We often call our dogs princesses. We do live to serve their needs, of course. They utilize our bodies to lie on whenever they choose, as if we were furniture, and demand attention whenever they want.
Put me into the pants crowd. I’m going to a wedding today, and pants it is. But, the last wedding I went to, I actually wore a dress for maybe the first time in ten years. It was a beach wedding, I felt pressured to wear a dress, so I bought a figure flattering halter top one. One of my sons was rather creeped out by this, and thought it was just wrong. He said it was because he’d never seen me in a dress, but I think it was probably because he’d never seen me looking attractive before, and what is this all about. One of my mom’s claim to fame was being the first female engineer at Boeing to wear pants. Though she says it wasn’t a feminist statement, just covering up fat legs.
Call a daughter Princess and her opportunities are narrowed? Only if you’ve already constrained her in other ways. I sometimes refer to my girls as oldest baby and littlest baby. Its a term of endearment. No one thinks I’m trying to juvenalize them. My mother still sometimes calls me “baby girl.”
"He said it was because he’d never seen me in a dress, but I think it was probably because he’d never seen me looking attractive before, and what is this all about. ".
Your son had never seen you look attractive before?? Huh?
There are plenty of women who only wear pants and, clearly, prefer them. My mother never wore a pair of pants- partly because skirts and dresses were easier for her since she had some paralysis in her legs from polio.
It’s just incorrect to say that wearing a dress makes one fall into some traditional feminine image trap. There isn’t much more comfortable than a thin maxi dress, actually.
One thing I learned as a lawyer after transitioning is that in a New York City summer, it’s a hell of a lot more comfortable wearing a dress with no sleeves or short sleeves (as long as you have a sweater or jacket for the air-conditioning), plus sandals on your feet, and bare legs, than it is to have to wear long pants, shoes and socks, and a long-sleeved button-down shirt. Even after ties no longer were required on an everyday basis. The difference is amazing!
Personally, I enjoy dresses too, even though I don’t do make up, etc. I like longer dresses for travel as well.
I do think shorts work better for bus travel. Also, when I am out with a possibility of being active (like going to a park, where I may run around or lay down on the grass or climb a rock), I will choose shorts.
I don’t get running skirts. I think it’s great women have options, it’s just not for me - I am not really into the idea of looking nice/cute for workouts.
I like running skirts/dresses because they are fun, cute and comfortable, but a lot of women wear them because they can provide more coverage and also are much better at preventing chafing. So- there are practical reasons for them. I wear shorts, too- and capris or tights in cooler weather. I like options. I may look like hell at the end of a race, but my outfits are cute!
I would love, love,love to be able to wear sundresses. I have always longed to be that tall, slim woman in the magazine ads standing in a field of wheat with my hand just brushing the top of the wheat with that dreamy far off look in my eyes.
I just got around to that piece that you posted, Donna, and among other things it helped crystalize that of the points of cognitive dissonance that many cis-women have about Jenner. As was unfortunately pointed out in the VF material, Jenner has legs for days and, therefore, was easy to dress in high fashion samples. Cis-women have been resenting that fashion image pretty much forever because the dominant ideal that magazine spreads and retails ads present to us is that 6’+ with thigh gap. Of course Jenner has that body naturally and yet as a trans woman it can be a liability because in real life it’s harder to feminize a 6’2" frame with size 12 feet. In glamming it up to be acceptably feminine she ends up more successfully achieving that advertising based feminine ideal than most cis-gender women are able to. It gives a visceral feeling of unfairness, right or wrong, that this unachievable image of femininity was created by male advertisers and yet someone who started with a male body is able to come darn close to nailing it. You can add a D cup but you can’t add a willowy frame.
I like how the author of the piece explains how that image is harmful to all women both cis-gender and trans.
“I would love, love,love to be able to wear sundresses. I have always longed to be that tall, slim woman in the magazine ads standing in a field of wheat with my hand just brushing the top of the wheat with that dreamy far off look in my eyes.”
Wait, why do you have to be tall and skinny to wear sundresses? Plenty of women wear those, and different styles can flatter different shapes. Maybe you can’t change your body to be tall and skinny, but you could wear sandals with heels, and get a sundress works for your shape. Plus anyone can put their hand on top of the wheat, and I always have that dreamy far off look in my eyes, because I’ve forgotten whatever it was I was doing. What was I planning on doing before this thread pulled me in, anyways?
I’m with busdriver here. If you want to wear a sundress, wear a sundress. Find one that works for you, find a good color for you, and go for it. You can’t be tall and skinny, maybe, but you can look your best in a sundress of the right style.
Wear a sundress if you want, but although many women wear makeup and dresses, certainly MOST don’t wear what Ms. Jenner was wearing on the magazine cover.
And any woman who sees a woman who dresses like that is more likely to say “what a fake” instead of “how beautiful, now that is a real woman who I can aspire to!”.
I’m with sax. Maybe some of you are already willowy or close enough. Have pity on the rest of us who don’t match the usual design or who look better with something more fitted. Or for whom the lack of thigh gap makes a sundress much less comfy in humid weather.
Yes, I would like to look like Caitlyn (at least occasionally) and no, ain’t gonna happen. Yes, I am confident, nonetheless. But thanks for the permission. (I get it.)
And I guess I should say I found the last article link a bit hard to penetrate.
I found parts of it annoying and parts of it interesting, but I had to laugh when I got to the end of it and saw the picture of the self-identified “woman of color” who wrote it.
Thanks for the post @DonnaL, though I don’t agree with the writer speaking for all transwomen and against all women. It seems self-defeating and propagating discrimination. I can imagine there were multiple reasons it was not published by the NYT. For one thing, I think comparing violence against trans-women to violence against women (I really don’t like the term “cis-women” - who decided on it?) is a no-win situation.
