Nobody remembers the purple states.

You're thinking blue-state again, Heather.

It's because I live in a nearly blue county. I blame Oak Lawn.

You know, geographically speaking, it's really tricky for all the cities to secede and form a new country.

You know, geographically speaking, it's really tricky for all the cities to secede and form a new country.

Viva Berlin!

I wonder if most people don't have a little cross-dressing or attraction to it in them.

Yeah, I've been thinking about this. When does wearing trousers, an Oxford shirt, and loafers become cross-dressing for women? When she adds a fedora? A mustache? And women have much more room to play with gender-identified clothing -- I'm thinking of M. Dietrich in the tux, Annie Hall, etc. The 80s glam thing (and some of the Goth styles) gave a bit of room for men to play, with the feather boas, ruffled shirts, eye-liner and so on. But I think women can go further.

At what point does it really become cross-dressing? I don't consider a guy in a kilt to be cross-dressing, probably because of all the cultural baggage. Does there have to be makeup? An actual attempt to pass as the opposite gender? I'm sitting here in khaki jeans, a t-shirt, and a corduroy shirt over it, with unisex-birkies on my feet. What saves this from being cross-dressing? The fact that women in this culture brought jeans into our wardrobe in the 60s? The fact that the t-shirt is bright pink or the way my breasts stick out under it?

I don't consider a guy in a kilt to be cross-dressing, probably because of all the cultural baggage.

I don't know if it's cultural baggage, or just that kilts are men's clothes.

kilts are men's clothes.

That's sort of what I meant by cultural baggage. Since men's clothes and women's clothes are defined by the culture and so on.

You know, geographically speaking, it's really tricky for all the cities to secede and form a new country.

Some southern ones wanted to during the Civil War. Off the top of my head Winnfield in La. They might have if the Confederacy had actually meant all that crap about states rights and self-determination.

At what point does it really become cross-dressing? I don't consider a guy in a kilt to be cross-dressing, probably because of all the cultural baggage. Does there have to be makeup? An actual attempt to pass as the opposite gender? I'm sitting here in khaki jeans, a t-shirt, and a corduroy shirt over it, with unisex-birkies on my feet. What saves this from being cross-dressing? The fact that women in this culture brought jeans into our wardrobe in the 60s? The fact that the t-shirt is bright pink or the way my breasts stick out under it?

Just throwing something out there- but maybe when it's the fact that the thing is masculine or feminine itself that is the turn on for the wearer or the oogler. Kilt=masculine!=cross dressing Tux=masculine=cross dressing.

You know, geographically speaking, it's really tricky for all the cities to secede and form a new country.

Shouldn't this be something the internets can fix?

The internets are not so good at getting the sex toys through the Texas tollboths.