# If your consciousness was transported into a body of the opposite sex



## skycloud86 (Jul 15, 2009)

eros5th said:


> Screw that! I'd go become a whore ASAP XD


No, you wouldn't. You would probably suffer from significant gender dysphoria, unless you aren't cisgendered. Also, stop with the misogynistic name-calling.


----------



## Drewbie (Apr 28, 2010)

skycloud86 said:


> No, you wouldn't. You would probably suffer from significant gender dysphoria, unless you aren't cisgendered. Also, stop with the misogynistic name-calling.


It always amazes me how much cis people don't consider how involved gender actually is in their sense of identity and well-being. There's a big difference between playing at being another gender and actually being designated and treated accordingly as that gender by society.


----------



## Fizz (Nov 13, 2010)

JackParrish said:


> *And I bet I'd get a raise in my job just because I'm female. And promotions would come like buttered lightening.* And mechanics would start finally telling me the truth. And then maybe I could get pregnant and I'd get 9 months of feeling like I have a combination of leukemia and schizophrenia just before I got to feel like someone put a stick of dynamite in my pants and blew a hole in my genitals that humans will crawl through.


No, it's usually the opposite. There's a lot more statistics on women being paid less than males. 

And also mechanics can easily take advantage of a situation if he assumes the woman doesn't know much about her vehicle. This is based on the stereotype that women don't know anything about cars. If I missed some kind of joke where you're stating opposite beliefs, well then I don't get it.


----------



## Fizz (Nov 13, 2010)

bromide said:


> I'd go for long ambling night walks without fear of being sexually assaulted. Livin' the dream, man.


I totally second this. Not that males aren't sexually assaulted, they're just less likely to be hooted and hollered at like some kind of prancing fawn.


----------



## Sayonara (May 11, 2012)

I'd probably uh...examine myself first lol.

But then I'd probably adapt pretty readily. It's not that I want to be male, but rather I feel that it doesn't matter what gender I am, I would have the same personality. 

Only thing I would be annoyed at is my healthy demisexual drive becoming more obvious, as it's just easier to notice when men are turned on than women. I can hide it better when I'm female.


----------



## Fizz (Nov 13, 2010)

Fitz Cabbage said:


> It always amazes me how much cis people don't consider how involved gender actually is in their sense of identity and well-being. There's a big difference between playing at being another gender and actually being designated and treated accordingly as that gender by society.


I imagine most cis people would end up screaming and crying after their new opposite sexed body...for a couple days. Then they'd probably freak out if they went out in public because of how people treat them. Then they'd have to readjust to all the pronouns and title changes. There's a chance that within that time they will masturbate or try to masturbate. 

I imagine the females turned males would be mortified if they got a boner, especially in public. It would be a much different sensation than an aroused clitoris. The males turned females will have a wonderful time figuring out the entire female genital structure, if they're into that kind of thing.


----------



## dejavu (Jun 23, 2010)

If I was hot, I'd probably have a lot of fun with it.

If I wasn't, I'd probably be pretty miserable.

Yay for being superficial!


----------



## JackParrish (May 5, 2012)

Fizz said:


> No, it's usually the opposite. There's a lot more statistics on women being paid less than males.
> 
> And also mechanics can easily take advantage of a situation if he assumes the woman doesn't know much about her vehicle. This is based on the stereotype that women don't know anything about cars. If I missed some kind of joke where you're stating opposite beliefs, well then I don't get it.


I can neither confirm, nor deny, that sarcasm was employed.


----------



## Fizz (Nov 13, 2010)

JackParrish said:


> I can neither confirm, nor deny, that sarcasm was employed.


You'd be the worst person to interrogate.


----------



## Reicheru (Sep 24, 2011)

i'd look at myself in the mirror and study my new musculature and genitals intesnively as i'd run my fingers up and down my ribcage, celebrating being finally rid of breasts.

then i'd go and get a nice haircut and buy some more fitting clothes, and work on growing out some facial hair. i'd find some way to come across my friends, to see if they recognised me, and re-make friends with them in disguise. i'd read their expressions as i threw out comments and remarks i used to say - paying the most attention to pre-sex swap mutual crushes, to see if, somewhere, deep down, they still subconsciously respond to me... (think Blackadder S2E01.)
i'd keep my sexuality a secret; i'd be a masculine gay, but i'd stay skinny and lithe.

i'd try to get into the lad mentality and make some guy friends. i'd maybe buff up a tiny bit, and try to avoid getting into any fights.

i'd see how many girls (and blokes) i could pull without actually sleeping with them.

...and masturbate feverishly.


----------



## CoopV (Nov 6, 2011)

skycloud86 said:


> No, you wouldn't. You would probably suffer from significant gender dysphoria, unless you aren't cisgendered. Also, stop with the misogynistic name-calling.


I'm not name calling anyone but myself lol. I'm not trying to be politically correct and I don't know what misogynistic means. I don't consider a whore a bad thing either I mean men are called man-whores all the time. 

Just like when people say if a woman is rude and tough she's called a bitch but if a man is he's given respect. I've never understood that cuz I consider that man an asshole not a "G" or respectful or whatever. 



Swordsman of Mana said:


> nah, they're posers. lol
> I'd be more like Uma Thurman or Michelle Yeoh


You think Angelina is a poser? lol elaborate? :tongue:


----------



## 7rr7s (Jun 6, 2011)

@eros5th That would work, but I'm not into dudes so that'd be a problem. I suppose I could allways become a lipstick lesbain though. Solid plan bro!


