Slashdot Mirror
Robotics Researcher Starts Campaign To Ban Development of Sexbots
Earthquake Retrofit writes: A robotics ethicist from the UK's De Montfort University has started a campaign to ban the development and use of sex robots. "She believes that they reinforce traditional stereotypes of women and the view that a relationship need be nothing more than physical." The campaign was spurred by news that some companies claim to be fairly far along in development of such technology. One company even plans to start selling them later this year. The campaign's goals and concerns include "We propose that the development of sex robots will further reduce human empathy that can only be developed by an experience of mutual relationship," and, "We challenge the view that the development of adults and child sex robots will have a positive benefit to society, but instead further reinforce power relations of inequality and violence."
when they pry it from my cold, dead hands...
"She believes that they reinforce traditional stereotypes of women"
Millions of gay men will hate you and your bigotry, because your arguments sucks more than a sex robot would do.
Every bit as doomed as banning porn. I'd be angry at her for trying, but since she'll accomplish precisely nothing, I think her failure will be a thoroughly satisfying punishment for the attempt.
Looking at the woman
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
It's no surprise she fears competition from robots.
too much Futurama?
Nothing like putting up crap without analysis or even a modicum of critical thought
How does choosing to have sex with a robot reinforce stereotypes about women or relationships with women?
Good luck with that...
Hectice, baby, Mercator says hello to you
I am so disgusted by my own arousal at the thought of a lifelike sex toy that I must have them band for all, lest I give into the unholy temptation and have sex with one.
--- Keep the choice with the user..
Sexbots for women and men might be the ultimate chance to remedy one humanity's greatest source of conflicts, ranging from the Troian War over annoyingly crazy teenagers to sexually frustrated housewives. They could finally stop men from objectifying women for purely sexual purposes. The effects of this change could be more beneficial than the pill and the invention of the vibrator taken together. In an age in which in-vitro fertilization is easy, it would be crazy to take away this unique chance for the evolution of humanity.
I'll support her movement as long as she also pushes to ban dildos, vibrators, clitoral stimulators, teledildonics, "fucking machines" and other female masturbation aids. No, I don't use masturbation aids, and I don't have a problem with female masturbation aids. I just have a problem with the horrific double standard. Feminists tell us that women who use masturbation aids are strong, independent and empowered, while at the same time claiming that men who use masturbation aids are disgusting perverts.
and half of images will be of sex toy robots. If somebody wants to start sex robot line, I would suggest naming lead model 'Kathleen'.
BTW, what is 'robot ethicist'? I suppose they share university space with Post-scarcity Economics, Xenoarchology, Applied Fusion and Singularity Communication.
as we can still have the killer robots. Those do not " further reinforce power relations of inequality and violence."
This is just another utterly immoral attempt to force people to behave in ways some authoritarian POS wants them to. Whatever happened to freedom? The irony is of course that this comes form an "ethicist". Apparently one does not even need to know basic ethics to become an "ethicist".
Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
A few quotes from an academic without context may well produce a decent bit of clickbait, but I'd be interested to read the rest of "The Asymmetrical âRelationship: Parallels Between Prostitution and the Development of Sex Robots,".
There doesn't seem to be a lot about this "campaign" apart from a few mentions in the media.
They reinforce traditional stereotypes of men and the view that a relationship need be nothing more than physical...
Sexbots are masturbation aids, no more, no less. And I don't see anyone but the most hardcore fetishists see them as anything else but a glorified dildo or fleshlight.
"People Who Annoy You"
"Freedom in the USA is not the ability to do what you want. It is the ability to stop others from doing what THEY want"
Stanislaw Lem already predicted quite a few things here... read the Star Diaries, although I believe that the matching story "Die Waschmaschinentragödie") isn't included in the English versions. http://derdeutsche.twoday.net/...
view that a relationship need be nothing more than physical
She doesn't approve fuck buddies I guess. Relationships are what they are, all dependent of the persons/machines/animals/inanimate objects involved. There are many possibilities, and each teach something about life and death.
will further reduce human empathy that can only be developed by an experience of mutual relationship
Really? People have no inherent capabilities for empathy now?
