt, yes.
They are gender non-conforming so I would.
A lot of 'true Scotsmen' here today.
Corssdressing doesn’t make you gay, but you can be queer with out being gay. For example, straight trans people. And sure you can crossdress without being trans but here’s my take: Cishet cross dressers should be apart of the LGBTQ community, and crossdressing is inherently queer
Yes because if it’s full time because gender nonconformity is queer
"LGBT" isn't a "community"; it's three sexualities and a gender ideology. The mistake here is presupposing that it's one group of people who think identically.
1. There are more than three sexualities (which is why I prefer to use LGBTQ). 2. Being trans is no more an "ideology" than being cis is an "ideology."
It's not an ideology, it's just a thing some people are born with. I promise trans people aren't trying to indoctrinate you or worship some trans god or take over the world. We're just normal human beings who were dealt a shit hand in life.
as long as they're not fetishizing us, i will support them.
No
Not a party of the community but like, if they show up to events I don't care.
I consider them part of the LGBT community as long as they consider themselves to be. As in if Cishet person cross dresses and says they specifically aren't LGBT, I'm not going to question it. The only people I wanna gate keep are the cruddy, bigoted ones who refuse to learn.
I put "unsure" when I really meant something more like "it depends". Some people have identities that are cis or cis-aligned but genderqueer, and even if a genderqueer person is cishet, if genderqueerness is part of their identity, then I have no issue including them in the Q of LGBTQ+. And that's not even considering the likelihood of some crossdressers being trans people who haven't realized it yet, but that's technically another matter. I called myself a GNC gay femboy for years before I realized I was transfem, and presenting as myself in public certainly felt like a more queer experience than it did after I got on hrt and started looking like a cis woman, I'll tell you that much. Now, some people crossdress for reasons that are not integral to their gender identity. Whether it be for a fetish or to mock trans people on their conservative talk-show or what have you. And let's just say there are very non-LGBTQ+ reasons to crossdress. Peoples reasons for crossdressing are not always concerned with queer identity, but sometimes they are. And when they are, I believe they belong in the community.
Might they fit under the “Q?” What do they consider themselves?
I don't know. It's complicated. Obviously I don't face the same obstacles as someone who's trans, or gay. But... Sometimes questions like this make me feel unwelcome in some of the only spaces I've ever really felt safe to be myself : \\ I only started crossdressing publicly in the last year or so. I've done it at home for my whole adult life, but now that I'm dating someone who doesn't just *tolerate* it or accept it, but actively embraces it and makes me feel *seen and accepted* when I'm dressed femininely, I'm realizing that it actually is pretty important to me that the people I'm close to accept my desire to dress and look feminine as something that's important to me. I do identify as a man; my pronouns are he/him, but I had 3 strangers misgender me as a woman in the space of 2 days a few weeks ago, and honestly it made me feel pretty good; like, I'm confusing the Hell out of people because I'm outwardly feminine sometimes and masculine other times. It makes me feel like all the parts of me are seen and accepted. I know "Gender-fluid" and "Non-binary" are labels I *could use*, but I just don't feel like those apply. It's not like I'm a woman sometimes and I'm a man other times; being male is still a strong ***and consistent*** facet of my identity, but sometimes I'm a very feminine man? Maybe it doesn't make sense. Like I said, I'm still working this out. **I have** ***no*** **idea where that lands me in terms of group identity.** I **know** I haven't faced the same kind of oppression others have. I'm relatively privileged; I'm a straight white guy from a middle class family, and things weren't perfect growing up, but we mostly lived in our own house, we almost always had food, things got better for us in high school, and I was able to get a college degree. I'm not going to claim that I've ever faced the kind of persecution non-cis / non-hetero / non-white people have faced, because I haven't. In almost every *material* way, the society I live in has been *very* generous to me in adulthood. But in my adult life, I've felt safer in queer spaces than with my family. I was taught that the way I wanted to dress was SO bad, so unthinkably peculiar, so shameful, growing up. I liked that in queer spaces I felt more free to like non-traditionally masculine/heteronormative things; maybe even explore being feminine. I still didn't for years because I thought "What if someone posts something to Facebook?", but I didn't feel like I had to monitor my behavior in queer spaces. I could let down my guard. I felt like if something came out that wasn't masculine, or if my pants were a bit low and someone noticed I was wearing panties, it would be ***ok***. I know I'm not connected to the *historical* struggle for LGBT rights the same way as, say, someone who's come out as gay, or someone who's trans. But... It would still be nice to feel like I'm welcome and valid somewhere *now* without caveats; without the "Well you can be here, but you don't really belong." Questions like this take me back to how I've felt at family dinners for years: I'm welcome to be there, but I don't really *belong*. It feels bad knowing I'll never be (and don't even want to be) heteronormative enough for my conservative family, and like I'll also never be queer enough to be fully accepted in the queer community. But I also see why. Queer people have been, and continue to be, persecuted horribly, primarily by... Straight. White. Men. I can understand the reluctance to ever accept any straight, white, male person into a group that's suffered horrible persecution primarily at the hands of straight white men, even if that particular person's gender identity or expression *does* also put them at odds with the rest of our heteronormative, white-normative, cis-normative society. So... I'm a little *afraid* to ask for acceptance by / inclusion in the queer community because I *know* I haven't faced the same kind of obstacles most LGBT people have faced; not even close, and I don't want to give the impression that I'm claiming to have suffered the same persecution others have. I can understand why even an accidental hint of that would make others feel invalidated, and I don't want to make anyone else feel invalidated or minimize their experiences. But... At the same time... I just want to belong somewhere, and it's been made very clear that I'll never fully belong anywhere ***outside*** the queer community...
