Archer
Posts: 3207
Joined: 3/11/2005 Status: offline
|
Social conventions in SE Asia and in the US are very different as far as clothing. I have no issue with crossdressers at all I have friends who do it and they remain dear friends. The fact remains social convention in Western cuture permits only kilts as a form of masculine skirts, and dresses, are considered strictly a women's wear item. I could care less what someone chooses to wear personally but my opinion does not make sociallay associated with a specific gender. Samoan skirts for men are not cross dressing because of the simple fact that they are socially not associated with gender in that social context. I don't know of a single western culture society where a satin dress is not associated with female only clothing, nor do I know of one where panties are not considered the same. Knowing that it is a social convention and agreeing that the social convention are good and or correct are two vastly diferent things. You can disagree with the convention all you wish but your disagreement with it does not change the convention. The rule is an unwritten one so no it can't be cited by book, chapter, page, line, but it does exist. You can disagree with the rule but to try to deny it's existance is delussional. Where the line gets drawn, I'm not a firm on as some others here have been. The material is not what makes the line for me it is the design, panties designed for women in satin vs mens briefs designed for men in satin, or mens boxers in satin certainly cross the line for me into crossdressing, and dresses as opposed to a suit in satin certainly cross the line for me. Stockings or pantyhose when worn for utilitarian purposes do not cross the line for me. Wearing a samoan mens skirt in context wouldn't cross the line, wearing it out of context might. In Leather Archer
|