A rose by any other name...

[nevermint]

Taken from a friend of mine: Dire

Comments

[hobbesdawg]

I don't really see it as cross dressing, even if I give my friends crap for playing othe sex characters. I just see it as an expression of the character and nothing more.

Rather bland answer I know.

[raspberryroo]

I just want to note that I agree with you fully as well as the other points made further down this thread. I am a female who has a male fursuit. It is a character I play, and nothing more. I think the term "cross dressing" implies more than simply dressing as the other gender.

For the record, I don't think poorly of those that do enjoy cross dressing, but I just don't see them to be the same thing. I'm not a girl dressing as a guy, I'm a person dressing as a giant animal... which happens to be male!

[foxb]

I would say its cross dressing. I mean you are pretending to be female or taking on the appearance of a female. Maybe if your fursuit was female but then you cross dressed it as a male it wouldn't be? o.o But that sounds confusing.

Nothing wrong with that of course.

[mwakolion]

Yes. It is, by definition, Cross-dressing to wear a costume that is opposite gender from the person wearing it. I'm not really sure where the confusion is. Cross-dressing has been around in performance for hundreds of year.

Hobbes brings up the point that it's "the character and nothing more". While I see what he is trying to say, I disagree that it removes the Cross-dressing nature. You can dress up as the opposite gender (not in fursuit) and walk around downtown and everyone will say that is Cross-dressing. You can call it "playing a character", and it may be, but it is ALSO Cross-Dressing.
( See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cross-dressing )

Edit:
I don't like the way the Dire defines Cross-dressing. It really *doesn't* have *anything* to do with "sexuality or gender/sex preference" and has little to do with "opposing societal norms". It think that's going to be a sticking point for a lot of people.

[hobbesdawg]

I would diagree simply by the point the person is presenting a fully different character, not even human, that is composed of both clothing, faux fur, foam, etc. That is costuming far beyond any simple deffinition of cross dressing. Thus I don't see cross dressing applying to the situation. If Bob wore his lovley red dress say to a halloween party, cross dressing. In suit tho? That's a non human character that is female.

It may sound like picking nits, but I feel it is far more accurate and correct to the deffinition of the term

[direwolf23]

So did these individuals not cross-dress because they're playing a fully different characters than themselves?

[hobbesdawg]

To an extent yes because they are basically in a different species suit all together different gendered or not. Humans are NOT giant 2 legged huskies, be it a male or female character. So I don't see the cross dressing appelation would apply at all.

If a guy wore a dress playing Tootsie in a stage production, that clearly is cross dressing. Just as it would be for halloween or a drag queen. That's still playing a character sure, but is not at all related. For instancea male movie "suit performer" who dress up in a female predator suit for a group scene are not cross dressing...they are performing a character that isn't even human - gender or clothes arnt even a factor.

[direwolf23]

Cross-dressing doesn't inherently involve "sexuality or gender/sex preference."

[direwolf23]

I wrote the original post. I can assure it doesn't. :P The line your reading refers to other motivations for cross-dressing, not fursuiting. And in either case, it's not inherent in the action.

[eosfoxx]

You can also say it's role play.
Cause you act as an other character.
I would suit a male charakter o.o without any doupt. And I would have fun ^^