----------



## Master Mind (Aug 15, 2011)

I would realize that suddenly I would have to go through things that have never previously been an issue. In my own body, I'm over half a foot taller than the average male, and intimidating. People have been afraid of me since my teens. I would lose that psychological edge. I would have to worry about losers bothering me, when I've been perceived as unapproachable and don't usually have to worry about people bothering me. My entire life would change. I couldn't imagine my consciousness being in the body of the opposite sex because I could never get away with some of the stuff I've done if I was a woman.


----------



## CoopV (Nov 6, 2011)

KindOfBlue06 said:


> @_eros5th_ That would work, but I'm not into dudes so that'd be a problem. I suppose I could allways become a lipstick lesbain though. Solid plan bro!


Wait what? I'm lost XD


----------



## pinkrasputin (Apr 13, 2009)

Master Mind said:


> I would realize that suddenly I would have to go through things that have never previously been an issue. In my own body, I'm over half a foot taller than the average male, and intimidating. People have been afraid of me since my teens. I would lose that psychological edge.


You would lose that psychological edge with you or with others? Because I can't see how changing physically in this sense can change your psychological edge.

You were once tall and you intimidated people because of your tallness. Do you mean that when you are shorter you no longer have your tallness to fall back on? You'd have to actually use a psychological edge?


----------



## 7rr7s (Jun 6, 2011)

eros5th said:


> Wait what? I'm lost XD


well it's all well and good if your into being a slut and all, but it'd be MY CONSCIOUSNESS in a womans body. To be a whore means getting a lot of dick in you, and I'm not into that, but you could still be a total nymph -but with other women. I wouldn't be no butch **** either, I'd want to get it on with the hottest women I could find right(still thinking like a man) but enjoy all the benefits of being a woman(multiple orgasms!) See the thinking there? Then again who knows, maybe if I was in a womans body I'd just start craving cock all the time. I don't know man, but I'd try my gameplan first!


----------



## WolfStar (Aug 18, 2009)

I'd fap...er, shlick.

And holy hell you people got super serious fast.


----------



## Master Mind (Aug 15, 2011)

I'd stand naked in front of the mirror and check myself out all day, feeling myself up. Isn't that what any "red-blooded" male would do?

:dry:


----------



## pinkrasputin (Apr 13, 2009)

Master Mind said:


> With others. My tallness isn't the _only_ thing that intimidates people, but when you're perceived as physically intimidating in the first place, it's an advantageous starting point that allows you to mindscrew people in other ways.
> 
> And you don't see how I would lose a psychological edge? From being a 6-5, 200-pound plus male to someone much smaller? I've rarely had to put up with crap from anyone. The last time someone tested me, I physically impressed upon him that it was a bad idea. And it's not necessary to have to do this too many times. The same would not be the case if I were a woman. Unfortunately, that's the reality. I've witnessed my mom and female friends have to put up with crap that has never even been an issue with me because they're women and I'm a man. I couldn't deal with all the BS because I have no tolerance for it. I had to come get a female friend of mine some years ago when her boyfriend was beating her up. I heard him break the door down while she was on the phone calling me for help, knock the phone out of her hand, and I heard the impact as he struck her. He was a gutless coward who vanished when I got there. You can't see how the outcome might have been different if I was in a female body rather than my own?


I would think that a man would be intimidated by me because I could bitch slap him with my boobs. You don't see how I can stop terror in it's tracks?


----------



## dejavu (Jun 23, 2010)

WolfStar said:


> And holy hell you people got super serious fast.


Yeah, what's with that? It's not like we're all actually going to become the opposite sex.


----------



## WolfStar (Aug 18, 2009)

dejavu said:


> Yeah, what's with that? It's not like we're all actually going to become the opposite sex.


Guess people wanted to get into pointless arguments over gender roles and whatnot.


----------



## WamphyriThrall (Apr 11, 2011)

pinkrasputin said:


> You would lose that psychological edge with you or with others? Because I can't see how changing physically in this sense can change your psychological edge.
> 
> You were once tall and you intimidated people because of your tallness. Do you mean that when you are shorter you no longer have your tallness to fall back on? You'd have to actually use a psychological edge?


I imagine a good number of us would come back to PerC and have some iiiinteresting discussions with the then opposite sex.

Just reading through some of the female member's posts regarding sexism, homophobia, and double standards gives me a good idea of what we'll be looking at twofold. On the plus side, it can potentially bring greater understanding between the two sexes. I'm being optimistic.


----------



## Master Mind (Aug 15, 2011)

pinkrasputin said:


> I would think that a man would be intimidated by me because I could bitch slap him with my boobs. You don't see how I can stop terror in it's tracks?


*sigh*

Obviously I was being too serious in a thread that wasn't meant for it. How stupid of me. Fine. I'll give the expected, utterly predictable response for someone of my gender.

I'd lock myself in the bathroom all day, take off my clothes, stand in front of the mirror and feel myself up and masturbate.

That more along the acceptable bounds of this topic?


----------



## pinkrasputin (Apr 13, 2009)

Master Mind said:


> *sigh*
> 
> Obviously I was being too serious in a thread that wasn't meant for it. How stupid of me. Fine. I'll give the expected, utterly predictable response for someone of my gender.
> 
> ...


