Words of warning and welcome:

This is very much my blog, so don't be surprised if this doesn't follow accepted patterns and norms. Obviously it started out as a blog about my cross-dressing but it has developed a great deal since then. It is a place where I can be anonymous and honest, and I appreciate that.

It will deal with many things and new readers would do well to check out the New Readers' Page above this and the tag down there on the right. Although there's nothing too bad in here there will be adult language, so be careful. If you think this needs a greater control, please let me know. Thank you!

Monday, 13 January 2014

Residual Self Image

I wouldn't complain if I woke up with the ability to look like
this (though it would clearly take a bit of work).
As part of my ma-hoos-ive sharing of images earlier this week (was it only Saturday?) I got to thinking that I have only really had two images grace my profile page. Should I change that more often to reflect how I am feeling or should I be searching for an image that remains mine and never changes? Increasingly, since Calvin's rather interesting comment (still thinking it through), I am wondering about what image I would like to show the world. Note, this is different to what I want to show the world and even from what I should present to the world.

Oh noes, I haven't found the time or opportunity to
wear clothes designed for another gender in a
manner that won't arose suspicion despite having
recently bought them for this purpose.
I haven't under-dressed for a few days. Combination of factors but mainly the fact that the clothes I've been wearing have been rather too thin to 'get away with it', especially my shirt to work today that would have made any choice of clothes beneath it rather too obvious. There's also the small matter of Tilly and trying to work out what's going on there. I was dismissed on Sunday evening as she was getting grumpy and angry trying to settle a small claim we have with some company (not really a story for here save for the fact that we of an accord about restitution and we tried the peaceable method - I got hung up on). So I retired to mark. She came to bed late, we did not talk. Tonight I come home from work to a very happy Tilly who was keen to talk, she made tea for me, she seemed excited and happy. After children are abed I come down to sullen Tilly, we have not spoken much, she's immersed in facebook. On the back of Friday's spooning in bed I am thoroughly confused. To make matters worse, I read the following article.

Huh, well, see, it's already meme worthy.
I really don't know what to make of that at all. I mean, on one level, it makes a lot of sense about the primacy of PIV sex and how that shouldn't be the be all and end all of the sexual act, the fact that most women do not climax from PIV as it stands. The fact that the whole act should be more sharing, more languid, more playful. Yes, that all makes sense. But the fact that any PIV can be classified as rape (logical argument despite the tone of the piece) has me wondering generally. In wanting that from Tilly am I essentially pressuring her to do something she doesn't want to do? Is Tilly even aware of what she wants from all of this?

Along with those musings, I have been doing stupid things again. I think it's a matter of record that I often flirt with the idea of behaviour and other modification due to a fascination with hypnosis and conditioning. Indeed, I think I have already done much to condition sexual response and social mores in my own life. If you go beyond the line-break I shall share some of the things I found myself doing because I am random. Don't worry, I'll leave a long break if people want to comment but don't really care to read further! I shall fill that break with a couple of images with commentary. I promise they're nice enough.

So, there is an old caption blog that appears to have been taken over by a spam site but for the fact that it is primarily based on 'sissy assignments'. I read the first one of these and was slightly intrigued (obviously on a sexual level) by the content. Now, I'm getting the impression that sissy assignments are primarily about making people addicted to fellatio. I have no interest in that, nor in being the recipient of penetrative sex - well, not in a 'sissy' style at any rate. I can't really comment on it as there's never been the opportunity and there's never really been a point where I have considered it. I am reasonably certain that I am attracted to females for sex, for example, and have considered that, so I feel justified in stating myself as heterosexual in that regard. I digress.

The point is that I was drawn to an assignment about wearing heels, toes to wall, and standing with shoulders back and nose to a wall for five minutes followed by five minutes (again in heels), heels to wall, standing with shoulders and bum to wall. On the back of reading that I looked up others and found plenty. Reading them triggered a response, so of course I went looking further and found plenty more, including 'hypnosis gifs' and 'hypnosis videos'. Some of them were 'sissy' and the vast majority were 'forced feminisation'. Big surprise.

Anyway, on Sunday evening, having some spare time having been spurned by Tilly, I tried out the heels thing. It did that thing to my legs that I remembered from my time out in heels and that I recall being a delicious feeling in the couple of days afterward. I spoke about it at length there too. It is highly likely that I shall be repeating the experience at some point.

