The traditional role of woman as baker, taker and candlestick-maker is fading, and the age of women in the workplace, holding top jobs, is slowly breaking in. But there are aspects that, in some respects, still hark back to the world of Mr Darcy and it is certainly a matter of pride, and, predictably, a little prejudice, that is holding us back from real gender equality.

I am currently in transition, going through a change in physical and social gender role from female to male: I am a transsexual man. As a conscious decision and part of this process, I have very much considered and reassessed how I physically present. I have therefore become very aware of the existence of certain cues that trigger the idea of male or female and these are, as far as my own experience goes, quite consistent. Men give the impression of being more square and wear looser fitting clothes—and bear in mind, here, that I am using the mainstream majority as the focus. Take the classic Oxford suit. No individual feature of the body should be visible—no impression of sexual characteristics discernible through the trousers and a maximum of one shirt button open, but preferably shirt and tie. As the slogan for Ritter Sport (the chocolate bar) goes: “Square. Practical. Good.” On the other hand, women dress to accentuate curves, wearing make-up and with more skin showing. Look at any ball gown, or, at the less extreme end of the scale, the pencil skirt. The sexes dress differently, and it is only through the process of changing my gender presentation that I have realised how much people use these guidelines to signal ‘male’ or ‘female’. I have, on numerous occasions (before I finally started binding my chest absolutely every day) been read as male, despite having sizeable and obvious breasts. This has happened in straight and gay circles alike. Wearing jeans that are designed for men and a shirt that only has the top button undone was enough to convince a lot of people that I was male, even at the point when my figure and voice were still so obviously were not. Some brief examples: the old school friend who saw me in the street for the first time in years and shouted in my direction: “Oh, I know him!”; the people who invariably tell me to “Take your feet off that seat, young man!” on the bus; and the bar-staff who ask for ID every time because they assumed I was a 15 year old boy rather than a 21 year old woman—and so many of the times similar things happened, I did not have my breasts bound.

One thing that I have become aware of through making the transition from female to male is that, even with all of the improvements in the position of women, they are still expected to dress a way that is restrictive. Men’s fashion has always allowed much freer and more comfortable movement than women’s and, even as fashions change, this principle does not. Carrie Bradshaw is no more comfortable in the size heels that she wears now than anyone ever was in a Victorian corset. And it is when we want to make a real impression that these gender roles are most enforced; on a date, in a job interview or in an important meeting. And these limitations on dress also pose limitations on behaviour. It is of course much more ‘acceptable’ for a man to open a taxi door for a woman if she is wearing high heels. There is rarely the opportunity for this specific favour to be returned. I only really became aware of this when the time came for me to take other role—it is not that the woman should have to ask for help, it is that the man should automatically offer assistance. It could be considered degrading for a woman to ask her date to open the taxi door for her, but it is remiss if the man does not step up if his date is having problems. The way women are expected to dress encourages dependency upon the male figure, which is more able to move and complete physical tasks without restriction. It is only when you see that you have to change your entire mode of behaviour in order to ‘pass’ as the other gender that you realise how much is dictated by clothing.

The world of work is geared up in this way and it still panders to the traditional gender roles. The few women who get to the top of their fields almost invariably dress in a specifically female way; women who do not conform to this simply do not get the career progression that they may seek. Of top managers in Britain, only 13% are female, and the percentage of those that does not wear a skirt and/or an open-necked shirt to work on a regular basis is miniscule. The ‘metrosexual’ man is now in a much stronger position than that of the woman in the opposite role, but the less traditionally ‘feminine’ woman wearing a less revealing shirt is very much the exception to the rule and certainly is not at the forefront of the job market. Angela Merkel is one of the most powerful women in the world and she dresses, generally, in a way that is much less traditionally ‘feminine’. Look for her on Google Images, though, and on that first page you will find various copies of a picture of her wearing an incredibly indecent low-cut top to a state event—she still has to do the occasional nod to how a lot of the world wants her to dress, and especially when she is ‘dressing up’. For a woman to get to the absolute top in the mainstream, you still have to show some skin.

