[Dianna1395]

Hi, SFem.
I understand your points, and I'm likely a little (LOT) touchy on the subject, so I probably "Shared" too much.
I agree on being open-minded; my slant was more that we must at some point make a value judgement, as a fully "open" mind is always busy evaluating - and is like a puddle of water, no form, no reasoning, no shape - takes the shape of whatever container it can be put in. The easy example is, the concept of cannibalism. Normal to the Maori tribes; abnormal to Westerners, though they practice it usually weekly - ritualistic cannibalism via wafers and wine.
I think this is true of most people, that they'd rather things be defined FOR them, and use that framework for understanding the world, than to actually question and reason on their own. The mob mentality, or the herd mentality.

Most of us will be above that, from readings elsewhere... T* people tend to be above average, and have a high representation in STEM fields, I've read. No confirmation, maybe it's that those in other fields are better adjusted in birth-related gender roles, or are more able to go "stealth. dunno...

I think the "model" for human interaction at the base level, the atomic level for a civilization, would have to be the family. Male and female, orbiting each other, in essence; like the moon and earth, or the Yin and Yang - each pushes and pulls the other into a new direction, but the overall thing is (a) one entity, and (b) constantly moving and developing. It's like a dance... And I find that the dance is breaking down. Given I wanted to emulate the best of the feminine, I wonder why they would, in turn become something completely alien to what they've been for centuries... I.E., antagonistic of men, JUST to be antagonistic and who no vulnerability. And it's not just the current woman, but all I've dated, known, met... :-(

Meantime, here we are wishing for their grace, refinement, beauty, poise...

There are a lot of forums out there, and they can be VERY hard to find. I forgot about Cheryl's, for example, until someone posted a link here... I have posts on there dating back 5 years, I think, maybe more.
but unless you KNOW what you're searching for...? Might never find it. So I agree with resources being posted, even if they're sort of OT.

But I don't think we can really have a "society" where everyone does whatever they want - because there's always some who wants to hurt others, or watch the world burn... And they can be quite destructive. Especially since others might want to watch, even if they don't DO. (think Virtuosity's ending scenes; might be able to find on YouTube. Vicarious murderers who won't do it on their own will watch others commit the crime...) Which is why I can't quite be an anarchist, either. In a perfect world, sure... Not a perfect world, though.

And most of the human gender divide is really about sex. Questions of who will lead the dance, and who will follow, are settled based on our attire, in a sense. Questions of how rigid people are in social presentation echo in the same way (E.G., a pierced and tattooed girl has different ideas on sex from a nun).
How many of us would willingly, knowingly, go to bed with a transsexual? Same question, only she's a Trap?

Changes the equation, right?

In fact, looking at the TV version of "Brave new World" sometime back, where Leonard Nimoy starred, and wore a skirt: Was there any question he was a male wearing a skirt?
Minor things, if you will; still frames the story. There's more there than just the clothes, and I think a feeling of deception alters the equation instantly. It's just... Wrong.
Hence the polarity of human sexuality.

Same with the 50/50 relationship discussed previously. She and He must decide for themselves what is important. If he is to be masculine and breadwinner and then submit to her...? Until they get to the bedroom, where he's supposed to "take charge" after being berated and subjugated and emasculated outside...? I can't do the calculus there.
Even if it were a less diseased model, I think it would be sickening. E.G., if he's a tyrant at work, and comes home to a tyrant who rules the roost, I think a pshrink would talk about translation of the anger at being dominated, into the work world.
Whereas, if he is submissive to the woman, it might work. Then, they're dancing. (Again, dominance isn't tyranny.) Or, she can submit to him... Still dancing. Or, they can alternate: she plans Saturday, he plans Sunday, either/both/neither could be great or a disaster, as long as no one takes it personally... all is good. Their arrangement, their lives. As an example, New Hope, PA, where there is some Mistress and her Sissies, who go out regularly. you can tell who is who immediately; the clothes tell the whole story, and you know who is in charge.