Honestly, I really was just asking for clarification on the psychological edge thing. I thought your explanation would be very interesting.


----------



## Master Mind (Aug 15, 2011)

pinkrasputin said:


> Honestly, I really was just asking for clarification on the psychological edge thing. I thought your explanation would be very interesting.


Sorry to disappoint you.

I wouldn't go into a full in-depth explanation anyway. Some things I will never disclose, whether anonymously or not. It would be like a magician explaining how he performs his tricks.


----------



## voicetrocity (Mar 31, 2012)

I would be so happy to be free from having a period. 
After staring at myself in the mirror for a good amount of time; I'd go out and flirt with every beautiful female I saw, and enter in a drag queen contest, with my swag going all over the place. 
I would walk down the street without having to dodge cat calls. I'd start a bar fight; throw myself in the middle of a fight, and be delighted in the facial expression of the instigator being intimidated (as opposed to looking confused, when seeing a female). I would relish the fact that people actually wouldn't expect me to cry at the movies and would laugh in the face of every woman who thought they would be able to get their way through seducing me. I'd probably be shirtless a lot as well. 

The more I think about this, the more I don't think I'd like it. I enjoy being a female and I think I'd be such a stereotypical man i'd hate myself. Hmmmm......


----------



## pinkrasputin (Apr 13, 2009)

Master Mind said:


> Sorry to disappoint you.
> 
> I wouldn't go into a full in-depth explanation anyway. Some things I will never disclose, whether anonymously or not. It would be like a magician explaining how he performs his tricks.


You didn't disappoint at all. It was interesting and you did clarify. I just added my little funny button. Which is actually really in depth if you can read between my lines. If not, it's still a cute funny button. :happy:


BACK TO TOPIC:
This thread has helped me realize that I would have to wear a giant muumuu all the time if I were a man. I forgot about the hard ons. That sucks!


----------



## Tanuchiro (Mar 1, 2012)

I honestly can't see myself doing anything different, really. I'd still be me, so activity would be the same. Video games, internet, nothing, waiting for school to start.
I'd tell my friends... Ugh, one I can already imagine trying to screw me immediately if I turned into an attractive woman.

Heck, people already call me a bit effeminate and stuff like that.
The only difference I can think of is that I would feel a bit better about if my shorts ended above my knees. I like at the knee or a bit lower. Sounds weird, but that's about it. Oh, and no more random erections. In gym shorts, especially.


----------



## JackParrish (May 5, 2012)

pinkrasputin said:


> You didn't disappoint at all. It was interesting and you did clarify. I just added my little funny button. Which is actually really in depth if you can read between my lines. If not, it's still a cute funny button. :happy:
> 
> 
> BACK TO TOPIC:
> This thread has helped me realize that I would have to wear a giant muumuu all the time if I were a man. I forgot about the hard ons. That sucks!


A muumuu wouldn't help, it would be a disaster. You'd just walk around with this enormous tent pole under your fabric. Duct taping it to the leg is something every school aged boy considered at one time or another. That shit just happens whether you are having a sexual feeling or not, and if you didn't have books or a backpack to put in front of you, you just didn't go out until moment was over. It was awkward as hell. 

As a man, though, you learn to just tuck it into the top of your jeans if you must.


----------



## JackParrish (May 5, 2012)

KindOfBlue06 said:


> @_eros5th_ That would work, but I'm not into dudes so that'd be a problem. I suppose I could allways become a lipstick lesbain though. Solid plan bro!


Mastermind...yeah, I've heard of him. Actually, I've seen him. He's 10 feet tall. He can shoot fire from his eyes and lightning bolts from his arse!


----------



## Swordsman of Mana (Jan 7, 2011)

@eros5th
she is not a believable bad ass


----------



## deftonePassenger (Jun 18, 2012)

wow I've thought about this before, and I've come to the conclusion that I may have been better off born as a girl...judging mostly on dating. But I'm confused, do you keep the same sexual preference in this transformation? I'd rather become a straight girl. Either way, you better believe I would masturbate.


----------



## CoopV (Nov 6, 2011)

KindOfBlue06 said:


> well it's all well and good if your into being a slut and all, but it'd be MY CONSCIOUSNESS in a womans body. To be a whore means getting a lot of dick in you, and I'm not into that, but you could still be a total nymph -but with other women. I wouldn't be no butch **** either, I'd want to get it on with the hottest women I could find right(still thinking like a man) but enjoy all the benefits of being a woman(multiple orgasms!) See the thinking there? Then again who knows, maybe if I was in a womans body I'd just start craving cock all the time. I don't know man, but I'd try my gameplan first!


Ohh you're a straight guy! I get it ahaha

Damn you got me craving cock now :frustrating: :kitteh:


----------



## pretty.Odd (Oct 7, 2010)

I would feel really odd and awkward and I would be scared of injuring my privates :x


----------



## Razare (Apr 21, 2009)

Swordsman of Mana said:


> how would you respond?


It's already happened. I was a woman in a previous life. But being born into it makes the transition smooth. I'm straight and everything, just my inner nature is softer than most men I think.


----------



## skycloud86 (Jul 15, 2009)

eros5th said:


> I'm not name calling anyone but myself lol.


You said you would be a whore if you had a female body.



