Would you screw a rule 63 / opposite gender you?

[cross_grave]

Re: Would you screw a rule 63 / opposite gender you?

Meh. Why bother changing your style? I'd just wear something similiar to what I'm wearing now, except suited for girls. Which means a lot of black stuff. And no skirts or anything of the sort. I mean, it's just a modified sheet, for crying out loud.

 

[GargantuaBlarg]

Re: Would you screw a rule 63 / opposite gender you?

Exactly the same. Clothes cost money you know.

I'd say "maybe a skirt sometimes", but I really don't think I could pull that shit off.

 

[Sinfulwolf]

Re: Would you screw a rule 63 / opposite gender you?

I'd probably wear what women wear now, without looking like a cheap whore though.

Most women don't look like cheap whores... so I don't see why that needed to be pointed out.

 

[Unknown Squid]

Re: Would you screw a rule 63 / opposite gender you?

Does your sexuality change with your gender?

The question can be tweeked to answer any situation you feel like really, but the original intended take on it would be that you'd remain entirely the same mentally, other than the gender swap. Thoughts, memories and personality, all the same. How much you imagine the change may or may not change you personally after that is a another matter.

The main difference between this question and the original OP questions, is that it's provided a clear cut origin behind the situation and the mysterious R63 clone (which is now you), and removed the assumption that the clone is automatically acceptant about the situation.


My response to my own question...

Firstly, I would need that bit of time to get used to my new self before anything much more happened. I don't mean instantly find a corner and masturbate, though that would certainly be on the to do list for the day. Luckily I've actually long ago planned and put several hours of pillow thought into the concept of such a thing happening (though with out the M-me remaining). Even considered the possibility of my own family not recognising me and being forced into homelessness. Mentally prepared. Though being able to stay with M-me conveniently makes that stuff irrelevant.

Upon meeting for the first time, I would probably demand that M-me follows me on a run, to test out the new legs and find somewhere to discuss stuff away from family or friends. Also I know that M-me wouldn't turn me down on the request, even with a deliberate "bossy mystery visitor" act. I would know my new name right away, because I know the name my parents would have called me if born that way. In contrary to my original answer in this thread, I reckon that stringing my male self along with things like the (relatively uncommon) name for a while would be loads of fun. If I cock that up though, I can always fall back on the personal memories that only we would know routine.

The sex part... becomes less certain, but overall, I think I could handle it. Provided it's only "me", I could get over the initial having sex with a guy hang up. After that, it probably would go much like my first answer. Again, it's hard to be certain, but if we did go down that path, then stuff like

You must be registered to see the links

, would never be looked at quite the same way again. Printouts and check marks would become involved.

Also, as silly as it is, I'd also inevitably want to play out all the stereotypical mini fantasies involved with having a strange geek girl invading a guy's room. Sit around on the floor wearing only a button up shirt and panties, reading a random manga for no reason. Stuff like that. I don't normally read manga in book form, nor would I sit on the floor to read it, but that's not the point. And M-me would know the game, and it would be fun watching him squirm. I seem to be imagining/assuming a strange confidence boost from this. I'm not sure if that's merely because they are imaginary scenarios, where it's easy to think in that way, or because the drastic change in my life might actually re-energise me. The OP question assumed that F-me would share the same libido as M-me. I'm not sure how much this would be true in reality. I've always assumed that male hormones played a big factor in that, though it's possible it's more to do with the hormones building the male psyche than merely their presence. I don't really know.

For clothes, I'd be sure to check out which of my existing clothes still fit/suited, but since it'd probably be a fairly limited selection, and that M-me wouldn't want half of his clothes stolen (not permanently anyway), it'd have to turn to shopping. I'm pretty damned awful at clothes shopping normally, but whatever. Plus, would need new underwear and all that shit. Unless my bank account or wallet was also cloned, M-me would probably get stuck with the bil. Poor sap just virtually emptied his bank paying for next years car insurance, but that's why he keeps an emergency fund.

For buying bras, obviously.

 

[Takimaru]

Re: Would you screw a rule 63 / opposite gender you?

LOL, good answer. Bras aren't cheap, especially if the girl is particularly busty and has to buy from specific retailers for their size and what not. I figure not a lot of people haven't necessarily thought it through in terms of the clothing thing, especially since many girls can at least pass with the whole T-shirt and jeans look, societally, as opposed to a guy wearing a skirt or dress (for those girls who would turn into a guy under rule 63).