Well, not really.
Imagine reading about somebody whipping a slave in history book.
Now, compare it to actually flogging naturally looking doll of said slave (of appropriate color), with that doll covering, making proper noises and bleeding as required. And doing that every day.
Do you really think that mental impact of both activities is the same?
human empathy that can only be developed by an experience of mutual relationship
So what does she have to offer or suggest to those people (men particularly) who have no opportunity to develop such an experience? In the West at least, a significant proportion of women have rejected men entirely, possible after one fling and a child. Equal wages and opportunities for women, as well as social attitudes, mean that it is no longer "essential" for a woman to find a husband as it was as recently as two generations ago. There are too many men seeking for the number of women available.
Mal. Guy killed me, Mal. He killed me with a sword. How weird is that?
--- Liberty in our Lifetime
Where is the campaign to ban dildos. Aren't they simple sex robots that depict men who's only purpose is to sexually furfil women and then to be thrown in a draw?
It seems that she is afraid of competition from said sexbots.
instead of women?
"She believes that they reinforce traditional stereotypes of women"
Sounds more like "women will lose the powerful tool of sex deprivation to control men".
Not that anyone here will suffer from that a lot.
Sure let's make a million of them. For testing. Now drop them in the Middle East, the terrorist training areas. Before they are taught how to have sex with their camels. Or make homemade bombs out of fertilizer, and other household goods. Hey guys, the virgins we were promised are here, early delivery! Everybody would be trying to get these bots in unusual contortions before the bots suddenly explode, nuking the desert back to the stone age.
WARNING: Smartphones have side effects--most of them undocumented.
the industry need sexbots the same way the internet needs porn. no way around that, but thanks for bringing that forward.
welcome our new Sexbot Overlords!
I like to look at this as something of an economics issue, with sex being an economic good (or service).
Women oppose sex bots (and prostitution) because women function as something of a cartel that wants to establish a minimum price for sex. Historically, the price has been marriage but over the last 40 years or so the cartel has been willing to lower the price as the economic value of men has dropped -- women have vastly more economic opportunities and no longer see socially and legally enforced relationships with men as economically rewarding or necessary as they used to be.
They haven't completely reduced the price to free, though, as for the most part the cartel still generally demands a price that men engage in forms of courtship and relationship engagement in exchange for sex.
Women oppose prostitution and sex bots because they effectively break the cartel's monopoly. A sex bot (at least a reasonably realistic one) lowers the price below the cartel's general minimum price. They also have the economic efficiency of reducing the transaction costs below the cartel's and even below illegal prostitution and with fewer externalities, too. The cartel's price has an inherently high transaction cost and a lot of inefficiencies, although to some extent the cartel has been able to leverage technology to reduce transaction costs and efficiencies somewhat.
when they pry it from my cold, dead hands...
Any sexual experience not based on a mutual relationship is bad, apparently - so they'll be taking your hands, too.
In a survey of 100 programmers, 111111 thought that duck-typing was a good idea.
She's actually probably right about sex robots not being a benefit to society, but trying to block them is like trying to stop human nature in its tracks. Good luck with that.
There's a reason why "sex toys" are sometimes referred to as "marital aids".
Some people use sex toys as a substitute for a partner, sure. But plenty of people use them as a supplement to a healthy sexual relationship.
So, I'm going to apply the same argument here as one would apply to the concept of "potential weapons": inasmuch as anything you can find can be used as a weapon, so, too, can anything be used as a sex toy.
Ergo: Ban everything.
Christ, what a limited perspective this woman must have about sex.
Some people don't believe in fairies. I don't believe in The Patriarchy.
Warbots are just fine.
