Man in a dress

In My Humble Opinion
1

My family attends a UU church. A couple of years ago, we officially became a welcoming congregation. In short, that means we affirmatively welcome and celebrate the contribution of gays, lesbians, bisexuals, and transgendered people. I was not a huge fan of this for a couple of reasons. First, I do not generally favor extending a special welcome to any one group. Second, While I have nothing against folk whatever their sexual orientation, I wish to welcome people to my church based on their spiritual philosophy. So, for example, I readily welcome gay UUs to my church, but not necessarily all gays.

Suffice it to say I was in the extreme minority, and the resolution passed. Fine. I have no problem with that. Or so I thought.

Last Sunday, after services, folk were socializing over coffee. There was this one guy I’d never seen before. He was wearing a dress. No make-up, wig, or jewelry other than a bracelet. Just a big ugly guy wearing a dress. At first I thought, well, maybe that is cool in a radical way. Maybe he is wearing a kilt or something, refusing to be bound by custom, or something like that. But he simply appeared to be wearing a woman’s skirt and sweater, and sensible pumps.

Let me explain why it kind of bothered me. Please give me your thoughts and opinions.

I feel as though I would have “understood” it more if he had been in full drag. But simply wearing women’s clothes strikes me more as a “kink.” Somehow seems more volitional, than what I would expect as a gender identity issue. I have no problem with different people having different kinks, but I guess I think there are proper times and places for various types of self expression, and I question whether my church is the proper time and place.

I guess I could have talked to him and found out if he shared our UU values and beliefs. I hope so, because it would bother me if he simply came to our church because he felt comfortable exercising his kink there. And, I’m sorry, but I don’t know that it enhances my family’s religious practice/experience for me to have to wonder if my kids are going to ask, “Why was that man wearing a dress?”

I feel as tho I’m not expressing myself well, and this probably reads as pretty intolerant and judgmental. Actually, I’m basically trying to figure out how I feel about this. I’d appreciate hearing your opinions (humble or otherwise).

2

Well, Dinny, there are various kinds of “men in dresses,” and I (or you) have no idea which this fellow was:

• Transvestite (mostly straight men who enjoy wearing womens’ clothing)

• Drag queen (not bloody likely, from your description)

• Pre- or Post-Operative Transsexual (probably).

Now, transsexuals have to dress as their new sex for a minimum of a year before qualifying for surgery. Not all transsexuals are lucky enough to be born with feminine bone structure: imagine the torture of some poor 6-foot Tom Selleck look-alike undergoing sex-change surgery! Should he not have it and be miserable for the rest of his life and probably kill himself, or have it and look like “a man in a dress?”

As far as his not wearing makeup, wouldn’t you have been MORE put off if he showed up dolled up like Tammy Faye Baker?

Why don’t you chat with him next time you see him and hear his side of the story?

3

But, Eve, what if I’m really not interested in his story? I guess some might consider me a jerk that I go to church for reasons other than to learn about other peoples’ sexual issues. I have several friends at my church - and many other acquaintances whom I anticipate could become friends. And I enjoy spending my limited time at services developing those relationships, instead of trying to learn this guy’s story.

And I think there is some middle ground between “guy in a dress” and “Tammy Bakker lookalike.” I guess I could find out if the pre-operative dressing is full drag. Cause this guy surely wasn’t making any atempt to “pass”.

I guess I’m coming across as pretty self-centered and intolerant. Actually, I am a big fan of toleration. It seems, however, that many groups find tolerance insufficient. Instead, they want some affirmative support.

I’m trying to figure out how I actually feel here. I appreciate having this forum to try to express and explore my feelings.

4

I’m increasingly confused about your question. Is it:

• Why does my church set aside special “nights” for transsexuals, gays, blacks, Hispanics, etc., when all we want to do is worship as a group?

or,

• Why do transsexuals disturb me?

5

OK, I’m pretty new around here, but I’m going to jump in. There’s one line in your initial post that really bugs me:

Now I am not intimately familiar with the UU “values and beliefs” but I would be surprised to find out that they didn’t include allowing those who are * searching * for a spiritual path to examine the offerings of your church.

IMHO, attending a church is only part of the journey, not the destination.

