Return of the Sexy Robot Ladies, Part Two: Electric Boogaloo
Our glorious future
The sexy robot ladies are back! Not so much in real life, where they are still more scary than sexy, but in the fervid imagination of dudes who hate real ladies. Like Eric here, on The Spearhead:
When I first came to the MRM, there was a story in the news about a Japanese robotics engineer who had made a female android. It really wasn’t much more than a fairly realistic-looking doll; although there was quite a bit of discussion at the time for the potential to improve on the design. The main thing was that it’s invention caused a fury from the feminists. Even at that early stage in my MRA days, I could see the reason: for the first time women were looking the very real possibility that they could become expendable.
Well, “expendable” only if you view women as little more than support systems for their vaginas.
Personally, I’m more into foreign girls than virtual sex. But the same principle applies: as long as there are alternatives to feminists, the feminists are expendable. They don’t have the power to convert every woman on the planet; and even if they could they can’t stop men from building robots.
Please, build those robots, and lock yourselves away with them forever, and leave the rest of us alone.
Elsewhere in the same thread on The Spearhead we get some examples of why it’s a problem when Men Who Really Should Be Going Their Own way … don’t. A fellow calling himself Rmaxd apparently suggested that men who feel themselves to have been mistreated by the courts should: “Lynch a judge as you would any traitor or dictator.”
His comment was deleted, and heavily criticized — apparently for not being circumspect enough in his threatening language. After all, our dear friend JeremiahMRA got mostly upvotes on The Spearhead for a similarly threatening remark just the other day. And elsewhere in the very same thread as Rmaxd’s now-deleted comment we find a fellow called freebird suggesting that men who have allegedly suffered because of women should
share this pain with those inflicting it.
cue up “blood on the plow”
Meanwhile, again in the same thread, a commenter called walking in hell brings up the example of Thomas Ball, the MRA who self-immolated on the steps of a Keene, New Hampshire courthouse a year ago in hopes that his dramatic death would inspire other men to (quite literally) burn down police stations and courthouses using Molotov cocktails. (You can read Ball’s manifesto, complete with its call for MRA terrorism though without the specific instructions on how to make effective Molotov cocktails, on A Voice for Men, in its “activism” section; search the page for “burn” to go directly to his advocacy of terrorism.) Walking in hell also thinks family court judges should be “punished” for their alleged “crimes,” by which he means denying some fathers visitation.
[R]esponsibility for such heinous crimes against children can behold an individual to a special kind of punishment.
We see the nervous squirming by judges in the Australia case marked by the judge issuing an apology. We also see nervous squirming in the UK with the evildoers trying to issue fake political gestures to angry people.
The evildoers must smell something besides fire and brimstone. The sooner they get to the fire and brimstone, the better off children and fathers will be.
Apparently this vaguely threatening language was vague enough to pass muster on The Spearhead; this comment got more than a dozen upvotes.
The sooner you fuckers build those sexbots you like to talk about so much, the better for all of us.
Posted on June 20, 2012, in antifeminism, men who should not ever be with women ever, MGTOW, misogyny, MRA, sexy robot ladies, terrorism, threats, vaginas, your time will come. Bookmark the permalink. 503 Comments.
If one of us went to the Spearhead to say “haha you’re all wrong,” I’d call that trolling, because I wouldn’t expect to change their minds- the only objective there is to annoy people. The difference is I can imagine Ruby genuinely thinking we might agree with some of what she says.
so… is this b______n
Huh? No, I’m not going to scam MRAs. For shame! If I wanted to fleece the gullible, I may as well go and be a televangelist, there’s lots more money there.
Hah! Sorry about that! It’s just that your comment came a few comments down from the comment about a Kickstarter for sex robots. And apparently I’m a bad person because I’m the only one who upon reading the comment about the Kickstarter for sex robots, immediately started me stroking my fake goatee and thinking “easy $$$$”
I didn’t think you were going to do it for real.
*Does the I Got A Bonus dance*
Sorry, did I interrupt?
@AlexB: No worries.
Anti-male bias like taking kids away from abusers. The dude specifically stated he hit his daughter, insisting it was something along the lines of ‘only a little bit’.
If you actually read his manifesto, he explicitly states that he’s doing it just to hurt his wife. ‘desperate’ my ass.
With a closed fist.
But ‘only a little bit.’
FFS
He only bloodied his child’s nose a little bit.
The child only cried a little bit.
The child is now scared of him, only a little bit.
AAAARRRRGGGG
It’s probably not well thought-through, but children, especially little children, always seem to me to be more fragile than a china doll and I just don’t get how anyone can think that smacking one around is at all OK.
Rechecking the facts, I see that I have mis-remembered, or conflated this case with another. It was ‘a slap.’