My ism, it's full of beliefs.
So, the "Inquisition" and "Mutaween" have become old news, and "ethicist" is the new "in" thing to be i see.
An individual with arbitrary and completely subjective and relative ethical and moral principles, attempting to dictate to society on how it should act and think; justified by an infantile and twisted self-righteousness and savior complex, supported by a slippery slope fallacy and patronizing.
Trying to dictate to people on what they should wear, what they should listen and watch, what they should or shouldn't fuck, what they do in private.
Sounds familiar. I'm surprised she didn't state that being a male homosexual is misogynist because it is unfair to women and doesn't give them a chance.
I find it ironic that the same people who should be fighting against religious fundamentalism and the radicalism that misuses morals and ethics to stifle individualism and sexual liberty,
are now doing the exact same thing, but they delude themselves into thinking it is ok when they do it because they are not a religion but a "progressive political" movement. A difference of labels standing in for the same authoritarian thought policing shit.
The old "Do as i say, not as i do." spiel.
This is hilarious. This is entertaining. This is bound to fail.
I have noticed that BBC had the guts to have open comments on any article that is feminist around 2012. Yet now they are all locked.
The reason is that the people who may have supported feminism in 2012, have witnessed the movement doing stupid and contradictory radical crap, to such a point where it has lost support from most people. To the point where even prominent accomplished feminists (i'm not talking basement feminists like Tumblr and Twitter personas, but feminists with tangible accomplishments such as Hirsi Ali) are bashing what the movement has become. It has become to Egalitarianism what Westboro Baptist Church is to Christianity.
The latest low point was when these same people shamed and bullied a scientist for his choice in what shirt he wore, gifted by a female friend to him mind you. Almost reminiscent of some Middle Eastern countries and their "religious fashion police".
This is all bull.
Look at how well banning pornography has done.
And puritanical. However I think in some case we should ban sex-robots. I think if they're just a machine, without any self-awareness then I don't have a problem with them. If however a sexbots are sentient, even to a limited degree then making them is nothing more than sexual slavery. Much as Charles Stross and Greg Egan have pointed out. The trick will be how do we determine if a robot is sentience, and at what level do we say no more.
I also think that in the near future anyone with sexbot will be considered a bit of a fuck up, unable to manage even basic relationships with the opposite sex.
+1, Firefly
(name withheld by request)
I knew it had to be a chick raising these objections as soon as I read the reasoning.
Broadly speaking (no pun intended), females relate sex to emotional and relationship feelings and thoughts. While men do derive pleasure from combining "love" and sex, it isn't always necessary. Sex just by itself for physical pleasure is great and one doesn't always even need to know or remember her name.
Again, very broadly speaking, this isn't something in the female mentality, or at least it has not been....till recently I do see changes in female attitudes towards this..but I don't think it is still nearly as prevalent as with mens thinking and easy ability to separate emotion from the physical act.
It is often been said that one sure cure to world over population would be to perfect some sort of artificial sex, be it virtual or some type of robot, that is so real feeling.......and basically you'd have a ton of men who would have their physical needs fulfilled, without having to put up with the nagging, and emotional baggage that comes with women (not to mention potential unwanted kids). I fear female popularity would drop a good bit. Not saying it is a good or bad thing, but I could see it potentially happen.
I mean, there's an old joke that kinda sums it up....
"Why did God give women tits?"
"So men would talk to them...."
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
Your post isn't much better than her reasoning.
She's just a "family values" campaigner using the rhetoric of feminism in a weak attempt to bolster her position. You're repeating the same flawed arguments she's using in an attempt to rebut her.
Asking the millions of elderly, ugly, disfigured, disabled, etc to live without in the name of empathy is ironic.
Beware of she who would deny you access to easy orgasms, for in her heart she dreams herself your mistress.
Again, very broadly speaking, this isn't something in the female mentality, or at least it has not been....
The existence and popularity of dildos invalidates both your position and hers.
