Going out with "guy" me would be like going out with my brother... EW.
Cuz my bro basically raised me so i'm basically girl him... EW!
Cuz my bro basically raised me so i'm basically girl him... EW!
Your opposite gender self.
- Thread starter CharlieH
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Yea, I could date my opposite gender self, as long as they didnt look too much like me, then it would be a little creepy.
Short answer: No.
Long answer: No, we'd both be overemotional crybabies who don't respond well to failure or rejection, therefore we'd be stuck with each other forever. I'd probably have that person as a buddy (vent-machine) because we'd at least have the same hobbies, but as a partner, no.
Long answer: No, we'd both be overemotional crybabies who don't respond well to failure or rejection, therefore we'd be stuck with each other forever. I'd probably have that person as a buddy (vent-machine) because we'd at least have the same hobbies, but as a partner, no.
Sex would be pretty hot though.KitsunetheFox said:
Why is that weird? Its like the perfect masturbation.Yopaz said:
I kind of hate myself, so I'd probably kind of hate dude!me. Plus, even if we were mutually interested, we'd be way too shy to actually, like, ask each other out.
At least he would get it when I was being serious and when I wasn't, and wouldn't respond with unwanted sympathy when I'm upset. We might end up being bros, but dating would be pretty much out of the question.
At least he would get it when I was being serious and when I wasn't, and wouldn't respond with unwanted sympathy when I'm upset. We might end up being bros, but dating would be pretty much out of the question.
I would... and then later, we would convieve the first generation of THE MASTER RACE!!! MWAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!
I see what you did there. Bonus points for using the Zero Punctuation reference.chowderface said:
But yeah, my earlier reason still stands.
Female me would be far too interested in David Tennant and Harrison Ford.
It's an impossibility.
It's an impossibility.
Ah this falls into the classic 'clone personality' trap:
People often, wrongly, make the assumption that a clone would have the exact same personality as its base, but this is overly deterministic. Certainly there are some, very limited, aspects of our behaviour which are determined by biology, but almost all of our personality comes from our experiences. Whilst the clone shares your personality exactly at the moment of its creation (since it's brain has the exact same composition, including memory, as yours upon 'birth'), it starts to develop a separate, but related, personality from yours as soon as that instance has passed. This personality grows exponentially as time progresses until it starts to look very dissimilar from the personality it started out as: just think how much you've changed in the past decade, or perhaps even the past year.
For a more tangible example, imagine that your new clone and you read two different articles in New Scientist. Your clone reads about the attention-switching capacity of dogs and you read about super-symmetry (I picked those because I read both and enjoyed both, so presumably so too would my fresh clone). Your clone now possesses knowledge that you do not and vice versa, you now have something to talk about because you are no longer duplicate personalities.
The 'female me' would face the same problem: she wouldn't remain 'me' for very long, she'd fast become a separate approximation of me based upon what she experiences after becoming a separate being. So, yes, I'd date her because she'd be enough like me that I'd get on with her logical, skeptical nature, but not so similar to me that there'd be nothing fresh to discuss.
The glorious and ever-sexy Daniel O'Brien sums it up like the voracious He-Man he is over at cracked [http://www.cracked.com/blog/human-clones-do-you-fk-or-fight].
People often, wrongly, make the assumption that a clone would have the exact same personality as its base, but this is overly deterministic. Certainly there are some, very limited, aspects of our behaviour which are determined by biology, but almost all of our personality comes from our experiences. Whilst the clone shares your personality exactly at the moment of its creation (since it's brain has the exact same composition, including memory, as yours upon 'birth'), it starts to develop a separate, but related, personality from yours as soon as that instance has passed. This personality grows exponentially as time progresses until it starts to look very dissimilar from the personality it started out as: just think how much you've changed in the past decade, or perhaps even the past year.
For a more tangible example, imagine that your new clone and you read two different articles in New Scientist. Your clone reads about the attention-switching capacity of dogs and you read about super-symmetry (I picked those because I read both and enjoyed both, so presumably so too would my fresh clone). Your clone now possesses knowledge that you do not and vice versa, you now have something to talk about because you are no longer duplicate personalities.
The 'female me' would face the same problem: she wouldn't remain 'me' for very long, she'd fast become a separate approximation of me based upon what she experiences after becoming a separate being. So, yes, I'd date her because she'd be enough like me that I'd get on with her logical, skeptical nature, but not so similar to me that there'd be nothing fresh to discuss.
The glorious and ever-sexy Daniel O'Brien sums it up like the voracious He-Man he is over at cracked [http://www.cracked.com/blog/human-clones-do-you-fk-or-fight].