> I'm not trying to be politically correct


What does that have to do with anything?



> and I don't know what misogynistic means.


Firstly, I doubt that you don't know what that word means. Secondly, we're on the Internet, you could always just look it up.



> I don't consider a whore a bad thing either I mean men are called man-whores all the time.


That's not the point, the point is that women are called names like whore when they don't conform to societal expectations.



> Just like when people say if a woman is rude and tough she's called a bitch but if a man is he's given respect. I've never understood that cuz I consider that man an asshole not a "G" or respectful or whatever.


Being rude and tough goes against the societal expectations and gender roles pushed onto women.


----------



## skycloud86 (Jul 15, 2009)

deftonePassenger said:


> wow I've thought about this before, and I've come to the conclusion that I may have been better off born as a girl...judging mostly on dating.


You really wouldn't, and judging mostly on dating is an awful way of judging how better off you would be. You would have to deal with a lot of harassment, societal hypocrisy, loss of bodily autonomy etc.



> But I'm confused, do you keep the same sexual preference in this transformation? I'd rather become a straight girl. Either way, you better believe I would masturbate.


It's a very different situation, but generally trans* people keep their sexual orientation after transitioning. I think in this hypothetical situation, you would basically just be given a body of another sex, so it wouldn't affect your personality or sexual orientation.


----------



## Mountainshepherd (Feb 23, 2012)

I'd go learn latin dancing and ballet.


----------



## CoopV (Nov 6, 2011)

skycloud86 said:


> You said you would be a whore if you had a female body.
> What does that have to do with anything?
> Firstly, I doubt that you don't know what that word means. Secondly, we're on the Internet, you could always just look it up.
> That's not the point, the point is that women are called names like whore when they don't conform to societal expectations.
> Being rude and tough goes against the societal expectations and gender roles pushed onto women.


You're taking this wrong and way overboard. I only said I'd be a whore because I'd want to know what it's like to have sex as a woman so initially I'd have lots of it. It sounds like you're caught up on the word "whore" and what it means to YOU so that's why I'm saying I'm not trying to be politically correct. If you don't like that word, well tough. I honestly don't know what misogyny means and I might look it up later. 

And yea it sounds like you're trying to get offended since you keep twisting everything into a feminist argument. So just chill out because I meant whore in a silly way. Whore, slut, skank, hoe, man-whore, pimp, they're just words :tongue:


----------



## skycloud86 (Jul 15, 2009)

eros5th said:


> You're taking this wrong and way overboard. I only said I'd be a whore because I'd want to know what it's like to have sex as a woman so initially I'd have lots of it.


Then just say that you would have lots of sex, no need for words like whore.



> It sounds like you're caught up on the word "whore" and what it means to YOU so that's why I'm saying I'm not trying to be politically correct. If you don't like that word, well tough. I honestly don't know what misogyny means and I might look it up later.


Why do you think I care about political correctness? Whilst I do think some PC is necessary, I'm no extremist either way.



> And yea it sounds like you're trying to get offended since you keep twisting everything into a feminist argument. So just chill out because I meant whore in a silly way. Whore, slut, skank, hoe, man-whore, pimp, they're just words :tongue:


I'm not trying to get offended.


----------



## Swordsman of Mana (Jan 7, 2011)

skycloud86 said:


> Because women are taught that by society, that they should compete with each other. Society likes to divide oppressed groups, it makes it easier to control them.


society does this to all groups, not just oppressed ones (and I don't know what culture you're from, but in America at least, I don't buy that women are significantly more oppressed than men). almost every group places oppressive social expectations upon it's members, not just oppressed groups. take samurai or knights for instance, they were the aristocracy of their day, but social custom oppressed the shit out of them and tried to control most areas of their lives. the same could be said of aristocrats in Victorian England and even popular cliques in most high schools (it's a lot like Mean Girls lol)


----------



## Jennywocky (Aug 7, 2009)

Swordsman of Mana said:


> no, who is that?


I've only skimmed this thread, I'm thinking about the other threads on this forum where the topic has come up... and no, I don't remember names. (Ha!) I just recall a vibe of where it really came across as guys wanting sex with women, and having a female body essentially just made it their plaything to use as a guy would, except he's driving the body and can make it do what he wants in order to please himself. 

You can add all the typical disclaimers in there, though (not all guys, of course some of that is natural, yada yada yada).

It might be fun as a woman with a man's body to write things in the snow and shoot ants off trees.


----------



## skycloud86 (Jul 15, 2009)

Swordsman of Mana said:


> society does this to all groups, not just oppressed ones (and I don't know what culture you're from, but in America at least, I don't buy that women are significantly more oppressed than men). almost every group places oppressive social expectations upon it's members, not just oppressed groups. take samurai or knights for instance, they were the aristocracy of their day, but social custom oppressed the shit out of them and tried to control most areas of their lives. the same could be said of aristocrats in Victorian England


Women are significantly more oppressed than men in most countries, including the US. Women get paid less, they get sexually harassed by strange men (you should read about rape culture), abortion is often restricted, birth control is more difficult for women to obtain. The US haven't even ratified the ERA, which was introduced in the 1970s, yet. It's even worse for women of colour and/or queer women. How likely is it that you'll get a female President any time soon?


----------



## Cetanu (Jan 20, 2012)

bromide said:


> I'd go for long ambling night walks without fear of being sexually assaulted. Livin' the dream, man.