That post ^^^ is what mod points are for, and it's dead-on.
Men and women do view sex differently... for women, it fulfills an emotional need more than physical desire. For men, more about physical need (as to why, the answer lies with how men and women are mentally hard-wired in general. )
For most men, as long as it is convincing enough in movement and sound during the moment, that is pretty much sufficient. For most women, the AI had damned well better be good enough to handle long conversations about highly emotional subjects, and that's not going to happen for quite a long time. Given the likelihood is a sufficiently sentient AI, I can see how women would more easily dismiss the idea.
This woman in particular? I understand her position as well - it's hard enough for the average woman to compete for a man's attention as it is (unless she lives somewhere that women are a pronounced demographic minority, such as China). As a woman gets older, that competition only intensifies and gets harder to win... see also the stereotypical (but nonetheless too often true) middle-aged male dumping his middle-aged wife for some younger, prettier version.
Now add a convincing-enough sexbot product to the mix, and I suspect that this won't be the only woman complaining rather loudly about it.
Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
Dunno... most women will use it a crutch, but that little rubber toy won't validate emotions, cuddle with her, pamper her, take her out to dinner... women generally need more than the occasional orgasm to consider their sex-lives as being fruitful.
Most guys on the other hand? Well, considering that a huge percentage of us guys treat women as not much more than disposable toys until full mental maturity? Well, you get the idea.
Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
There is very little that is remotely as sexually objectifying as a dildo. Reducing a man to his sex organ.
Well, doc? Why the outrage against sex bots? Maybe you should start with a campaign against dildos?
But ... I've seen you. I dare say that you probably are quite happy that they exist.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Pedos want to fuck, too.
And bluntly, if some small plastic sex toy spares one child that experience, I do WANT them to exist!
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Sure, men are just big dumb sex-mad brutes with no need for relationships, and there have been no women in history that enjoyed a quick fuck. Totally.
Used to think Slashdot was above this kind of shallow-minded crap.
If you make sex bots that look too realistic, and this causes men to objectify women, then perhaps this would carry over into how they treat real women. (Mind you, in that case, the genes that lead to this behavior would be eliminated from the gene pool.)
On the other hand, some men just have higher sex drive and just need to deal with some physical discomfort, unconnected with their emotional relationships with women. If they get their excess needs met somehow, then they might not be total horn dogs when they are around real women and would treat them with more respect as human beings.
Some artiificial ban on some specific technology isn't going to change people's nature. On the other hand, it might help a lot if we were to educate people from a young age that they need to treat other human beings with dignity and respect.
Most guys on the other hand? Well, considering that a huge percentage of us guys treat women as not much more than disposable toys until full mental maturity?
So you treated your mother as a disposable toy? Please, spare us the glib stereotyping and rhetorical laziness, it's way beyond old and busted.
You should see the film "Westworld". The robots get what we now would call a computer virus that makes them too intelligent.
I don't have sex with my mother either, or do you not know what context is?
Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
Wait for artificial wombs. The same people oppose those too.
"She believes that they reinforce traditional stereotypes of women and the view that a relationship need be nothing more than physical."
I don't believe a word she says. I think she's one of those anti-AI types and is just using the sex/exploitation angle as an obfuscating excuse to quell the one branch of the industry that is likely to pass the Turing test first.
Free, as in your money being freed from the confines of your account.
And you never had any female friends you viewed as more than disposable toys until age 22 or so? I'm not saying that explains your comment but...
Saw a story on this yesterday. It seems that because she can draw some tenuous parallels between sexbot production and prostitution, and because she thinks there's something fundamentally terrible about prostitution(?), sexbot production is wrong. :-\
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
"She believes that they reinforce traditional stereotypes of women and the view that a relationship need be nothing more than physical."
It was no surprise at all to find that this comes from a female researcher. Anything that gives men pleasure is viewed with suspicion, and doubly-so anything that might make guys less dependent on women for sexual gratification.