6

Dinsdale,
I don’t think that not being in full drag means that the person in question was simply wearing the dress as a “kink.” I’m thinking that it may be easier for others to accept when the transsexual looks like a very feminine woman, however, not all transsexuals identify as this type of woman. Many women do not dress in “full drag” either. Meaning, I’m sure there are women who go to your church in a skirt, sweater, sensible pumps and a bracelet with no makeup and no furhter decoration.

I beleive that transsexuals gender identify as the opposite gender. For example, the man in your church identifies himself as a woman. This does not mean that he identifies himself as someone who wears fancy clothes, makeup, wigs and jewelry. That would be a narrow defiintion of “woman.”

7

Wait, so it’s perfectly ok for a woman to wear

but not a transvestite (/pre-op transgender/whatever this guy/girl is)? Nobody would argue with that outfit if a woman was wearing it, so why a man?

Sorry guy, but transvestites (we’ll stick to this category, for now) don’t have to “pass”, and they don’t have to live up to your expectations of what they should look like. They simply want to wear women’s clothing–and that doesn’t always mean a fancy dress, dangly earrings, and a boatload of makeup. In fact, I’d have to say that that would be much more disruptive to your church service than the aforementioned outfit.

8

Folk, I appreciate all of your input. Eve, i appreciate that my “question” may cause confusion, but that is probably due to the fact that I am not at all “certain” how I feel about this. And I hope I didn’t convey that this is occupying a huge portion of my consciousness or disturbing me one way or the other.

Yeah, I guess I could have asked this guy any number of things. But I really don’t care. Sorry I’m such a self-centered jerk, but the need of a guy to wear women’s clothes, for whatever reason, just isn’t all that important to me.

Sure, no one has to live up to my “expectations.” But we would be fooling ourselves if we did not acknowledge that there are certain societally accepted norms. And yes, Myrr, there is a difference between a biological woman wearing a dress and a biological man wearing the same. Or going naked. Or painting oneself blue. I’m not saying you shouldn’t feel free to do quite a bit, but you shouldn’t be naive enough to be surprised if you get a reaction. And it doesn’t mean those who react are “bad” or “wrong”. There is something “in your face” about openly going against well-accepted conventions. So his appearance had an affect on me. I’m just trying to figure out what that affect was.

That’s one reason I enjoy attending this church so much. In just about every other aspect of my life, I am considered almost radically liberal. My church is the one place I can go and feel almost radically conservative.

Also, I have not spent hours trying to craft my posts here in a manner to project myself as one thing or another. So I apologize for any imprecision. And I appreciate all of your input.

9

How many times have you seen this guy? Maybe he just lost a bet or was trying to win a contest.

10

I know that this was just figurative speech, but being a fan doesn’t necessarily mean that you practice tolerance yourself (FWIW, I don’t think I would have mentioned this if I wasn’t guilty of the same hypocrisy. It’s just another hangup, and I think I’ve pretty much gotten past it.)

While I agree that it sounds silly to extend a welcome to specific groups instead of everyone, a lot of these folks probably go on the assumption that they will not be welcome. So if you’re going to invite them in, you have to challenge assumptions. It’s a bit like having a nonsegregated church in the Fifties: if you want it, you had better say it. I’m not too familiar with the UU beliefs, but I expect that these are important enough to everyone in the congregation that they will survive.

Just a WAG, as I can’t speak for the guy (or woman, in which case this is moot) and I don’t know where you live, but I doubt that someone would go to a strange church for the first time dressed in drag unless this was a fairly important part of who they are. I think that the risks of ostracism or getting beaten up on the way are too great, but I’ll defer to someone with more experience here.

11

Dinsdale, dresses are turribly comfortable and I think you’d look smashing in one. :smiley: Why don’t you wear one to church and see how you feel about this guy? Don’t knock it til you’ve tried it!

12

Don’t need to convince me, Maggie. I almost became a convert after two Halloweens dressed as Queen Elizabeth and Amy Carter (I guess that shows my age!) If only I’d pulled a tekchick and gone commando!

13

And if your kids do ask, you might answer:

“This is a very brave man. He knows that people like me are either going to stare at him or totally avoid him. And he’s willing to come here anyway, in spite of people like me and people who might even cause him physical injury on his way to church. Now I may not approve of the way this guy dresses, and maybe I’m a little uncomfortable being around him, but maybe he’s here to teach us to be a little more tolerant of people who aren’t just like us. Being in a minority is never easy, and maybe someday one of you kids will be in a minority. And thanks to this guy, and others like him, maybe I’ll be a little more accepting of you if that day ever comes. So why don’t we just treat him the same as everyone else, instead of making such a big deal out of what he wears.”

