The difference is, KISS was going for artifice and their face paint was inspired by other theatrical traditions - such as makeup worn by mimes, and the imagery of sock & buskin (the ancient symbols of comedy/tragedy, usually depicted in black & white) - as well as by the warpaint traditionally worn by males in battle in many cultures in past historical eras, and the pale face powder and dark black accents worn by aristocratic, fashionable men in France in the 17th and 18th centuries. The men in KISS weren't female impersonators, and their makeup in no way resembled the kind of makeup worn by real-life girls and women in their own era or past eras.

Also, none of the male rockers of the 1960s, 70s, 80s and 90s who did sport makeup that more closely resembed the kinds of makeup often worn by girls and women in everyday life as well as in movies, TV and advertising did so with the intent of being seen as female. They had no desire to pretend to be the opposite sex. They were not female impersonators, but were simply guys who had fun wearing makeup. Even Marilyn Peter Robinson - who in some of his getups could "pass" as a woman especially in still photos - never expected that when he was dressed and made-up in "feminine" mode that anyone would mistake him for a woman.

Whereas today Lux and men like him want the rest of the world to believe that by changing superficial aspects of their appearance, they have somehow magically changed sex. Guys like Lux are simply the latest in a long line of female impersonators, but unlike the female impersonators of the past, they seem to really believe their own PR and BS. They have deluded themselves into thinking that by extensively making use of today's advanced cosmetic surgeries and makeup techniques they've somehow managed to achieve verisimilitude - "the appearance of being true or real."