I have bad news for you.


----------



## skycloud86 (Jul 15, 2009)

Cetanu said:


> I have bad news for you.


What are you saying in this post?


----------



## Swordsman of Mana (Jan 7, 2011)

skycloud86 said:


> Women are significantly more oppressed than men in most countries, including the US. Women get paid less, they get sexually harassed by strange men (you should read about rape culture), abortion is often restricted, birth control is more difficult for women to obtain. The US haven't even ratified the ERA, which was introduced in the 1970s, yet. It's even worse for women of colour and/or queer women. How likely is it that you'll get a female President any time soon?


- much of this has nothing to do with women being oppressed (not having a female president for instance)
- men are raped and mistreated too. this has nothing to do with gender and everything to do with power. "you're weak and I'm attracted to you so I'm going to control you" 
- being pro-life is not sexist against women
- limiting birth control has just as bad side effects for a man as it does for a woman (ie, less ability to have sex. at least, safely anyway)
- as for the queer women part, I feel there pain, but I assure you, it's much harder for gay men. I don't want to derail though =)

I guess my point is: does oppression of women (in America) occur? yes, definitely; but, is it significantly harder to be a woman (in America) than a man? no. I don't think I would notice a significant difference in the way I was treated were I transported into the body of a woman (minus the occasional creep). however, I will grant feminists this, the construct of a patriarchal society is in many ways harmful and oppressive, but just as much so to men as it is to women (ever heard of the draft for instance?)
PS: I'm sure it's much worse for women in many other countries, I can't speak for them


----------



## Jennywocky (Aug 7, 2009)

The whole thing seems to be a topic derail, since this thread is asking something different. But here's my one round of thoughts, since it was brought up...



Swordsman of Mana said:


> - much of this has nothing to do with women being oppressed (not having a female president for instance)
> - men are raped and mistreated too. this has nothing to do with gender and everything to do with power. "you're weak and I'm attracted to you so I'm going to control you"


What are the stats on that? I'm sure men can be raped, anyone can. Just not sure what the actual statistics are. It's typically much harder for a woman (average height in US = 5' 4.5") to physically overpower a man (average height 5'10") especially with his upper body muscle being more plentiful; and with some women just thinking they're being friendly and instead finding out that they're in the middle of a sex situation; and with women being able to get pregnant from a rape. It just doesn't seem quite the same, if you're honest, even though men can be victimized as well. I still feel a bit nervous, even though I'm tall and solid; I feel bad for my friends who are short and wiry and just have no way to defend themselves against potential predators. Even just the fear is kind of demoralizing, where we have to consider where we can go when we're out, who we need to go with, etc. Men typically are much more liable to be a victim of violence by other men than be raped by women, I'd think.



> - being pro-life is not sexist against women


I think the pro-lifer can actively not be trying to be sexist; I guess it all depends on whether you think a guy can legitimately can try to tell another woman what she should do about a pregnancy. I think the degree of pro-life stance we saw recently with the Republicans in the US reached a sexist proportion, where candidates were even trying to dictate whether contraception should be legal.



> - limiting birth control has just as bad side effects for a man as it does for a woman (ie, less ability to have sex. at least, safely anyway)


I'd say it impacts the man, but "just as bad" is probably stretching, until men are able to get pregnant.



> I guess my point is: does oppression of women (in America) occur? yes, definitely; but, is it significantly harder to be a woman (in America) than a man? no. I don't think I would notice a significant difference in the way I was treated were I transported into the body of a woman (minus the occasional creep). however, I will grant feminists this, the construct of a patriarchal society is in many ways harmful and oppressive, but just as much so to men as it is to women (ever heard of the draft for instance?)


It's too bad that this thread can't truly be implemented; I think it would be an eye-opener for both genders to spend a little time in each other's shoes in order to see what life is like on a daily basis. I think the US is fortunate in that there's been some equalization that has occurred; some other cultures/countries just treat women like garbage. still, just because we're better doesn't mean that things are really equal.


----------



## skycloud86 (Jul 15, 2009)

Swordsman of Mana said:


> - much of this has nothing to do with women being oppressed (not having a female president for instance)


Yeah, but it's not likely to happen anytime soon, is it? I'm not saying that anyone should be elected POTUS just because they are a woman/black/gay/insert other oppressed group here, I'm saying that all other things being equal, a woman would not be nearly as likely to be elected as a man.



> - men are raped


Of course, but most male victims are raped by other men, and most rape victims are women. Men don't have to worry about being raped if they're outside at night, or if they're drunk etc.



> and mistreated too. this has nothing to do with gender and everything to do with power. "you're weak and I'm attracted to you so I'm going to control you"


Societally, men in general have much more power than women.



> - being pro-life is not sexist against women


Yes it is, because women should be allowed to make their choices regarding their own bodies. Not to mention that banning or restricting abortions leads women to resort to back alley abortions or using coat hangars, both of which can be fatal to her.



> - limiting birth control has just as bad side effects for a man as it does for a woman (ie, less ability to have sex. at least, safely anyway)


You cannot be serious, surely? Less ability to have sex is a bad side effect? Do you know what the side effects of a woman not getting birth control are?

