I hijacked this from CJ's post about what she believes but can not prove, subesquently disproving part of her belief that "everything I've said in this post matters not one whit to anyone". In fact I can not stop thinking about it.
I am prejudiced in this regard, being a crossdresser. And even though I will never be a woman, and even if I had SRS I still would not be a woman, because I can not reproduce human life. The "hallmarK" of actually being a woman.CJ wrote:
I believe that women are naturally superior to men and that men's violence is the result of an unacknowledged and repressed jealousy and envy of that superiority;
I know? You will say, "woman can not produce a baby all by herself", and I concede that. But a woman can reproduce offspring without the knowledge of the father. And in many parts of the world, particularly the industialized countries, can actually decide when to reproduce, depending on their religious beliefs and social conditions.
Socially we also value women more, at least in the western culture. When it comes to saving lives, it is women and children before men. Men give thier seat to a woman. We allow a woman to go before men. Men hold doors for women. Men do the dangerous tasks to protect women from danger. And before I get slaughtered by the feminists out there, I do not mean to say that women are incapable, or that this is always the case, I am only talking in generalities, and mean no disrespect. I am only trying to point out that there is a long tradition and history of men protecting the lives of women, over their own.
My own experience as a full time crossdresser is that I love my life as a woman, even if it is just a pretend woman. I get treated better as a pretend woman than I ever did as a man. And it is great being able to wear things that make me feel beautiful.
Personally being a man who desires to be a woman, or at the minimum dress like one. I have to admit , I do beleive women are superior to men in just about everyway, except physical strength. And I am interested to see what everyone else thinks, particularly the GG's.
Love always,
Elizabeth
And it takes two to create life, no matter where that life might happen to gestate. I think a lot of the tradition of 'chivalry' comes from the male knowledge that if all the women get killed, there ain't gonna be no more of us men... so go ahead, beat your wife all you want, in fact get two or three if you have the power, so your genes will have even more fertile soil to grow in, but for godsake don't let them do anything *dangerous*. Perhaps all of the little social niceties that develop from women to men came as a kind of compensation, from the deep down knowledge of how wrong it was to keep women 'in their place' and keep them from doing anything significant in life aside from birthing babies, 'so we should all be extra nice to them just to make sure they don't all snap and come at us with the meat cleaver'. Not an 'acknowledment of innate female superiority' but an 'acknowledgement that our presumption of male superiority is a sham and a fake'. 
Maybe it's the fault of the peculiar gothik niche I inhabit, but most of the women I know (generally speaking) seem to find it very difficult to back down once they've taken a position. Worse, instead of giving 'honest opposition' and putting the disagreement out in the open, they attempt to undermine their opponents behind their backs, stooping in some cases to quite disgustingly underhanded tactics such as breking up relationships or getting people jailed; in the best of cases thay will not display disagreement or anger to the person with whom they have a conflict but will express it quite vocally to common friends; and when forced into a debate by circumstance, they will argue in highly emotional, generalized, and personal terms, assuming facts without proof, making blatant errors of logic, and resorting to personal attacks or changing the subject when their position has failed to hold water. And, I will add a corollary: it seems that most of the time, when men's arguments get out of hand and lead to violence or even war it's because the participants have become too - well - emotional?
