42

Long before the TIM apocalypse, there was the "old-fashioned" variety of crossdressing. But it's not like that's any more acceptable than what we've currently been seeing. And yes, this includes drag queens.

Even if it was being "kept in private"... we had men trying on their partners' clothes, yes, and it's a fetish. It's all rooted in degenerate behavior, and it's all womanface, regardless of whether the man is actually denying physical facts or not. And quite understandably, the women got creeped out, because the men were forcing them to participate in their fetishes. No one believes that it's okay to beat your wife "as long as nobody else knows."

Likewise, both in the past and today, every time you're tempted to make an "exception to the rule" or something for "one of the nice TIMs" or convenience, or even fear of losing employment etc., consider all the victimized women, and children, who have to pay the price. Is that fair?

Call me bigoted or intolerant. But while it almost never works like that the other way around, whenever men put on women's clothing, it's pretty much guaranteed to be for the cheap sexual thrills.

Long before the TIM apocalypse, there was the "old-fashioned" variety of crossdressing. But it's not like that's any more acceptable than what we've currently been seeing. And yes, this includes drag queens. Even if it was being "kept in private"... we had men trying on their partners' clothes, yes, and it's a fetish. It's all rooted in degenerate behavior, and it's all womanface, regardless of whether the man is actually denying physical facts or not. And quite understandably, the women got creeped out, because the men were forcing them to participate in their fetishes. No one believes that it's okay to beat your wife "as long as nobody else knows." Likewise, both in the past and today, every time you're tempted to make an "exception to the rule" or something for "one of the nice TIMs" or convenience, or even fear of losing employment etc., consider all the victimized women, and children, who have to pay the price. Is that fair? Call me bigoted or intolerant. But while it almost never works like that the other way around, whenever men put on women's clothing, it's pretty much guaranteed to be for the cheap sexual thrills.

72 comments

Before the rise of gender nonsense, I was perfectly fine with Eddie Izzard's "executive transvestite" schtick when he performed. Genderism ruined that for me - now all I see in those men is the pornsick fetish.

Yeah, it was fine to me too, because he wasn't trying to say he was an actual woman. He did not appear to be fetishizing it either. Evidently that was all a lie. They are all lying about it, even the so called good ones. I no longer give the benefit of the doubt. Until proven innocent, Harry Styles and Brad Pitt are fetishizing the dresses they wore here recently.

And news flash on this: I think men fetishize kilts too. This always gets mentioned as the exception. It's the exception that proves the rule IMHO. My stepdad would wear one and be gleeful about the fact that you go commando beneath. Men looove that about a kilt. Next time one of y'all see a man in one and pat yourself on the back about how it proves men can wear dresses without being gross fetishists, think again!