FROM THE MAILBOX

By Diane FRANK

One of the duties I have as Director of Communications is handling all the incoming e-mail. Recently we received e-mail from two men (yes, I said men) who represent very different takes on crossdressing from what we usually see. While they would both like to have space in our newsletter, I think it might be better for me to summarize their positions.

Mssr. S. likes to wear some items of women's clothing in public situations without attempting in the least to appear as a woman. This has garnered him some local notoriety. He has been unwelcome at traditional CD support groups. Technically speaking he'd be unwelcome at ours, since our by-laws call for presentation as conventionally female or male, but not half and half. Further Mssr. S. does not want to assume another name. Mssr. S. is simply after sartorial freedom. He doesn't think that any sort of transgender identity applies to him, and doesn't regard his behavior, no matter what he's wearing, in any way feminine.

Mssr. R. has a similar position to Mssr. S., except that he includes makeup in the kit. Bi-sexual, with a preference he says for women, he'd like to be able to be a feminine man in society and attractive to women as such. Certainly, rock stars such as Mick Jagger, David Bowie, and Boy George have played with effeminacy and bi-sexuality as part of their performance-lifestyle. (Oh, did I just coin a new term, “performance lifestyle” as similar to “performance art?”) Mssr. R. lives in Canada and isn't a candidate for AO membership. But he'd like a forum for his ideas as well.

What else Mssrs. S. and R. have in common is that they'd like organizations like AO to advocate on their behalf. This is a little difficult since the present incarnation of AO isn't really an advocacy organization. We're a social, support organization with an educational mission. It's one thing to say that people such as S. and R. exist and another to advocate for them when we don't advocate for ourselves.

But there is a serious side to this. Why do we exclude mixed presentations from our meetings? It's a historical holdover. But isn't it also a prejudice that we should have outgrown? Sure, someone like Mssr. S. will cause more looks if seen with us on a public outing, but seriously it's not like we pass anyhow. What AO offers all its members is a chance just to be themselves for a few hours a month. Now apparently Mssrs. S. and R. do just that anyhow. It's not clear what benefit they'd derive from AO or we from their membership. But most of what AO does is provide people a chance to be ordinary. To talk about hard drives and horsepower and makeup without missing a beat or mussing a hair. To ask about someone's health, their kids, talk about yours. So does it really matter how well someone presents or whether they're half and half?

Can we talk about this?