Curious Question on Cross-Dressing

[Untruth]

This might seem a weird question but I’m kind of interested in seeing what the Church has to say on such matters. I’m not a cross-dresser but I know for a fact that lots of them are actually straight and for some reason or another they like to do it. Is it actually a sin for them especially if nothing sexual comes out of it?

 

[DL82]

It is a sin to deliberately cross-dress because it takes away from the dignity proper to the respective sexes. When God made humanity, he made them male and female (Genesis 2) and our respective genders in their diversity show something of the glory of God. I will not go into too much depth, but the writings of Bl. John Paul II are rich with this (you could take a look at his Wednesday audiences on the Theology of the Body catechesisofthepopes.wikispaces.com/Theology+of+the+Body or look at one of the popular commentators on his work, such as Christopher West’s ‘Theology of the Body for Beginners’)

That said, it is only the desire to damage or mis-appropriate the dignity of the other sex that is problematic, the specific forms of clothing are not wrong in themselves (i.e. there are many cultures in which men wear skirt-like garments such as hakamas and kilts, and it has become normal in our own culture for a woman to wear trousers without wanting to look like a man in the process) - dressing up for halloween, or playing a pantomime dame on stage (even Shakespeare had men dressed as women in his plays) wouldn’t necessarily be a problem either in my opinion as long as it was understood that this was a joke, a deliberate subverting of normal conventions to make an aesthetic statement, and not the normal way of things.

Part of the problem with cross-dressing is that it is often an attempt to gain power over another person (such as a man dressing in his wife’s clothes) or to compensate for serious lack of self-esteem, masking deep underlying emotional problems. In the normal run of things, it is either a sin or a sign of illness, depending on the circumstances.

 

[Adam1986]

This might seem a weird question but I’m kind of interested in seeing what the Church has to say on such matters. I’m not a cross-dresser but I know for a fact that lots of them are actually straight and for some reason or another they like to do it. Is it actually a sin for them especially if nothing sexual comes out of it?

In my opinion, nope not a sin at all. People can wear whatever clothes they like, it’s not a big deal.

 

[beafedor]

This might seem a weird question but I’m kind of interested in seeing what the Church has to say on such matters. I’m not a cross-dresser but I know for a fact that lots of them are actually straight and for some reason or another they like to do it. Is it actually a sin for them especially if nothing sexual comes out of it?

Ok my friend. When I first read the topic, I thought you were discussing some of the Catholic Priests/Religious attire… My mistake.

‘Cross-dressing’, ‘cross-dresser’ Am I guessing correctly that this is one of those new euphemisms like ‘gay’ for homosexual or ‘choice’ for abortion? So what does it mean? Dressing the gender that you are not? Back in my day (not that long ago, I was a teenager in the 1990) it was called being a travesty (un travelo in French slang) and the travestys were by their clothes affirming their homosexuality and looking for like minded folks (not to play Chess I assume). Therefore, to answer your question, I would think that it is probably not a very holy thing to do. Beware of the popular culture that glamorizes evil. Homosexual is homosexual, travesty is travesty, abortion is abortion. Change the language, change the culture.

 

[Adam1986]

Ok my friend. When I first read the topic, I thought you were discussing some of the Catholic Priests/Religious attire… My mistake.

‘Cross-dressing’, ‘cross-dresser’ Am I guessing correctly that this is one of those new euphemisms like ‘gay’ for homosexual or ‘choice’ for abortion? So what does it mean? Dressing the gender that you are not? Back in my day (not that long ago, I was a teenager in the 1990) it was called being a travesty (un travelo in French slang) and the travestys were by their clothes affirming their homosexuality and looking for like minded folks (not to play Chess I assume). Therefore, to answer your question, I would think that it is probably not a very holy thing to do. Beware of the popular culture that glamorizes evil. Homosexual is homosexual, travesty is travesty, abortion is abortion. Change the language, change the culture.

Um, yeah you’re actually completely off the mark on this one. I don’t think you quite get what a cross-dresser is.

A cross-dresser does not have to be gay. As a matter of fact as the OP stated a lot of them are straight.

A cross-dresser is different from a transexual and a transgender. Trans people are born in the wrong body and change their outer appearance to match what they feel on the inside. While a male cross-dresser in this case, would be wearing women’s clothing simply because he likes it. Not in a sexual way, just likes it. The same way I like to wear jeans.

 

[beafedor]

Um, yeah you’re actually completely off the mark on this one. I don’t think you quite get what a cross-dresser is.