She wants to ban this sort of thing not because it's wrong, but because she's offended by it.
Honestly, can you imagine a male researcher making these statements and suggesting we ban vibrators or female-oriented sex toys? Me neither.
Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
Break the va-jay-jay cartel! Free men from ever having to put up with a woman's crap to get laid ever again.
A lot of women should be terrified, they might have to get by on their personality.
I knew it had to be a chick raising these objections as soon as I read the reasoning.
BINGO, this was my thought exactly. I wish I could mod you up to a million.
I knew it was a woman making the comments in the article the instant I read them. She wants to ban this sort of thing not because it's wrong, but because she's offended by it. Anything that gives men pleasure is viewed with suspicion, and doubly-so anything that might make guys less dependent on women for sexual gratification.
Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
So, in other words, female sexuality good, male sexuality bad. Yeah, got it.
The soylentnews experiment has been a dismal failure.
Oh....suddenly, this idea isn't acceptable to women now?
I mean, denigrated men to a single part of their body.
Used to think Slashdot was above this kind of shallow-minded crap.
You did!
Come on, you've got to be kidding me.
Watch this Heartland Institute video
I'll bet she's an American woman too.
Maybe if American women weren't so obese and/or afflicted with princess mentalities, then American men wouldn't care much about having a sexbot. I'd bet good money almost all the demand for these things is coming from American men.
Just look at the statistics for how many Americans now are single (either separated/divorced or never married at all), it's going through the roof. There just aren't a whole lot of quality women out there any more. Part of this can probably also be blamed on our government and its policies which have created an obesity epidemic (which hits women harder than men, because women have more body fat naturally and lower metabolisms, so they have a harder time staying thin), and of course corporations which (because of profits and also government policies) create shit food that makes people fat. They don't have this kind of obesity problem in Europe.
Straight men can have female friends. Fat, ugly, old ones.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
I'd separate the gender imbalance issues with marital failure from the sexual use of electro-mechanical devices.
It's possible to fuck a machine and have a healthy happy sexual relationship and still not be married. Millions of women already do this.
They don't have this kind of obesity problem in Europe.
No, they just have a "Obesity crisis of enormous proportions". And like usual, you blame the government, because it can't possibly be the fault of the obese people themselves.
Enigma
Y'know how you can tell women are crazy?
They used to do things that men liked. Then, they all got together and set their bras on fire, and marched in the streets, and said "WE DON'T HAVE TO DO THINGS THAT YOU LIKE".
And, in an effort to get them to shut up, we agreed. Now, they don't do things that we like any more, and now, outside of fucking them, we don't particularly like them.
And now, having excised every character trait they had that made us like them for their deeds, they say that we've reduced them to sex objects.
They reduced themselves to sex objects.
On a completely different note, here's a wikipedia link to a newspaper advertisement selling sex robots for women in 1913.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
-1 Uncomfortable Truth
This is essentially the same argument that says realistic violent video games will produce violent individuals.
Just as with violent individuals, the ones that cause problems were already violent; the person who wants to whip a slave is already defective.
Furthermore, it would appear that the actual result of porn, prostitution, etc., is to reduce adverse events involving real people. Rape statistics go down, etc. The actual result is pretty clearly more along the line of pressure release than pressure enhancement.
I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
Very good point. Moreover, in a recent discussion with a friend ( male ), we concluded that the price many women tend to demand for sex is simply too high. This "price" is mostly quoted in terms of involvement, of at least the promise thereof, or otherwise of exclusivity of feelings. Which conclusion of ours tend to corroborate your point.
Religous speak to God. Insane are spoken to by God. When all shut up, one can finally hear Shostakovich in peace
That kinda ad hominem nonsense just creates a faulty "argument" that her theories would have been more valid if she were younger and thinner.
Wind the time back and she's this nerdy chick with raven hair and pretty eyes who's into robots. How cool is that, right?