14

True. But the societally accepted norms are what your church is challenging by accepting transgendered members. Just because it is a societally accepted norm does not make it correct. Once, segregation was a societally accepted norm.

Why? The only difference I can see is that a woman wearing a dress is accepted behavior for that gender. If a man self identifies as a woman, then wearing a dress would be appropriate behavior for him.

No, but you should feel safe to do these things in a place where these types of behaviors have been specifically defined as being welcomed. I.E. Transgendered people were welcomed in to your church. A man wearing a dress is transgendered behavior. He should expect to be welcome in that environment. Now if he had worn a dress to say a conservative Southern Baptist church then he could expect to get a different reaction.

True. I do not believe you are “bad” or “wrong” for having these reactions. I appreciate your attempts to honestly figure out how you feel. I do think that you may not be very comfortable with transgendered behaviour and that is OK. You may choose to educate yourself about it if you wish to be tolerant…or not. The choice is yours. Neither is bad or good. As long as you don’t go out of your way to make this person feel unwelcome in yuor church. (Which I don’t believe you are)

Yes, but sometimes it must be done. Otherwise nothing would change. Nobody would have sat at the segregated lunch counter or come out of the closet if they had been afraid of being “in your face.”

Good for you!

15

Still thinking.

I guess part of my problem is due to an element of the church that sort of says “it stands for tolerance/celebration/acceptance of everything” which translates to “it stands for nothing.” An organization cannot be all things to all people.

What is/are the primary goal(s)/mission(s) of the church? Can the church’s goals, or peoples’ use of the church, be prioritized? Or maybe what this emphasizes for me is that different people can use the church for different purposes?

There are several basic principles of UU, one of which is the respect and dignity of every individual. Another is use of the democratic process. I hope my church “stands for” something other than “a place transgendered people feel comfortable.” I mean, sure, it would be nice if they felt comfortable there, and everywhere, but I think the resources and attention of our church should be aimed at people who share UU values, whether transgendered or otherwise.

Again, I’m not expressing myself well. Thanks for the input.

16

Would it make a difference if you knew for sure that this person did indeed share UU values?
I’m guessing that he must share at least some of these values. I do not think he would attend the church solely on the basis of the announcement to welcome transgendered people. If you knew for a fact that he shared all of these values, would it still bother you if he showed up in a dress?

Maybe it transgendered behaviour bothers you more than you want to admit to yourself? I am not trying to judge your reaction, but am trying to help you look at it honestly.

You say that one of the basic principles of UU is “the respect and dignity of every individual.” Would this not translate into your church being “a place transgendered people feel comfortable.” In other words, if you truly respect and uphold the dignity of the individual, then you would want these individuals to feel comfortable in your church.

17

I’m afraid you’re NOT expressing yourself well, dear. Are you freaked out by—

• The fact that there was a transgendered person in your church at all, or,

• The fact that your church made a huge deal out of welcoming transgendered people (or any other minority group)?

18

Not sure I was “freaked out.”
I disagreed with the church’s action - I thought it was unnecessary and inappropriate. But the church adopted the position. Fine. And, one of my problems is that the church did not make a big deal out of welcoming any other minority group.

Yes, tevya, I would feel better if I knew he was there for “spiritual” reasons rather than “expressive/social” reasons. Course I guess I’d have to talk to him to find out, huh?

And, I guess deep down I feel differently about transgendered individuals, than I do about gays/lesbians/bisexuals.

19

I think you’re dancing sround the answer to your dilemma:

Talk to him.

Talk to him or stop thinking about him.

20

You’re obviously spending a lot of time and energy thinking about this person. Most of your questions, about him or your own feelings, could be answered simply by talking with him. You might even wind up thanking him for being the catalyst for your own soul-searching.

I believe the answers a person accepts are not as important as the questions he asks. And the mistake most religions make is that they shove answers down people’s throats, before the people know what questions to ask. It sounds like your church is doing you a favor by causing you to think about things and ask questions.