A cross-dresser does not have to be gay. As a matter of fact as the OP stated a lot of them are straight.

A cross-dresser is different from a transexual and a transgender. Trans people are born in the wrong body and change their outer appearance to match what they feel on the inside. While a male cross-dresser in this case, would be wearing women’s clothing simply because he likes it. Not in a sexual way, just likes it. The same way I like to wear jeans.

May I ask how old you are?

 

[Adam1986]

May I ask how old you are?

Sure, no problem. I was born in 1986. Why?

 

[thistle]

In my opinion, nope not a sin at all. People can wear whatever clothes they like, it’s not a big deal.

Well you are wrong!

Deut 22:5 5 "A woman shall not wear an article proper to a man, nor shall a man put on a woman’s dress; for anyone who does such things is an abomination to the LORD, your God.

 

[Adam1986]

Well you are wrong!

Deut 22:5 5 "A woman shall not wear an article proper to a man, nor shall a man put on a woman’s dress; for anyone who does such things is an abomination to the LORD, your God.

If you go by that quote then any woman who wears pants is an abomination. Or any woman who ever wears a guy’s over shirt. Or her guy friend’s hoodie. Or a wears a tie with a skirt.

What are your feelings of a woman wearing pants?

And if we’re going by Deut then also anyone who mixes denim and cotten, jeans and a T-shirt, is an abomination. Or anyone who eats shellfish.

 

[thistle]

If you go by that quote then any woman who wears pants is an abomination. Or any woman who ever wears a guy’s over shirt. Or her guy friend’s hoodie. Or a wears a tie with a skirt.

What are your feelings of a woman wearing pants?

And if we’re going by Deut then also anyone who mixes denim and cotten, jeans and a T-shirt, is an abomination. Or anyone who eats shellfish.

You are being ridiculous. None of what you said is cross dressing. Check the dictionary to see the real meaning of cross dressing. The Scripture verse refers to the real meaning of cross dressing.

 

[LeafByNiggle]

Saying that it is wrong to wear clothing that is proper to the opposite sex just begs the question (and here I mean “begs the question” in its original Aristotelean sense, not the common misuse of the term). In other words it is circular reasoning. In order to know if it is proper to wear a specific article of clothing, if you try to apply Deut 22:5 you have to decide if that article is proper for that sex. In other words, it is proper to wear something if it proper to wear it. This does not help in deciding specific cases because it is circular. One can only conclude that the interpretation of the term “proper” relies on standards found outside of scripture. I think it has already been mentioned that clothing proper for one society or time period may not be considered proper for another society or time period.

For example, one could say that the wearing of a dress by a man in a theatrical performance may be considered proper by those attending the performance if that is their expectation. To them at that particular time it is “proper” attire. However that same dress when worn to work by a man who is a high school football coach would not be proper.

So the answer to the original question must be “it depends”.

 

[Adam1986]

You are being ridiculous. None of what you said is cross dressing. Check the dictionary to see the real meaning of cross dressing. The Scripture verse refers to the real meaning of cross dressing.

Why am I being ridiculous? It doesn’t say in that verse that it’s about cross-dressing.

"Deut 22:5 5 “A woman shall not wear an article proper to a man, nor shall a man put on a woman’s dress; for anyone who does such things is an abomination to the LORD, your God.”

All it says is an article that is proper to a man or a woman. Technically, pants ARE proper to a man and yet there’s nothing wrong with a woman wearing them. And a TIE certainly is a “men’s only” garment. Where in the verse does it SPECIFICALLY say cross-dressing or something similar? It’s only your and some other people’s INTERPRETATION that says it’s about cross-dressing.

Also what about St. Joan of Arc? What she did WAS cross-dressing. It obviously wasn’t a sin for her. So why would it be a sin for some guy to wear a dress and heels if he likes it and doesn’t get a “sexual charge” out of it? Or some girl to wear a suit if she doesn’t get a “sexual charge” out of it?

 

[thistle]

Why am I being ridiculous? It doesn’t say in that verse that it’s about cross-dressing.

"Deut 22:5 5 “A woman shall not wear an article proper to a man, nor shall a man put on a woman’s dress; for anyone who does such things is an abomination to the LORD, your God.”

All it says is an article that is proper to a man or a woman. Technically, pants ARE proper to a man and yet there’s nothing wrong with a woman wearing them. And a TIE certainly is a “men’s only” garment. Where in the verse does it SPECIFICALLY say cross-dressing or something similar? It’s only your and some other people’s INTERPRETATION that says it’s about cross-dressing.