Of course, I am taking the abuser’s word for it here.
He used abuser language, too. Look at how Ball used the passive voice.
He used the passive voice to make it sound like something that just happened, rather than something he did to her. She didn’t get a cut lip. Ball cut her lip. Yet MRA’s continue to lionize him.
Or you know, instead of slapping his little girl, he could have joined in the fun and given her a great big slurp.
“Is it everything you expected?” – David
Well it made me laugh, I suppose that’s.. something? Nothing like a slightly amusing troll on a slow day to lighten the mood.
This is a long-winded response to the troll’s arguments about how dolls are such a slippery slope to necrophilia and lingerie OMG! Offered mostly because it’s hot and I’m avoiding packing.
Under US law you can’t actually ban something on the grounds that it might someday in the future theoretically lead someone to commit a crime. There was a SCOTUS decision about “virtual child porn” (meaning porn created using computer imaging to de-age consenting adult models. Ew.) that touched on this. Child porn is illegal because the creation by default involves sexual assault of minors, so the question came up, if it’s a computer generated image and no child was involved, what does that mean for the law? The argument was put forward that the material could lead pedophiles to escalate from virtual to real, and SCOTUS said possible future events weren’t sufficient for banning something: http://articles.cnn.com/2002-04-16/justice/scotus.virtual.child.porn_1_child-pornography-traffic-and-american-beauty-sexually-explicit-activity?_s=PM:LAW
However SCOTUS also upheld a law making offering or soliciting any child porn illegal: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/20/washington/20scotus.html
(Teaching digital ethics classes has lead me to some strange readings over the years.)
Fallacy is like Anti-Meller. Has a portal to the mirror dimension been opened?
ahahahahahhahahahaaahahhaahahahahahahahahhahahahahahahahahhahahahaaahahahahhahaahahahahahahhahaahhahaha
Hmm… Fallacy do you have a small beard?
Other options include a statistically unlikely colour-inverted palette.
It’s not just Japan, Fallacy dear. You can buy girlfriend pillows (and boyfriend pillows, there’s one with Sebastian from Black Books on it) right here in the US– along with Real Dolls and everything else your perverted little mind desires.
And, you know, I’m cool with it. Your perversion is not my perversion but your perversion’s okay, you know?
Also before you ban RealDolls to prevent necrophilia I really think you need to see about banning lolicon to prevent child pornography and noncon porn to prevent rape, insofar as those are (a) actually logically connected and (b) crimes that actually hurt actual people, as opposed to corpses. Oooh, and ban guro to prevent murder! There are WORLDS and WORLDS of things for you to be outraged about, little troll, sexdolls are only the beginning.
About fifteen years ago my grandmother bought a life-sized man doll to ride in her passenger seat so she wouldn’t look like a vulnerable woman driving alone. Unfortunately she was laughed at so much by those in passing cars that she had to get rid of it. The doll eventually ended up in my mother’s garage, and we used to change his shirt and play with him. It was like having a life sized Ken doll. Unfortunately his pants were sewn on. :(
With your logic:
Dildos will lead way to women wanting to have sex with chopped off male penises..
Vibrators will lead way to women wanted to fuck robots or cars.
People into the school girl uniform fetish will lead to them wanting to fuck children.
Furries will lead to people wanting to fuck animals.
Honestly this all sounds familiar as the “slippery slope” argument which is crap I hope you know.
Also you fail at understanding what kinks/fetishes mean. There isn’t “gateway fetishes” that will lead you to becoming a pedo/zoophiliac/necrophiliac or some other fetish, you either have it or you don’t. Also you can have a fetish and never actually carry it out. For that reason I try not to demonize people for having an unfortunate kinks and who have the morals to never do it. If someone was into fucking dolls because they look like dead bodies and not actually performing necrophilia I honesty would not care if that helped them cope with their unfortunate fetish. That being said I don’t think thats why many of the dude’s use sex dolls, it seems like most of the users have things for dolls rather than corpses.
The emotional attachment seems a bit ridiculous to me but its not more offensive than someone having emotional attachments to items or cars. They don’t particularly offend me nor do I feel any threat by them. If thats how they want to live their life, then I don’t see why I should care since its not going to effect mine in any way.
There was a pretty good TV show here in Sweden recently called “äkta människor” which means “real people” or “real humans”. It’s not really set in the future, rather in a parallell world where technology is pretty much the way it is in reality EXCEPT that they got advanced human-looking robots.
There were a few human/robot couples in the series, and since the robots seemed sentient it sort of prima facie makes sense to have a romantic and sexual relationship with one. But then there’s the REALLY FUCKED UP POWER DYNAMIC when one partner legally OWNS the other one, who’s also programmed to do as you say.