- Unwanted pregnancy that could end up in miscarriage, causing a woman both physical and psychological trauma.
- If she suffers post-natal depression after the unwanted pregnancy, that just makes it even worse.
- Loss of independence and maybe even her job in order to look after a child she didn't want.
- A rape victim might have to carry her rapists' child.

I'm probably missing off quite a few major side effects.



> - as for the queer women part, I feel there pain, but I assure you, it's much harder for gay men. I don't want to derail though =)


How is it?



> I guess my point is: does oppression of women (in America) occur? yes, definitely; but, is it significantly harder to be a woman (in America) than a man? no. I don't think I would notice a significant difference in the way I was treated were I transported into the body of a woman (minus the occasional creep). however,


You don't think you would? Have you ever actually read about women's experiences of American society?



> I will grant feminists this, the construct of a patriarchal society is in many ways harmful and oppressive, but just as much so to men as it is to women


No, it doesn't, although the patriarchy does hurt men too.



> (ever heard of the draft for instance?)


Yes, I have. If society hadn't seen women as weak and fragile, and not fit for active service, women would have been drafted as well.



> PS: I'm sure it's much worse for women in many other countries, I can't speak for them


Oh, you can quite sure of that.


----------



## KneeSeekerArrow (Jan 8, 2012)

I'd enjoy the 5 years longer lifespan. Other than that, nothing.


----------



## Swordsman of Mana (Jan 7, 2011)

@skycloud86
- labeling anyone who is pro-life as a sexist is simply ridiculous. pro-life is about believing that an unborn child has the right to live. I'm sure that's more inconvenient for women, but sexist? you've got to be kidding me
- we have not had a woman president because the position overall appeals more to men. I don't think the vast majority of people would vote against a female president simply because she is female. 
- how do men generally have more power than women societally? 
- men don't have to worry about being raped? please, I've almost been raped twice. 
- men are better equipped for combat. as you've already mentioned, we are physically stronger, don't have breasts in the way and are on average more aggressive. that said, I disapprove of the draft entirely. I can't think of many things that are more evil, but drafting women into the army would be laughable 
- I've read a few things and talked to several female friends about it, but most of it either sounded like complaining or specific circumstances as opposed to oppression of women in general. when I hear of more examples of gender specific hate crimes against women, laws that allow women to get beaten/raped etc I will rethink if being a woman would be harder than being a man, but until then, I'm still under the impression most think that for an inflated sense of self importance. 

now, I don't want to spend a lot of time on this but
lesbians are seen as exotic, erotic, forbidden fruit etc; gay men are much more prone to being verbally harassed, beaten, victims of hate crimes, ostracized by parents and culturally shunned. why do you think it is acceptable for women to make out with each other and not for two men to do so? being a (open) homosexual male is much more dangerous.


----------



## skycloud86 (Jul 15, 2009)

Swordsman of Mana said:


> labeling anyone who is pro-life as a sexist is simply ridiculous. pro-life is about believing that an unborn child has the right to live. I'm sure that's more inconvenient for women, but sexist? you've got to be kidding me


Not all pro-life people are sexist, but for many their views come from sexism. pro-lifers don't realise that for most of the pregnancy, a foetus is a barely-human clump of cells with no ability to feel pain. Not to mention that most abortions happen fairly early on, and are usually for serious reasons that, if the abortion does not take place, could have serious and possibly fatal consequences for the woman. Not only that, but many pro-lifers are opposed to birth control and teaching young people about contraception as well.



> - we have not had a woman president because the position overall appeals more to men.


Does it? Are you saying that men are inherently more interested in becoming President than women are? What about in the various other countries where women have become the leaders of their country?

Women are generally brought up believing that the presidency is something they can never attain, and men are generally brought up believing that it is, even if they have little to no chance of ever being the President.

Even so, many women have managed to gain power - http://www.filibustercartoons.com/charts_rest_female-leaders.php



> I don't think the vast majority of people would vote against a female president simply because she is female.


Really? Most Americans wouldn't vote for an atheist or other non-Christian, what makes you think most Americans wouldn't vote against a woman for being female?



> - how do men generally have more power than women societally?


Look up male privilege
.


> - men don't have to worry about being raped? please, I've almost been raped twice.


I'm sorry that that's happened, but do you really think most men worry about being raped walking down a dark street at night, or when they're crossing an empty car park to their car, or when they're in a room full of strangers?



> - men are better equipped for combat. as you've already mentioned, we are physically stronger, don't have breasts in the way and are on average more aggressive. that said, I disapprove of the draft entirely. I can't think of many things that are more evil, but drafting women into the army would be laughable


You can't think of many things that are more evil? Personally, I could list much more evil things all day. Yes, the draft was barbaric, but what makes it almost the most evil thing in your mind?



> - I've read a few things and talked to several female friends about it, but most of it either sounded like complaining


Complaining? You should remember that women have experiences that men will never have (and I'm not talking about things like rape).



> or specific circumstances as opposed to oppression of women in general. when I hear of more examples of gender specific hate crimes against women, laws that allow women to get beaten/raped etc I will rethink if being a woman would be harder than being a man, but until then, I'm still under the impression most think that for an inflated sense of self importance.


America is not a utopia of equality and feminism. No country is.



> now, I don't want to spend a lot of time on this but
> lesbians are seen as exotic, erotic, forbidden fruit etc; gay men are much more prone to being verbally harassed, beaten, victims of hate crimes, ostracized by parents and culturally shunned. why do you think it is acceptable for women to make out with each other and not for two men to do so? being a (open) homosexual male is much more dangerous.