The woman is pushing 40(ish) and has excess weight.
Yeah... no one on slashdot has ever been or will ever be in those shoes. We're all fit and perma-young.
Should she lose weight and get sexier lighting, background and clothes - will her theories suddenly become more valid?
How about if she were a guy?
I know, I know... It's a joke.
But it's a lame one and it opens the door to the whole "her theory is laughed at on account of her being a woman" argument.
When the real reason it is laughable is cause it is based on a faulty premise of humans being nothing but sex-bots made of flesh and then making a bunch of logical leaps based on premises as faulty as that one.
I.e. This is some wonderful circular thinking:
The vision for sex robots is underscored by reference to prostitute-john exchange which relies on recognizing only the needs and wants of the buyers of sex, the sellers of sex are not attributed subjectivity and reduced to a thing (just like the robot).
Sex robots are like prostitutes. Which is bad. Cause prostitution treats prostitutes like robots.
Ergo, treating robots like prostitutes is bad - CAUSE THAT WOULD BE TREATING ROBOTS LIKE ROBOTS!
Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
All sex toys save one I've ever seen were for women. How did she come to the conclusion that sex bots would be built for men? Sex bots for women are much more likely and, I dare say, almost exist already.
Maybe they should just build an unisex fuckbot with industry-standard extension slots which can be fitted with either a dildo or a fleshlight? Then everybody could objectify in peace and equality! Of course there's a very real danger that the fuckbots would just pair off with each others and give us the finger ;)
If a train station is a place where a train stops, what's a workstation?
They watch football, guys like doing that right? I don't enjoy watching professional football anymore, but then again I don't like watching sports where I'm supposed to root for a team because they are located near me when none of the players are from the area.
Do Brits still sell Playboy only from the top shelf, in the paper bag with only a title visible? I bought an issue just to see what the fuss is about - they even bothered to censor it - some pages were cut! I thought then - wow better get out of the isle - when they have to do such things to stop perverts there from uncontrollable indulgence then it is really dangerous there. Give them all these sex dolls fast or else something bad may happen.
I submit that this is an astroturfing campaign from the SexBot Manufacturers Industry Association!
... and consider that a sexbot, which could easily be made stronger than a human, would spend a lot of its time around humans in distracted and/or exhausted condition.
Man, I wish I had points right now... Preach it brother! :D
"...Well, there's egg and bacon; egg sausage and bacon; egg and spam; egg bacon and spam; egg bacon sausage and spam..."
The abusive comments on the YouTube channel that featured Dr. Richardson were, in my opinion, uncalled for, and probably just reinforce her beliefs. We can have diverse opinions about issues like this, and I, for one, am glad someone's at least thinking about this. As robots come into general familiarity, we're all going to have to do some soul searching.
While I don't agree with the outright banning of this technology, I do understand her point - I just don't think technology, in and of itself, is good or evil.
This was my (somewhat lengthy response to her):
I think that we can have a discussion here without such personal derision. I wonder, Dr., how you feel about places like China where the men outnumber the women by over 30%. Or in Japan, where women's increased demands for an 'acceptable' mate have lowered their birthrate to non-sustainable levels. Already there are men there who use RealDoll-like toys - some who literally make them part of their social lives. What options are available to them that would be acceptable to you?
In addition, and closer to Western world, not all men are capable of having or maintaining a sexual relationship with women - but this doesn't necessarily limit their sex drive. Men with severe appearance deficits or low intelligence may never have the opportunity to have a mate.
While it is often easy for women to dismiss sex for men as being a disconnected act, this is certainly not always true (it isn't with me), and I believe there is an equally important biological need for acceptance and love. This is demonstrated differently with different men.
While I do believe there is some merit in your argument, I also believe that sexual expression IS different between men and women, regardless of relationship status.