Most excellent image example ;D And I'd say about the same, in terms of the whole switch-around question. There's no way I would ever be a girl without at least experimenting with lesbian stuffs and likely threesomes (of both angel & devil varieties, lol), so that could be fun. I'd probably have to drop some of my saved-up cash on a new wardrobe; turtlenecks, nice jackets and otherwise business or formal-looking clothes is pretty much a mainstay for me as a guy, so I feel it would probably apply to my R63 self.

 

[Unnatural Kiwi]

Re: Would you screw a rule 63 / opposite gender you?

-How do you think you'd react to her, or each other?
Probably give a good kick to each others shins to prove it wasn't a dream. I'd think of plenty of reasons of how this happened, but I wouldn't worry about it. After that,...good times? Various trickery would ensue until we got bored of it. Other than that, hanging out more or less. It would certainly make 2P type games interesting since we'd have the same mindset. Though pvp/score based games would have us constantly trying to one up each other.

-Would you have sex with her, given that she is open to the idea if you are?
-If so, what positions?
No, however, various foreplay would be highly likely.

-How often, if you had it your way since she'd share roughly the same libido?
Hmm, depend on the day/mood, but I'd say often.

-Fetishes you or her would indulge in? Would you share her?
Might try some out of curiosity and the fact of knowing it will stay secret between us, but nothing crazy. Sharing...that'd be a no.


-Would you want her to have a futa option or no?
Negative, one is all ya need.

Things to add:
Well considering I eat a lot of pasta and not gain weight, I'm sure my money going towards food wouldn't be enjoyable. Though if the other version of me also had a job then this is null and void.

One possibly good thing with two "me's", I might actually finish things I started (like drawings, games, etc.). If not, there would be all the half complete things X2.


As for the other question with the gender bending magic...curiosity killed the cat?

 

[Unknown Squid]

Re: Would you screw a rule 63 / opposite gender you?

Would you have sex with her, given that she is open to the idea if you are?
-If so, what positions?
No, however, various foreplay would be highly likely.

-How often, if you had it your way since she'd share roughly the same libido?
Hmm, depend on the day/mood, but I'd say often.

-Fetishes you or her would indulge in? Would you share her?
Might try some out of curiosity and the fact of knowing it will stay secret between us, but nothing crazy. Sharing...that'd be a no.

-If so, what positions?

No sex, but probably lot's of making out, showering in soft kisses, and close snuggling while playing with each others bodies. To me there's always been a pretty thick line between that and sex, and that kind of play is something I really enjoy and could do all day. Not to suggest I don't like sex, but neither of us would probably pass that line that is clear to both of us, though not rooted in the thought that we believe it would be wrong to have sex with each other.

I'm curious here. Both Kiwi and Toxic Shock gave similar answers regarding that bit. "No but foreplay is likely."

So how come the line gets drawn there for either of you? What's the reasoning and such, if it's ok to ask. A simple straight "No" would be easy to understand, but the halfway deal seems odd to me. In Toxic's case, one potential reason has already been crossed off the list.

I'm left with this theoretical scene, where your M & F selves are supposedly kissing, hugging up and rubbing or whatever, evidently enjoying it and suposedly not bothered by going that far, and yet neither ever feels like going the rest of the way? Each eventually separate, tent pitched and moist, and aren't bothered by the massive tease of it all?

I'm just trying to understand the thinking behind these. Different answers from different people was a given, it's just that I know that -I- certainly wouldn't be able to lick a cake and walk away without wanting to eat it.

 

[ToxicShock]

Re: Would you screw a rule 63 / opposite gender you?

You do if you enjoy the frosting more than the cake.

I do that type of activity all the time, I still have no idea what this "blueball" thing is people keep talking about, but its' a phenomenon that has yet to hit home with me. I aspire to the cuddle, not much more. Obviously, I play it by ear, so there's not an exact line that determines if I'll have sex, but if you've ever been to a party where someone was having cake and you silently decided you weren't really up for cake but you got handed a plate anyway, I suppose I'd eat it then. By the by, what was the potential reason that was crossed off for me, if I may ask?


And it's possible we gave the same answer cuz me and Kiwi are the genderswaps of each other!!!

 

[cross_grave]

Re: Would you screw a rule 63 / opposite gender you?

Is that a good thing?

 

[Unnatural Kiwi]

Re: Would you screw a rule 63 / opposite gender you?

And it's possible we gave the same answer cuz me and Kiwi are the genderswaps of each other!!!

For a rule 63 version of my self there would be curiosities sure, but I stick with the sex after marriage motion. I see enough idiots and even family having kids then more or less being forced into marriage. Hell, I deal with enough domestics as it is thanks to this. You be with someone because you want to, not because you have to.