Also what about St. Joan of Arc? What she did WAS cross-dressing. It obviously wasn’t a sin for her. So why would it be a sin for some guy to wear a dress and heels if he likes it and doesn’t get a “sexual charge” out of it? Or some girl to wear a suit if she doesn’t get a “sexual charge” out of it?

Obviously you refuse to understand. The scripture verse is about cross dressing involving sexuality and has nothing to do with a woman simply wearing jeans or actors dresing up.
Scripture is talking about real cross dressing.
Joan of Arc didn’t think she was a man nor did she want to be a man!!!

 

[DL82]

Quoting from Deuteronomy isn’t helpful in a Catholic context, as this is the ‘old Law’ of Israel, with its purity requirements. I would suggest if you want to know about Christian teaching on sexuality and what is appropriate to different genders, look at Ephesians 5, Titus 3, etc. where St Paul gives a broader teaching on this - it doesn’t include anything explicitly addressing cross-dressing, but we can take from it that there is something wrong when a member of one gender tries to mimic or appropriate the sexual values of the other.

 

[Cherry5]

but we can take from it that there is something wrong when a member of one gender tries to mimic or appropriate the sexual values of the other.

Why because it makes most uncomfortable with it? it almost appears that you are looking for a reason to call it a sin! there are lots of references in the bible that we do not follow to the letter and are contradictions, so is it ok to pick verses and tailor the interpretation to suit what makes one comfortable?

There is no question that when the first women started wearing pants, they were considered crossdressers, but now you feel it is acceptable. why? because it has become a standard and common practice? I see Catholic School girls schools that include ties as part of their uniform!

“Matthew 5:29 If your right eye causes you to sin, gouge it out and throw it away. It is better for you to lose one part of your body than for your whole body to be thrown into hell.” I don’t see any one interpreting this in its literal sense!

I have consulted two priests and they said it was not a sin! There is much that we do not understand about this and so need to reserve judgment.

Some of the reasons indicated above as to why people crossdress clearly shows their ignorance on the matter and perhaps portraying their own mind set as to why they would do it if they had to.

I have seen lots of Crossdressers that are excellent people, husbands and fathers. They have used their feminine part of their persona to make their family and home an excellent nurturing environment.

No question there are others that have perhaps used it inappropriately, however there are many many heterosexuals - non crossdressers (most crossdressers are heterosexual) that are promiscus that does not mean that being a hetrosexual is sinful.

By the way it is a widely accepted fact that everyone has a male and female gender (not physical sex) component as part of their being to different degrees, some more skewed than others which can impact behavior, this does not make one persons behavior better than another, just makes us all different.

If this is the way God made crossdressers and that is the best way they can live a fulfilled authentic life, I do not believe our Loving Father would hold it against them.

 

[PLeeD]

My understanding is that the Catholic church has no official position on the issue of crossdressing. Joan of Arc and other saints are known to have crossdressed. Given those two facts, it’s odd that a Catholic will lay down such hard and fast rules for others with nothing from the church to support them. Seems some are fine with emulating protestants in the personal interpretation of scripture so long as the purpose is to judge others.

Here is a web site that advocates, as Paul does in Ephesians 5, living as children of light:

lightinthecloset.org/

 

[Dale_M]

Well you are wrong!

Deut 22:5 5 "A woman shall not wear an article proper to a man, nor shall a man put on a woman’s dress; for anyone who does such things is an abomination to the LORD, your God.

That verse gets cited often by people who want to condemn crossdressing, but it really is a poor choice. Deuteronomy 22 is a chapter of archaic legal prescriptions such as not mixing different fibers in the same cloth or the requirement of a rapist to marry his victim.

Deuteromy 22, and the rest of the Deuteromic legal code, is usually dismissed as no longer binding on Christians (or Jews) I am not sure how a person can justify Deut 22:5 as being morally significant while dismissing the rest of the chapter as not morally significant.

 

[Freeda]

You are being ridiculous. None of what you said is cross dressing. Check the dictionary to see the real meaning of cross dressing. The Scripture verse refers to the real meaning of cross dressing.

Hi, I’m new and following this discussion. Actually, the poster isn’t being ridiculous, he’s just quoting the other forbidden items in Deut…why are you ridiculing his question?
The cross dressers that I know feel that they were born into the wrong body,
Since we can’t understand what that may feel like, it’s sin against charity, in my opinion, to accuse them of grave sin.

 

[REDfan4Lyfe]

I’m still looking for a definitive answer for this myself. I have fallen into this behavior at some point in my life and I can’t find a single valid argument that transvestism is sinful.