Now, I know that I am tired, but I have to wonder at what this is doing to my brain, my responses and what the motivation is. I am not stressed, I've said this before but I'm really not, and most of my dressing and my other impulses regarding what is essentially porn have been in response to periods of stress. I have even said as much and yet there is no stress here. No relationship problems, well, not new ones. So what is the motivation? Why now?

Ah, onto some images to allow people who do not wish to read about depravity to comment without being forced to read (even if by accident) the ramblings of a mad-person.

I would love to hold a bouquet.
Dunno for what purpose, but I would.
Aaand, it's not a curtsey, but it perhaps is more fitting to my feelings of late...


  1. I have to start out by commenting on the article you linked to. This is in no way directed toward you or any person in particular... but I'm absolutely floored by the assertion that any penis in vagina sex is rape. I can't find a single definition (outside of radical feminism) of rape that isn't based on consent. If a party does not consent to sex, then it's rape. So turning that on its ear and saying that whenever a penis enters a vagina qualifies the act as rape is baffling to me and requires someone to either completely redefine the term 'rape', or assume that no woman is strong/smart/willing enough to ever give consent. As I view women as strong/smart/willing as men, I have to go with the former.

    If some one or some group wants to say that penis in vagina sex is improper or inappropriate then I can listen to their argument and come to a rational conclusion (a conclusion that may even be different than my own experience). But if that same person or group wants to take such a strong and ugly term as 'rape' and apply it to all forms of penis in vagina sex while completely ignoring the whole consent issue, then I have to stop listening and call bull shit. I find it about as understandable and convincing as the assertion that growing a beard is sexual assault. Again, this is in no way directed toward you Joanna.

    Despite my aversion to the article, I think you may be on the right path when it comes to Tilly. If she doesn't want to have sex because it's not pleasurable and/or is painful, then maybe there are other ways that the two of you can be physically intimate. I can't imagine it would be an easy discussion to have though as it would involve her stating why she doesn't want to have sex.

    1. With regards the article, the argument struck me as logical not because it claimed that women were *unable* to give consent but because of the idea that there was no real choice for women to give consent. That is, without a viable alternative the concept of consent was fundamentally flawed. Now, here, the article and I probably diverge. But at heart the concept that if there is no viable alternative then the choice doesn't really exist is something I've chewed over a lot and that I have a lot of time for. To choose a less emotionally charged example, consider the choice not to work.

      Most people would argue that you *have* to work and that the concept of a 'lifestyle choice' of not working would be immoral or, at least, not for the good of society. Almost criminal in fact. It was the basis of Marx's argument about being wage-slaves, that there is not a choice to actively withhold labour means that we are, in fact, slaves without freewill.

      In the same way, the fact that society assumes that consent *will* be given and that all women wish for PIV sex, and, indeed, that PIV sex is the 'normative' behaviour when it comes to 'healthy' relationships implies that consent is a chimera. A woman, the article argued, has no real choice to never give consent in our societal structure. Ergo, consent cannot really be the difference between rape and not rape. I disagree on the outcome, by the way, but the logical argument to get there supports multiple conclusions.

      Certainly, we need to do more work on how sex is taught, presented and talked about before consent can truly be seen as something within a woman's gift and not as something to be wheedled about and debated in law courts.

      And, finally, yes. I am trying to have that conversation, but it is hard. Tilly is not someone with whom one can have a conversation about bodily functions generally and sex even less. Increasingly I find myself being *unable* to be open with her due to the boundaries that she erects.

    2. "...there was no real choice for women to give consent." That right there. That is what I disagree with. It assumes that being part of the social norm is required and since social norm doesn't accept non penis/vagina sex as normal that there is no choice. I just don't believe that the 'social norm' is something that is required. Nor do I believe that anybody should strive for it. It's like believing you have to enjoy pop music because liking pop music is the norm. I choose instead to look at the 'social norm' as a simple majority opinion. Sometimes I agree with it and sometimes I don't. But I never believe I HAVE to agree with it. Nor do I believe that it has to change and accept my views.

      There IS a choice for women to give consent. If they don't enjoy or accept penis in vagina sex, they can simply not have it. If this doesn't include any attraction for men, it simply makes them a lesbian. Is that part of the majority social norm? No. Is being outside of the social norm wrong? No. Is the majority social norm wrong for not accepting that? No. It just is. I believe that accepting that you are yourself in a minority to be a very freeing and fun thing.