Imagine the outrage over the removal of Disney 'Princess' movies, romantic novels (essentially word-based pornography), or sex toys for women would cause! And yet, these things unquestionably also color women's perception of relationships with men - and their expectations.
As feminists scream for equality, the truth is that women are the ones who do the choosing, as they feel the need to be specially selective about their mates. This can be seen in the animal kingdom as well. It is understandable (especially when the production of children is involved), but this is, at least, an example of how men and women are not only different, but unequal.
Doesn't this, in and of itself, color an unfortunate man's opinion of woman? How better to address that than by providing men with the next best thing?
Advanced robotics is going to even the playing field somewhat for those disenfranchised men, not among the lucky to be selected by a 'real' woman. Eventually, it may offer these rejected men another side altogether of women, providing them with a 'loving' partner, fulfilling their need to be loved. Obviously, the reality of the 'love' expressed will be proportional to the level of technology and the skill of AI programmers.
Certainly, early forms of this will be no more than machine-assisted masturbation, but this will be a short-lived period of time, as Moore's Law and the determination of science has previously demonstrated.
As with any technology, the possibility for good and evil will exist. I suggest letting things progress as they will until direct evidence against ANY positive use exists.
"...Well, there's egg and bacon; egg sausage and bacon; egg and spam; egg bacon and spam; egg bacon sausage and spam..."
Most men actually want female companions. How about a ban on robots and drones that kill people?
Democracy Now! - your daily, uncensored, corporate-free
The real money will be in virtual sex. When they can build sex robots that are connected to the internet (or whatever replaces it) and the bots can transmit whatever they experience to another human in real time, that's when things will get interesting. Note that such an arrangement would appear to invalidate a good bit of the argument against sexbots described in TFA.
That isn't primarily a "sex robot" or masturbation aid, it's an electromechanical massage device along the same lines as the Hitachi Magic Wand. And it definitely isn't just aimed at women, half their testimonials down the left are from men. Yes, just like the Magic Wand I'm sure it was used as a masturbation aid as well. I'm quite possibly the only person with a Magic Wand used solely as a massage device, but whatever.
on a related note, the federal government spent $3.5 M to find out why lesbians are obese...
Ken
Again, very broadly speaking, this isn't something in the female mentality, or at least it has not been....
The existence and popularity of dildos invalidates both your position and hers.
Doesn't the existence and popularity of dildos validate the argument that women want more than sex? After all even dildo owners still want to date.
I think that the current issue is that there probably isn't a similar sex toy for men; one that is as satisfying to a man sexually as a dildo is to a woman sexually. Once there is few men are going to put up with relationship baggage. We are already seeing a sway towards this as porn becomes more accessible and cheaper.
I'm a minority race. Save your vitriol for white people.
Straight men can have female friends. Fat, ugly, old ones.
You must be a bundle of joy at work.
To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
Now, they don't do things that we like any more, and now, outside of fucking them, we don't particularly like them.
Sounds like a pretty good summation of the worldview of most Red Pill/MRA types out there.
To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
So what you are saying is that women used to suppress their own wants and desires and life goals in order to satisfy men. Then they liberated themselves and stopped confirming to men's ideals of what women should be, and instead did what they wanted to do, what made women happy and fulfilled.
Some men prefer the older "sex object" model, and want to act like Kirk and sleep with the hotty of the week, only now the supply of women dedicating themselves to pleasing men has diminished greatly. Rather than trying to adapt themselves and form relationships with modern women, like most guys do, they complain and long for the bad old days. They feel entitled to have women conform to their ideals, and get upset when people point out that their ideals are actually terrible and reduce women to objects.
Sexbots are very attractive to such men, because they are basically those 1950s women they lust after. Literally painted, groomed and dressed to please men and give them the sex they are entitled to on demand. The only thing that sexbots can't offer is continuation of the man's genetic line.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
To tolerate the time in between :-)
(Almost) everything about this topic has already been explained here: http://www.adultswim.com/video...