 

[SirOni]

Re: Would you screw a rule 63 / opposite gender you?

For a rule 63 version of my self there would be curiosities sure, but I stick with the sex after marriage motion. I see enough idiots and even family having kids then more or less being forced into marriage. Hell, I deal with enough domestics as it is thanks to this. You be with someone because you want to, not because you have to.

Sex doesn't always have to lead to pregnancy though. That's where condoms and the like come in. Granted, you're talking about idiots, but at least some people protect themselves when it comes to casual sex, or even sex in a relationship.

 

[ToxicShock]

Re: Would you screw a rule 63 / opposite gender you?

Yeah, sorry kiwi, you lost me on that one. I'm not against people having your view, but I am in massive disagreement with it. Countering the idiots by being on the opposite side of them often makes people just reverse idiots.

I guess we're not genderswaps.

 

[Newbie]

Re: Would you screw a rule 63 / opposite gender you?

sex after marriage motion... having kids

The reason incest is bad is because you and an immediate family member are likely to share recessive genetic traits like diabetes and blindness that are more likely to occur in the offspring if they are present in both pairs. I imagine having a child with yourself will be much, much worse, as all your recessive traits are guaranteed some manner of expression.

 

[Chibichibi]

Re: Would you screw a rule 63 / opposite gender you?

The reason incest is bad is because you and an immediate family member are likely to share recessive genetic traits like diabetes and blindness that are more likely to occur in the offspring if they are present in both pairs. I imagine having a child with yourself will be much, much worse, as all your recessive traits are guaranteed some manner of expression.

Yes. Hence needs for all forms of birth control in the event of this ever happening. But since it's make believe, we can get dirty all we want.

 

[Unnatural Kiwi]

Re: Would you screw a rule 63 / opposite gender you?

I went a little overboard in the wrong direction and vented a little. My apologies. I meant it as doing it only with someone special to me, hence the marriage motion.

 

[Lucas]

Re: Would you screw a rule 63 / opposite gender you?

I'd fuck me. I'd fuck me hard.

 

[Bartnum]

Re: Would you screw a rule 63 / opposite gender you?

-How do you think you'd react to her, or each other?
I thought long ago about what I would do if I met an alternate version of myself. My initial reaction would be skepticism, so I came up with a code that would verify we were indeed the same person (since no one but us would know it).
-Would you have sex with her, given that she is open to the idea if you are?
It'd probably be the first thing we did after having verified that we are indeed the same person.
-If so, what positions?
Eh, whatever I/we feel like at the time I guess.
-How often, if you had it your way since she'd share roughly the same libido?
At least once a day.
-Fetishes you or her would indulge in? Would you share her?
Again, depends on what we feel like at the time. I don't think I really have any though. And no, neither of us would want to share one another.
-Would you want her to have a futa option or no?
Fuck no.

 

[Unknown Squid]

Re: Would you screw a rule 63 / opposite gender you?

...By the by, what was the potential reason that was crossed off for me, if I may ask?

That was the extra bit I highlighted in bold in the post, where you said, "...though not rooted in the thought that we believe it would be wrong to have sex with each other."

And so your one of those people that nibble the icing and leave the rest eh? Tsk tsk...

I kid. Still slightly hard to imagine for me, but it's not like I'm your clone either.


The marriage issue hadn't even occurred to me yet, but then I've always had my own less traditional views on it anyway. I've never seen the need for official documents or third party blessings for people to be considered a couple. The religious signifigance has never meant anything to me, and the 'civil partnership' side of it effectively serves to do little more than assist in mutual banking and taxes.

The significance that comes from making an event of it and sharing with friends and family, of course withstands. It's a special thing. It's just that in all the weddings I've been to, there was always a part where the religious elements get heavy, hymns to be sung, etc, and I can't help but think that such things just wouldn't be relevant to me. It would feel phony. Or in the case of civil partnerships, there's the whole horrible bureaucratic element souring the whole event "Yadda yadda, officially recognised by UK law, please sign here". It's ugly, and not something I'd care to spend my special day doing.

I'd rather the day be genuinely devoted to the couple, and less to do with rambling strangers for whom the day is routine rather than unique. '-'

Though uh... I seem to have strayed from the clone subject.

 

[Hentaispider]

Re: Would you screw a rule 63 / opposite gender you?

I kid. Still slightly hard to imagine for me, but it's not like I'm not your clone either.

I FUCKING KNEW IT!

 

[ToxicShock]

Re: Would you screw a rule 63 / opposite gender you?

Oh see, I had just assumed you were using the bold to compare mine and kiwis and thought you alluded there was something similar in kiwi's post.