And I know some men who are gender non conforming because they do not want to get extra privileges.

Are you sure? They actively reject masculinity in order to avoid privileges? Or are they just burned out from over work?

Yes over work might be related to masculinity but if that's the only aspect of masculinity they are rejecting it doesn't sound like a rejection of masculinity.

Are they wearing dresses to avoid the privilege of masculinity?

It was about sexuality, that we are not attracted to gender expression, because if women were attracted before to high heels - they are not anymore. Gender expression is just an easy and socially created indicator of someone's sex and position.

But people still are sexually attracted to gender expression today. They had dimorphic gender expression back at that time too. It wasn't heels and leggings for men and women. Women had a whole other form of gender expression. If heels and leggings are part of misogyny now were they not when men wore something like that?

If heels and leggings became the norm for masculinity would non conforming women adopt them? I expect they would. Such is the nature of non conformity.

Gender non conformity among them I already explained, thought. It is because you do not need to attract opposite sex anymore and you understand your own sex better than you understand opposite.

Doesn't this place all of "gender" on attraction? That masculinity only exists because women find it attractive and femininity only exists because men find it attractive?

I think masculinity and femininity are social activities expressed by a person and sought by others. It's a social construction like language that comes naturally, like language.

And second reason is to show that you are searching attention from your own sex.

Well I mean I kind of agree. That seems perfectly normal and natural. Gender expression as sexual display. Masculinity is a sexual display.

Here's the thing though a person who is non conforming will find that "pressure to conform to please the opposite sex" more strongly. They will feel that contrast. Whereas conforming people won't feel that.

Plus in general, homosexuality already breaking the norms, as it is uncommon. If you are breaking one norm - it is easier to break more norms, because people already see you as one who is breaking norms.

I just don't believe this. Why would a gay person want to break norms EVEN more? When doing so is socially dangerous?

All of femininity is not down to male desire.

Most of promoted is, though. To looks sexy and young. Almost all ads are about it.

Of course I would think masculinity and femininity are sexy. Are you saying masculinity is down to the female gaze? People use its inherent attraction to sell other things. Selling isn't creating the attraction.

There is reasoning while men are more agressive and sexually more perverted (mostly androgenic hormones, but not just them and hormones not main reason), and some behaviours of women are dictated by fear - men are much stronger and agressive, so we (women) are limiting some our behaviours or behaving differently with men around. It is mostly all boiling down to physical differences, but it is more social again. In "perfect society" women would not afraid men, so those behaviours would dissapear.

I'm confused here. Are you saying men ARE more naturally aggressive than women?

I think this might be the case, but I'm more essentialist than most here. I accept there are natural behaviour and physical differences between men and women. Male aggression might be one of them and that creates the differences we see in society. Not just culture or physical differences.

For example criminality. I think men in all cultures, in almost all kinds of crime, in all eras are more likely to be criminal. That might be linked to a basic higher level of aggression. One attribute that has multiple effects across behaviours. So society can't be "perfected" to the point that men and women have equal behaviour profiles across all people.

Men from Wodaabe tribe in Africa are doing all the "female work" and wearing make up, dresses, dancing, when trying to impress women, who are in power there.

They are a fascinating culture. But are they "dresses?" I'm Scottish, kilts aren't judged as feminine. In fact they are judged as masculine, associated with the highland warrior iconography, which is hyper masculine.

A starting point about the Wadaabe is they still have gender norms.

Women choosing from among men trying to impress them is not the end of gender. Women select from among men trying to impress them within Western culture. Sexual selection carries on.

Is the beauty of Geerewol contest considered feminine? Or is it masculine beauty?

GC don't have interpretation for regular cross-dressers, most GC are concerned with AGP mostly.

I mean to me this is symbolic.

GC has problems justifying femininity at all. In that sense it becomes an argument for everyone to be masculine.

But most people in the world, men or women, don't accept that.

Transvestic fetishes can be issue, but only because Stonewall and GLAAD are pushing "cross-dressing" as "being transgender" and "same as being woman, so they allowed in female sports and spaces".

I think they have more issues with them than that.

I often think "crossdressers" are doing precisely the things that antagonise gender critical feminists the most.

The things they like across the spectrum are things that gc dislike most about the stereotypes about women. GC doesn't like those kinds of women.

But then I think gc doesn't seem masculinity in women as endorsing any stereotypes about men. But people outside of gc see masculinity in masculine women as expression of stereotypes.

If fetishes are not harming other people, there nothing bad in them in general.

But I think gc still disapproves of people finding femininity attractive.

I don't see people naturally sexual, thought. However, gender stereotypes are often sexual, that is true. But that is one of their goals to be sexual.

But it seems unavoidable. Masculinity is sexual. Femininity is sexual. I don't see how you can have society without that. I don't think populations are going to have unisex sexuality. Gender variation is going to carry on being a minority, often only noticeable in large populations.

You are mixing gender non conformity and "trying to look like opposite sex". We can understand gender non conformity for males and females, most of GC are gender non conforming themselves.

But "non conformity" surely just means cross conformity. They aren't inventing something entirely new. They are tuning in on either masculinity or feminininity.

Gender non conforming males who were not afraid to call themselves males were shown as good examples of gender ideology being bullshit by GC feminists, for example.... ContraPoints was respected for proudly calling himself a man and a male, who just likes dresses and make up. ContraPoints was like that for very long time, until recently decided to delete all old videos and transition to transwoman.

When ContraPoints said they were a crossdresser and it was all due to personality and personal choice I was in disagreement.

Because they are choosing the norms, "the stereotypes of women" if you will. They haven't made this up. They have some desire to express that femininity. I'd stress though that does not mean they need to identify as a woman. But I can see how a person would.

The same is true of masculinity in women. There doesn't seem much point in denying gnc people aren't focusing in on tropes of the opposite sex.

Now sure if half of all men and women stopped following gender norms, or if androgyny became the norm for everyone I'd agree social gender had gone. But it doesn't happen. In liberal nations, people carry on doing gender. They seem to enjoy it. While a minority carry on at odds with it.

Gender expression there is secondary. AGP are attracted to imagining themselves as being sexually attractive stereotypical woman. And main anchors of sexuality in society is "toxic femininity" or "toxic masculinity".

But what's counting as "toxic femininity" or "toxic masculinity" here? Who is doing the toxic femininity and toxic masculinity?

That model just showing distinctions between those two groups who want to transition. One groups are transitioning because either they are tired of homophobia (even if it is unconsciously) or they want to catfish heterosexual men,

That is not entirely the model.

The Blanchard model says the "gay male transsexual" is naturally feminine.

other group are doing this because they went too deep into their fetishes and sexual arousal of themselves being perceived as women. That is why first group wants to live very silently, blend with regular women and not demanding any extra rights, and why second group is so loud and want everyone to focus on them, how good or sexy they are...

I really don't think that is a realistic description either. I do think there are unreasonable, bad trans activists but the generalizations are not good descriptions overall. I think you have to distinguish between activists

But besides that I think the Blanchard model hits all kinds of other problems. It's not that the behaviours aren't there it has too many holes, too many exceptions, too much double think.

That's why second wave feminism was promoting gender non conformity among women so much...

I don't think glam metal or the new romantics were an end of gender. It was a theatrical rock and a club subculture. Gender carried on. Men as a population did not take to glam rock, it was a small movement.

Plenty of male clothes are uncomfortable and plenty of "male" activities are uncomfortable. That doesn't stop people wanting to do them.

I'm not a fan of violent contact sports and fanatical support but it's judged a reasonable part of masculinity.