      A personal example; The social norm is to date, find a 'soul mate' when you are relatively young, get married, have children, grow a family, and eventually grow old together. I've chosen not to follow that path. I didn't want to date until I was happy with myself, and that still really hasn't happened yet. So here I am, about to enter my fourth decade of life and I've never been close to marriage, let alone having children. I'm looking at the very likely possibility of NEVER having children of my own. The choice certainly isn't part of the 'norm', but I don't feel slighted by the majority social norm because my life choices haven't matched up with it.

      In that vein I don't believe women have no choice, and therefore all acts of penis in vagina sex are rape. If their choice puts them outside of the social norm, then they have to accept that as part of their choice. If enough of them make that choice and stand by it, they will change the social norm.

    3. Oh, absolutely, no one HAS to be part of a social norm. But thee and me, we are already outside of it. Furthermore, I've spent my life analysing what the norm is and, largely, ignoring it.

      Intriguingly, the majority opinion, a social norm, is held by a majority who have no clue WHY they hold that opinion and would never seek to challenge it. Not because they WANT to be part of the norm but because they can't really understand why anyone wouldn't be part of the norm already. In other words, for the vast majority, consent doesn't exist like it should (male or female). Not because they want it that way, but because they don't want to know any different. As people I teach put it: "if it works, why challenge it?"

      Take another for instance: is it really a choice for women to shave body hair and wear make up? A vast majority would agree that it is. But, equally, a vast majority would never contemplate a life not wearing make up ever or not shaving ever. Ask them why that is and... they have no idea. Ask them why it is acceptable for women to shave (not shaving is gross!) and not men (well, that would be wrong, men are supposed to be hairy) and their arguments are specious and shallow. Challenge them to change, explain the genetics and history of these activities and the shutters come down, they will refuse.

      On that basis, a vast majority adhere to the societal norm because it is the societal norm and nothing else. When applied to consent as it stands it means that a vast majority of people don't really consider alternatives and thus don't really have the choice that consent implies. Well, not an informed consent.

      In other words: I agree with everything you just said, but it doesn't alter what I was driving at (and probably failing to make clear AT ALL, it is my curse).

    4. AH HA!!! Now I see where you (and that article) are coming from now. I read the article and viewed it from my own perspective... the perspective of someone that isn't happy enough to like or do something but wants to know WHY I like or do something. That, however, just isn't the case with most people. Many (if not most) people do just tend to follow along and do as they're expected without thinking about why anything is considered normal or abnormal.

      It's difficult for me to consider that many (if not most) people carry on in this manner as I tend to surround myself with people that consider the why at least as important (if not MORE important) than the how. In that context, I can now appreciate that argument that PIV sex may be considered rape. It's not about a lack of consent, it's about a lack of truly INFORMED consent. The idea of protecting these people is similar to protecting an underage woman/girl.

      But while I can intellectually appreciate it... I still find myself hard pressed to agree with it. The way I see it now is that it's o.k. to call it rape because the vast majority of people (women) refuse to think deeply enough about themselves to consider possibilities outside of the norm. But we're talking about a group of people that either can't or at the least refuse to think deeply for themselves. Telling them to think for themselves is akin to telling them how to think... and they are already being told how to think. These people are grown adults and if their decision is to not make a decision but let it be made for them, then I have to offer them respect for that. Even if I don't like it.

      At some point there is just a diminished return on helping people. In the job I hold I offer a lot of education to a large group of people. But if I can make one out of a hundred of them act or be more healthy then I consider that a raging success as the vast majority of them simply cannot process (or subconsciously refuse to process) this life improving information. I'll never stop offering the education even when it's response is a rolling of the eyes... I just won't expect many of them to accept or even process the education.

      Using that lens to look at the PIV/rape thing... is it fair to criticize/chastise a group of people who consciously or unconsciously refuse to ever ask 'why'? Maybe, but I'd rather focus my thoughts and actions on people who are more predisposed to participate in the conversation willingly. People who don't look at all males as rapists because they accept that there IS a choice for women.

    5. *nods*

      I'm not suggesting that the original article author hit the nail on the head (I was slightly perturbed reading other articles on her blog), merely that it started the very conversation you and I are having. In stating PIV could be seen the same way as rape I'm not sure it necessarily follows that all men are rapists. Merely that any man that uses the lack of informed consent and societal norms to focus on only PIV or, at least, using PIV for selfish gain has the potential to consider himself a rapist. (If women lack the inclination to think about informed consent I doubt very much they'd consider the man a rapist for using/abusing that notion).