I think, if you removed the connotation, many people would have some issues with that world. Every interaction becomes a contract, with details that must be spelled out - affirmative consent, if you will, or "yes means yes." So the social pattern would go to, "May I hold your hand?", "May I kiss you?", "to eventually, "May I take off your bra?" and "May I lick your nipple?" and .. Well, you get the idea. this gets to where things can suddenly turn into "rape" because after she's been riding him, she can change her mind JUST as he tenses up, and now he'll be labelled a rapist because she said, "No." (And then there's morning-after regret, or "I'm not that kind of girl" after the fact...)

I think most of us like that men and women are different. And most of us wouldn't mislead others as to who and what we are.
But some want to, some believe it's their "right" to lie to others...

Which makes a world without rules very UNpleasant...

[sfem]

I think comparing rejecting gender representation norms and gender roles of any particular society cannot be fairly compared to cannibalism, murder, or destruction. They are both literally and figuratively completely different concepts with different drivers and effects. It is a false analogy. No-one is suggested the complete breakdown of all society into brutal primitive anarchy. Striving for the common good and compassion for others does not preclude having your own ideas of who you are and how you present yourself in both appearance and behaviour. Having a choice doesn't mean you will choice horrible things. I wish the political right could get that through their thick skulls.
I hear and understand that you are unable to see yourself outside of the binary and the modern central european/american representation of it for both appearance and behaviour. That makes me sad, as it sounds like that model for living has taken you to a very unhappy life.
As to some of your other comments, there is nothing intrinsically wrong with a man in a skirt. Books and covers, dude. Sex roles do not depend on gender, although the games people play can certainly incorporate them. Nothing wrong with that either, unless it becomes destructive to one or more parties. Then the issue is the behaviours and choices made, not some imaginary innate quality of a gender or piece or clothing. The gender divide is not mostly about sex. They certainly are related in many ways, but correlation is not causation. Talk to any fully transitioned trans person to get a perspective on this. Sleeping with a transsexual is not a Bad Thing. Nuns can be tattooed and pierced too, how would you even know if one was? I saw a really cool meme years ago with a woman holding the front of a habit open to show her cleavage and the slogan was "Nuns. They have tits too." Fantastic! The power, dominance, control topics you raise are not a product of genitals or gender. Women and men both struggle with these things. These topics come up in gay and lesbian relationships too. They are human nature topics.
No-one is suggesting a world without rules. But I hope you would agree, some rules are sort-sighted and counter-productive, some are destructive, some serve devious purposes, and some are just plain pointless. The really sad part is when we just accept someone else's rules without evaluating them. You won't do yourself any favours promoting, defending, and strengthening those kinds of rules. I hope you can find your way to a more fulfilling experience, and find people who can be positive contributors to your life.
I know I sound very preachy. I honestly don't mean to , but I don't know how else to say these things.

[The First Aria]

As sort of a climax to this thread...

I would have to share this last thought.

Women and men had to go through an "adjustment" phase here in the States after the war.

Men were shocked to see Wives, Girlfriends, Mother's and Sister's wearing slacks and having shorter hairstyles when they got back. But, I think men are more forgiving than their counterparts in such regards, as witnessed by some of the rants produced in the original "male" section.

In the Classical Period, both sexes pretty much wore Toga's all the time. Hell when Julius Caesar's Army invaded England, they wore "Mini Skirts". LOL.

Even in the Middle Ages, men and women wore powdered wigs, and almost a Uni Sex style of clothing, including Mid Height Heeled Shoes and many wore makeup as well.

So, when and why did women become so possessive of "their style of dress", even while stealing men's clothing to the point of not wearing much makeup at all????

I would demand anyone to go to a true Celt, and tell him he is gay due to him wearing a kilt.... (death sentence???) So I do NOT believe a man has to be gay, or TV or TG to want to wear anything he wants.

(Getting off of Soap Box)