It's only more acceptable because women are more sexualised than men, unless you want gay men to be accepted under the condition that they be sex objects for the entertainment of straight women?


----------



## Mountainshepherd (Feb 23, 2012)

It is often appropriate to have passionate options about issues that you feel are important. It is often appropriate to hold those views as sacred to you and how you wish the world to be. It is very appropriate to be a fighter for what you believe it.

Yet it is neither appropriate nor mature to force in those views every time anyone touches on the vague territory of what is sacred to you. Part of being an adult is knowing when to bite your tongue and let things slide, not every insult demands a response, not everything you disagree with deserves expression of that disagreement. Oppressive behaviour is oppressive regardless of its motives.


----------



## La Li Lu Le Lo (Aug 15, 2011)

skycloud86 said:


> Yes, but words like whore, slut and bitch are used against women simply because they are women. Anyone can be an asshole or a jerk, but almost every time the other three words (or similar words) are used, it's usually done so against a woman.


So women can do no wrong then? What about insults directed towards men?


----------



## skycloud86 (Jul 15, 2009)

La Li Lu Le Lo said:


> So women can do no wrong then?


Of course they can, they are human. What I'm saying is that calling women names specifically because they didn't adhere to a double standard is wrong.



> What about insults directed towards men?


If they're based on their being men, then it's just as bad. None of us are representative of our specific biological sexes, just like noone is representative of their country, their gender identity, their personality type.


----------



## La Li Lu Le Lo (Aug 15, 2011)

skycloud86 said:


> Of course they can, they are human. What I'm saying is that calling women names specifically because they didn't adhere to a double standard is wrong.
> 
> 
> 
> If they're based on their being men, then it's just as bad. None of us are representative of our specific biological sexes, just like noone is representative of their country, their gender identity, their personality type.


You seem to treat women as if they are above criticism. You're not allowed to disapprove of someone's reckless sexual behavior, if they are a woman. You aren't allowed to disapprove of a woman killing the child in her womb (It's her body!! You can't put limits on people's _bodies!_). Why? If men and women are equal, they should both be subject to criticism.


----------



## skycloud86 (Jul 15, 2009)

La Li Lu Le Lo said:


> You seem to treat women as if they are above criticism. You're not allowed to disapprove of someone's reckless sexual behavior, if they are a woman.


I'm not talking about reckless sexual behaviour, which is stupid whether someone is male, female, intersexed or other. I'm talking about women instantly being labelled a whore or a slut as soon as they do something that doesn't adhere to societal expectations and gender roles.



> You aren't allowed to disapprove of a woman killing the child in her womb (It's her body!! You can't put limits on people's _bodies!_). Why?


Firstly, an abortion is not "killing", it is the removal of a foetus from the womb. It's not even until far into the pregnancy that the mind develops, never mind the foetus having any signs of life. Most abortions take place very early on and it's not like a woman just walks into an abortion clinic on her lunch break.



> If men and women are equal, they should both be subject to criticism.


Of course, although why being pro-choice is somehow against criticising women I don't know.


----------



## Zeitgeist (Feb 7, 2012)

A perfectly good philosophical question got turned into an extremely annoying political controversy over reproductive rights. Leave it to @skycloud86 to ruin a potentially good thread.


----------



## La Li Lu Le Lo (Aug 15, 2011)

I'm sorry if I contributed to the derailing of this thread, but I couldn't resist responding to something as silly as not being able to disapprove of someone's behavior if they are a woman. Yes I agree words like "whore" and "asshole" are hurtful, but I was going after the reasoning behind those words.


----------



## skycloud86 (Jul 15, 2009)

rshortman said:


> A perfectly good philosophical question got turned into an extremely annoying political controversy over reproductive rights. Leave it to @_skycloud86_ to ruin a potentially good thread.


Oh yeah, because most of the posts weren't all the same boring "hurr hurr I would masturbate and look in the mirror" crap.


----------



## skycloud86 (Jul 15, 2009)

La Li Lu Le Lo said:


> I'm sorry if I contributed to the derailing of this thread, but I couldn't resist responding to something as silly as not being able to disapprove of someone's behavior if they are a woman. Yes I agree words like "whore" and "asshole" are hurtful, but I was going after the reasoning behind those words.


Except that you completely misunderstand my posts. I didn't say at all that a person's behaviour could be excused if they were a woman, just that someone who happens to be a woman shouldn't have to abide by certain societal expectations simply because they were a woman. The same goes for men.


----------



## Flatlander (Feb 25, 2012)

kindaconfused said:


> I would definitely go shopping. At least I could have some variety to my wardrobe. Life in blue, grey and black is boring.


Is there some reason you can't have variety in your wardrobe as you are right now?


----------



## kindaconfused (Apr 30, 2010)

Flatlander said:


> Is there some reason you can't have variety in your wardrobe as you are right now?


unfortunately, I am prone to worrying what others think.


----------



## Flatlander (Feb 25, 2012)

kindaconfused said:


> unfortunately, I am prone to worrying what others think.


If you worry, then you must be aware that they don't necessarily think what you think they do.


----------



## Reicheru (Sep 24, 2011)

kindaconfused said:


> I would definitely go shopping. At least I could have some variety to my wardrobe. Life in blue, grey and black is boring.


these are virtually the only colours i wear.  well, maybe with a little white as well.