      Ah... in other words, yes, those that reject or refuse to take in education are victims as much as abusers of that. I can hardly sit in judgement of them given my own proclivities and my own blindnesses (known and unknown). Applying it to my relationship suggested, to me, a perspective I hadn't fully considered regarding Tilly's position on the matter. She and I have yet to discuss the article, but she will read it eventually.

      I'm drifting... No, it is not fair to criticise/chastise a group of people who consciously or unconsciously refuse to ever ask 'why'. As educators we can continue to offer our thoughts, opinions and supported research to them but they are under no obligation to listen or even hear what we say. In return the same applies when we're the ones refusing to ask 'why' about other things.

      In conclusion, however, I return to my feeling, and it is a feeling rather than an opinion, that society as it stands tends to remove choice for women. It's not that there isn't one, it's that the way things are makes it difficult for anyone, men or women, straight or gay, trans* or otherwise, autistic of high-functioning, white, black or green, to exercise INFORMED choice - which is almost the same as not being able to choose at all. Being aware of that helps. It doesn't, in my mind, make all men rapists (or I would be one) but it does challenge me to think on another level.

  2. I think that most sexual responses are conditioned responses. For example; you do something and find it sexually arousing or exciting. You then repeat the behavior because you find it sexually arousing or exciting and it's even more sexually arousing or exciting. That act and the arousal become more and more entwined. But at the very beginning there was that spark of arousal.

    From my own experience, I look at three times in my life. All centered around 'Caitlyn'. Pre-Caitlyn phase when I focused on being masculine and thought of acting in any sort of feminine way as 'bad'. Caitlyn phase when focused on being feminine and thought of acting in any sort of feminine way as 'good'. I embraced the idea of being feminine and reinforced it through thought, actions, and imagined actions. Post-Caitlyn phase where I am no longer concerned with masculine or feminine and instead just focused on being me. I know that you are primarily focused on dressing and not attracted to the act of fellatio, but my own experiences were almost the opposite. In my pre-Caitlyn phase I'd look at an image of fellatio and get aroused at imagining the act of fellatio being performed on me. During my Caitlyn phase I'd get the same (if not more) arousal but from imagining me performing the act of fellatio on a man. I did that long enough that even though I no longer desire to be feminine, I can still get sexually aroused when I see an image of fellatio and imagine myself in the woman's role. The arousal isn't nearly as strong and rarely lasts all that long, but it's still there. I've conditioned myself to be aroused at the thought of it.

    So if I had to put this in a linear fashion, I'd say that there is a core part of you that desires to be feminine in dress and action. During a time of stress you acted parts of this out and got sexually aroused by it. Now when you think of these acts, even when you aren't stressed, you are conditioned to be aroused which in and of itself calls you to act the desires out.

    I'm not going to assign the terms good or bad to either your thoughts or actions. What I will say is that so long as the core desire remains... the desire to be and act in a feminine manner... then these actions and responses are perfectly understandable and normal.

    1. A double whammy of interesting and thought-provoking comments! Thank you for both (I forgot on the first one).

      The example you use with Caitlyn phase seems to support the idea that conditioning played a much larger role than an initial desire. In fact, it seems as though your Caitlyn phase created the desire with fellatio and the differing perspectives. Like when reading captions or porn and finding initial impulses of desire that draw one to certain places but then conditioning (either through reading one-handed or simply repeated exposure) oneself to finding desire in other parts of that same thing.

      Example: I found fictionmania back in 1998 and was initially drawn by (comparatively) vanilla accounts of cross-dressing. Indeed, the act was interesting to read and only vaguely sexually arousing. Over time it became moreso, I would seek out more sexually charged descriptions within the stories. By the end of 1999 I could add body-modification, female domination, authoritarianism and furries to my list of 'turn ons'. By 2005 I was able to add several more websites, expand my knowledge of bondage etc. Basically put, the conditioning was now far away from the initial well-spring of my desires.

      Thus your appraisal of the linear progression of my own situation is dead on. But I am happy to assign good and bad to my thoughts and actions and would argue that the progression further into acting out femininity is semi-toxic to my relationship with Tilly and, potentially, my children. Thus, though understandable, and possibly even normative, I would argue that these actions are very much in the 'bad' category. I simply lack the willpower, or the desire, to give them up.

    2. Maybe 'good and bad' aren't the right choices here. Maybe 'easy and difficult' better encapsulates it. On the surface, your choice seems to be continue to follow along with your desire to dress and act feminine and therefore undermine your relationship with Tilly. Or you can choose to fight your own core desire and strengthen your relationship with Tilly. Sadly, neither of those are 'easy'. Both are difficult.