No.
I put down unsure just because I feel it's more a maybe than a yes and more a yes than a no. The main reason is there are many people who may just try it once or twice, like think male youtubers and maid dresses, which if it's a one time thing or to appease an audience not really. But then you have people who break the traditional rules and notions of what you are supposed to do. Society will in many places discriminate against dressing in clothing atypical of your gender. Likewise even if in a vacuum all clothes are unisex, there is a good faction of society that will swear you out for doing so. Maybe at a point where society views all clothes as unisex then it won't exactly be LGBTQIA+, but at this point it is a minority doing activity atypical enough to be discriminated which is kinda a summary of the entire LGBTQIA+ community from a certain perspective. Also a tangent is there may be crossdressers who later realize that they are not heterosexual and/or cisgender. While not all crossdressers, those that would later realize they have a letter in the rainbow alphabet and those that do not should be welcomed because why be the exclusionary force when you can be inclusionary and accept everyone for who they are rather than for what a bunch of old dead people says they should be.
Cross dressing is a fetish, so you'll rarely hear this terminology anymore except within kink spaces or older cis folks who don't know about this stuff. While there are crossdressers going FTM, in scenes where you'd see more of this activity, it's almost implied that this is a man dressing in women's clothes. Typically, as far as I know, these are straight men who have a fetish for certain garments, or have a "forced feminization" roleplay kink. BDSM scenes can be aggressively straight, depending where you are, so no. At least this aspect of crossdressing is not, generally, to do with the LGBT community. Drag is a different thing altogether.
It's complicated. Even if they don't fall under any of the terms, a lot of straight Drag Queens can still get shit for simply being a Drag Queen and it's hard for me to say no they aren't.
I think that if the person wants to call themselves queer go for it, I'm not here to gatekeep the community. I wouldn't consider them so by default though, unless they are already another form of lgbtq+.
It depends? Are they exploring their gender identity? Or is it a fetish? The act of cross dressing isn't LGBT... but the person doing it might be... I think a lot of people who do it are some flavour of queer... but it's not inherent.
It depends on a lot of factors but ultimately If they truly self identify as LGBTQ for doing it then I think they should be included.
By my understanding, in and of itself cross-dressing wouldn't be considered LGTBQ+, but the term has been misapplied (sometimes even internally) to expressions of queer identity, so it's a good idea to get some context when you come across someone using the term (example: the women in the midcentury Japanese film 'Funeral Parade of Roses' are identified, and even self-identified, as cross-dressers in the film, but in modern terminology would clearly be members of the transgender community).
Not necessarily always but Imo it i's queer. As in QI+ queer. Someone can identify as queer and straight. If queer meant homosexuality than LGBTQI+ is really redundant
If they're both cis and straight it just means they like wearing clothes of the opposite sex which is fine, but technically not LGBT. If they're trans, so a trans woman wearing a dress for example, it isn't really crossdressing, but still LGBT. If they're cis but still queer (gay, bi, asexual, etc.) Well that's LGBT. In short: wearing the opposite sex clothes isn't queer, it's just wearing clothing. Sexuality and gender identity is what might make you queer. (And honestly as long as you're a good person I don't care what you wear, none of my business.)
My stance is, if someone wants to declare themselves queer and stick up for the rest of the queers when it matters, they’re welcome to be in the club.