A problem that this poses for sex is that the pressure to conform to standard gender presentation day-to-day pushes people to conform solely to these roles in the bedroom as well. I have a German friend who is going through the same process that I am—his name is Jeremy and he wants to be the archetypal “English Gentleman.” He wants all of the things that a lot of transmen value, for example: the feeling of peeing standing up, being comfortable swimming topless and having a voice deep enough that people read you as male. But as a Gentleman, the issue is very much more one of social and sexual role—he wishes to be the leader, the provider, the man. He wants to protect a woman and make her feel safe. To wear the trousers while she wears skirts. He wants the woman to be “female” enough, by his definitions, to reassert his masculinity. He also wants this to be reflected in their sexual interaction, with him being the active partner, the initiator and penetrator. And he is very comfortable discussing his approach to gender interaction. As a group that is quite basically separated from our ‘maleness’, it seems that transmen are granted more of a license to voice whatever opinion we may individually have on how to reclaim exactly this: whatever it is that we individually define as male. However, as a consequence of the feminist movement, men who were born anatomically male do not seem to have so much license because it can serve to undermine women if it is said without the background knowledge of what it is like to be in their position. (‘Cismen’ is a recently coined word that means, basically, men who were born physically male, as opposed to transmen, who are born physically female.) The fact that men who were born with the male sexual characteristics may not voice these opinions as often or as openly as transmen does not mean that cismen don’t feel the same way. One way to achieve happiness and feel ‘successful’ is to prove oneself as a man by reasserting the traditional gender roles, even now. How many men do you know who would be comfortable wearing a skirt in public? And how many men do you know who would admit to enjoying anal penetration?

The rules currently in place about a) gender presentation and b) what we do in the bedroom are problematic. The automatic connection between one and the other is, to my mind, unnecessary anyway. In the mainstream, assumptions are made about whether or not we enjoy being penetrated based on our gender presentation. Women: Yes. Men: No. This framework is outdated, and these ideas of how people ‘should’ or should not’ have sex are no longer appropriate. Men are still only expected to perform sexually in the ‘active’ role—I personally know very few men who would admit to enjoying experiencing even minimal anal penetration. Equally, the female figure is only expected to be ‘passive’—there is a very convenient wide-spread disgust expressed at the idea of anal penetration performed on men. On the other hand, it seems that a lot of men have fantasies about performing anal sex on a woman. This means that, despite all the leaps in sexual freedom and behaviour in the office, we are still having sex in the same way they did when Pride and Prejudice was published. This poses limitations on sexual agency—women’s as well as men’s. The implication is that a person’s masculinity or femininity is somehow compromised if these pre-established sexual roles are challenged. Why does this still have to be the case?

The leaps in Women’s Rights in the last centuries have been mammoth. And yet women still have to use the some form of nod to sexual accessibility as an accessory to their skills and education in order to succeed. This is an issue in itself but the implications on sexual agency are equally problematic. In the bedroom the same rules apply as always have; the man as the active partner, the woman as the passive. Most heterosexual w w omen may never have the option of experiencing penetrating someone. Do many women reading this know what it is to be physically inside another person and to connect sexually with them in this way? And do the guys know what it is like to trust another human being enough to let them into your actual physical space?

I have no problem with couples who have very traditional roles, but I would like to know that everyone has a viable choice of role. I want everyone to be able to dress exactly as they want to, not limited by their gender, and to do so without automatic implications on what they do in bed. Only when there is viable choice, and one that has no social consequences, will there be more of a level playing field for men and women in the sexual sphere. Where we leave Darcy and Bennet they are completely happy; it just seems odd to me that, two hundred years later, we don’t seem to have properly reassessed our approach to sex, especially with reference to gender presentation. Uncomfortable, somehow, that we still have the same principle of distinction between the genders as far as expectations for day-to-day dress go. And surprised, that we still have sex in pretty much the same way we always have, without asking whether there might be another option. An option that doesn’t regulate interaction, sexual or otherwise, quite so closely according to gender.

Luke loves Berlin and film, and lived as a woman for 21 years. ‘I once took a quiz, “Which ‘Friend’ are you?” Question 1: Do you chase or wear skirts? Had hoped to be Joey, but it said Phoebe. Retook the quiz, discounting my school uniform. Unfortunately for my girlfriend, I’m Chandler.’