      I want to say this, but I also want it said with the understanding that I've never been in a relationship as strong as a marriage. I believe it's most important to be true to yourself. To do anything else, especially when it comes to a relationship, is to simply advertise falsely. What I mean is... does Tilly love and accept you, or the veneer that you are showing her. If she only loves the veneer, it must be putting an incredible pressure on you. Instead of living your life and filling it with joy and love, you must constantly maintain this false image and eventually cracks are going to appear. The relationship will end up a success or failure not because of compatibility or mutual love/respect for each other, but because you are able to 'act' or 'be' the way she wants you to. The relationship only succeeds by your own internal struggle.

      If you make that choice, I can respect it. Again, I'm not in a relationship so I can continue to strive for the 'ideal'. Relationship do often require sacrifice... but I can't believe that a real relationship can be built upon the foundation of one person denying who and what they are.

      As for your children and this being semi-toxic... I think your children are too young for that to be true. I believe they are still at the age and reasoning level that they simply accept you as 'dad'. True, they may grow older and not accept this part of their dad, but then again they may grow up and not accept other parts of your life as well.

    3. And, with that, you render me speechless (in a positive way) again.

      Thank you. I shall be mulling on this for a while yet!

    4. I have to say... I worried about what I wrote here all day yesterday. I tend to write things like this in a theoretical, intellectual manner that doesn't look to closely at the reality of the situation. I feel like I'm writing about the 'big picture' without considering the nuts and bolts of it. And that's just not really fair.

      I feel like I know you. I know you as a friend. You are thoughtful, creative, and intelligent and exactly the type of person I love to associate myself with. You can go through interesting thought exercises as well as discuss the nitty gritty of everyday life. But even with as much as you've shared here (and I'm not going to say that I've even read all of your blog), I still see only a small slice of your 'real' life.

      I still stand by what I wrote... but I want to emphasize that I'm talking about all of this in an academic/ivory tower/perfection type way. I don't know anybody (myself most certainly included) that live in that fantasy world. I certainly don't know enough about you and your life to offer this up as real advice. For instance while I can read about why you disagree/debate/argue with Tily, I do this in a context of not knowing why you love her. Knowing as much about you as I do, I can't imagine you fell in love with your eyes closed. You met, you were attracted both on a physical and mental plane, you fell in love, and you married. I can say that, but it's all an assumption.

      I'm starting to ramble... let me reset. I don't want you to think that I'm giving out relationship advice. At best I'm woefully inadequate in that regard, and at worst I just don't have the information to offer anything other than an off the cuff bit of intellectual fluff that can barely scratch the surface of your world. Even in this 'open book' sharing environment that we live in I'd be silly to think that I could ever have enough information to offer anything really substantial for you to consider.

      I'll still read what you share and when I feel that I have something to contribute I'll still comment and converse with you about it. But keep in mind I'm talking about your very real situation in an entirely academic way.

    5. You shouldn't worry too much, or at all!

      Firstly, thank you, for the friendship. It is returned and felt, genuinely. Secondly, thank you for the compliments, they are also felt, as you are a person I respect, admire (sorry) and look up to - your talents and your experience outweigh my own. I am pleased to say that I can return the feeling of friendship and consider you one also!

      However, I am, usually, a dispassionate person. I am closer Lenin in emotional outlook than Hitler (if I may compare myself to famous dictators), or rather, closer to Gandhi than Mandela (the former being more rational, calculating and cold than the latter - take a look at his wishes regarding giving penicillin to his wife!) if you prefer more positive historical figures.

      In that sense, I understand that your comments here are removed, as they must be given the situation - my coldness in everyday life is balanced by the heat of my emotion and creativity here, for example - and so view what you say through the lens of that.

      I'm an academic, I recognise an academic who comments :) And I like that. I like that we can discuss very real things in a removed manner. What you say provokes me to think, challenges assumptions. That's more than I can ask for!

      So be reassured: you challenge academically and I mull and turn things over on this blog. My post that related to your comment was forming long before your comment, you just happened to crystalise a number of points I would have taken longer to say.

      Thank you again, advice it may not be but wisdom it can remain, it is my job to sift what is relevant to me from what is academic discussion and that's a job I quite enjoy! :)



All comments are welcome, I have a thicker skin virtually than I do in real life!