----------



## Jennywocky (Aug 7, 2009)

Reicheru said:


> wow. this thread has become such srs bsns.
> 
> any other autoandrophiles up in here? autogynephilia seems quite a common fetish, but its equivalent less so. maybe i should hop off to the 'why the heck does this turn me on?!' thread :tongue:


Interesting thought.
Likewise, I've heard much about autogynephilia but little (well, nothing) of the opposite. I wonder why. *curious*


----------



## dejavu (Jun 23, 2010)

Jennywocky said:


> Interesting thought.
> Likewise, I've heard much about autogynephilia but little (well, nothing) of the opposite. I wonder why. *curious*


I must live under a rock because I have never heard either of those terms...


----------



## Jennywocky (Aug 7, 2009)

dejavu said:


> I must live under a rock because I have never heard either of those terms...



Basically
auto = self
philia = love
gyne = woman
andro = man

autogynephilia = being sexually attracted to the thought of yourself as a woman
autoandrophilia = being sexually attracted to the thought of yourself as a man

A researcher named Blanchard up in Canada at one point tried to label m2f transsexuals as guys who were just sexually excited by the thought of themselves as women. I think that's one reason why that term might be more common, it was used clinically, and a few people even identified as it.


----------



## Kyrielle (Mar 12, 2012)

"...my dangly bits are in the wrong places!"

And I would then proceed to experiment in various ways for several hours with this new body.

And then I'd be satisfied, and would put a trophy on my shelf:










That would proclaim me the "Knower of Dudeliness".

And then I would like to have my normal body back and would spend the rest of my time trying to achieve that. Especially since I've finally gotten the dang thing all broken in and comfortable.


----------



## Pam (Jul 19, 2011)

I would make the perfect man. Finally.


----------



## Peripheral (Jan 8, 2011)

Masturbate, of course. I don't give a fuck how cliche it is, it's true.
Otherwise, I'll just do what I do every other day.


----------



## A Little Bit of Cheeze (Apr 21, 2012)

I would see what kind of different reactions I would get from the people around me.... I already have a more 'masculine' (meaning aggressive) mind set, I want to see if people would take it more seriously or the same. 

Then I'd explore the inner workings of a dude's mind.... 

I actually don't think I'd be able to have sex, with my own mind set and all, with the opposite sex (meaning my original)... straight sex, at least...


----------



## goastfarmer (Oct 20, 2010)

bromide said:


> I'd go for long ambling night walks without fear of being sexually assaulted. Livin' the dream, man.


I kind of do that already, but I have never lived in a city I deemed all the dangerous. Or maybe, I am confident in my ability to turn into some feisty, little groin-kicker. 




skycloud86 said:


> I think it quite clearly shows how messed up society is when people who are attracted to members of another sex think that if they were placed in the body of another sex, that they would just play around with that body all of the time. They're basically admitting that they see people of that sex as sex objects.


I don't know why I quoted this post of all your other posts, but my first thought was... "I'd have a penis. I'd have a stick swinging between my thighs. I've always been curious about the sexual functions of the penis. I would definitely have to stand in front of a mirror, examine how the muscle now lies across my body, and touch all the different parts of my body." However, I am in a phrase of my life where I am becoming sexually awakened, so that's naturally where my curiosity falls. It's sounds like something more suited for a kid going through puberty, but I am young adult starting to have quite a bit of sex. I am also a more or less recently identified bisexual so I am starting to have sex with different kinds of people. Forgive me if my current interest in my clit extends over to my interest in my newfound dick.

Though, other thoughts crossed my mind as well. 

I wouldn't have boobs anymore, which some have already glorified but I am a size-F woman. That, by the way, is not a humblebrag. That is a fucking pain when it comes to buying clothes. Hell, I would appreciate if my boobs suddenly got smaller now. My wardrobe would have so much more variety. Though if I ended up having manboobs... I might cry. Sorry, I am that vain.

Though, I would also try flirting more openly with people. I would try to be assertive and see how people respond to me. You know? All that sociological stuff? I would have a field day noting how people approach me differently. I mean I could carry myself with shoulders thrown back and people not get the slight vibe I am butch or something. I would definitely have no problems adopting the masculine role, except I wouldn't actually do that. I would be the same kind of emotional person I am now, and women might just love me. However, I could also make asshole remarks and people celebrate my personality rather than condemn it. 

Finally, I would go getting a mohawk or a fauxhawk because I know very girls who can pull those off and I am not one of them. Though... I wonder if I would then have to cut back on the jewelry I wear. I would be one decked out guy.


----------



## nottie (Mar 2, 2011)

fiertelann said:


> Wow, okay, this sounds kind of tame, but I'd go running without a shirt. Because I've always wanted to do that, but as a woman, I can't really because it's socially unacceptable (at least where I live) and also not exactly comfortable.
> 
> I would also wear button-up shirts and practice ripping them off dramatically.
> 
> ...


Actually, that list sounds great. Only having to wear shorts for clothes must be _awesome_.

I'd also find a dashing pinstripe suit to wear and sun glasses to slo-mo dramatically take off (not at the same time).


----------



## SenhorFrio (Apr 29, 2010)

I'd probably have some sex with some guys...then after a few hours it would feel very werid


----------