For instance, there was a woman who was really unhappily married. Her husband even slapped her at one point. She had this personal trainer robot whom she started to spend more and more time with, because he’s programmed to be nice and caring. Eventually she ran off from her husband, taking the robot with her. Since she was scared of her husband, she had the robot illegally reprogrammed to act as her bodyguard (although all robots were originally programmed never to harm a human) – and, almost as an after-thought, she also had the robo-hacker install a sex program in the robot so she could sleep with him. Okay, that’s creepy to start with, programming somebody to have sex with you. After being reprogrammed however the robot was acting more autonomosly, took his own initiatives rather than just following orders, and for a while it seemed like they did have a real romantic relationship going on, the woman and her robot. Eventually though, their relationship started to look really abusive, with her as the abuser, even if she didn’t physically hurt the robot. It just came from her being aware that legally, she OWNED him, legally, he was a MACHINE.
Anyway, it was a good show, and apparently it was sold to some American TV channel, so if it airs in the USA you should check it out.
http://www.joblo.com/horror-movies/news/upcoming-swedish-sci-fi-series-real-humans-being-remade-already
Seems from this article it’s rather a remake they’re gonna do.
Let’s get that nasty Poirot man off our tee vee sets and library shelves. He only encourages people to have large dinner parties and then kill the host after he’s announced he has major news.
And that Holmes fellow has an unnatural relationship with street urchins. Imagine, talking to them like they’re decent people!
[/Snob]
“Vibrators will lead way to women wanted to fuck robots or cars.”
Or washing machines. Stop the wanton violation of washing machines today – ban vibrators.
Soon, people who fuck to music are going to get sick of their computer speakers and are going to start having sex in concert halls! Ban all music!
@drst
i don’t really see how sex robots raise first amendment concerns tho?
Aww, Fallacy, that’s kinda cute, thinking I’m going to be all shocked that you own a dildo. Or that I give a fuck that some randomer thinks I’m not kinky enough. I’m going to have the sex I want – that’s kind of the point of sex – and your opinion on it is entirely irrelevant.
Which apparently bothers you.
It’s amazing how quickly Fallacy shifted from “OMG perverts!!! Slippery slope! Think of the children!!!” to “Oh yeah? Well I’m a bigger pervert than you, so there!!”, isn’t it?
Dracula: It’s almost like the important thing is that Fallacy is better than us.
They probably just got bored of the fakey-troll child-level argumentation techniques and reverted to their normal behaviour.
Sharculese – I have no idea if they would. I was responding to the troll’s ridiculous slippery slope argument about why dolls shouldn’t be allowed.
No, no, you don’t understand. Only Fallacy has reached the perfect sexuality, neither perverted nor boring. We must all ask her to enlighten us further.
It’s not my argument that’s on a slippery slope, it’s your moral relativism. It’s hypocritical to believe that it’s perfectly fine if they fuck their doll and fall in love with it and have a relationship with it, and state that they aren’t perverts at all, but they need to keep that shit out of your face because you don’t want to see him kissing him out with his doll in public or doing sexual things with it in public such as kissing. Why exactly isn’t he allowed to take his doll out and kiss it in public? Oh that’s right, because others would then see his perversion and we can’t have that, because we need to deny he’s a pervert at all costs, because it makes us feel all morally superior not to judge anyone in our politicallly correct world of hypocrisy.
WTF? Who cares? I’ve seen worse things in public than someone kissing a sex doll.
I totally judge people. For instance, I’m judging you HARD right now.
I’m a little too tired to play “follow the dancing goalposts” today, Fallacy. How’s about you help us out. What are you against?
1. “Perverts” (aka people having not your favourite kind of sex)?
2. People who aren’t perverted enough, and should therefore get over themselves?
3. People who have sex with dolls, because they’re going to fuck corpses later?
4. Naw, actually people who fuck dolls are actually cool, but not if they’re emotionally attached to them, because eww weird gross?
5. Actually being emotionally attached to dolls is okay, but it’s not okay if teh childrennz see?
I’m totally down with judgement. It’s a hobby.
But no, I don’t judge people for having a sex life that makes everyone involved happy, even if that involves kissing sex dolls or roleplaying that the doll is alive.
You shouldn’t take the doll outside because that’s nonconsensually involving *other people* in your sex life, people who might prefer not to be involved. I mean, it shouldn’t be illegal or anything, but it is certainly impolite.
Here’s a really shocking idea (feel free to sit down, wouldn’t want you to fall and hurt yourself). It’s quite possible to judge someone for doing something in the sense that you look at them and think “wow, you look kind of ridiculous doing that” and at the same time be entirely in favor of said person being allowed to do whatever ridiculous thing it is that they wish to do, as long as it’s not illegal or unethical. Do I think people look kind of idiotic making out with sex dolls? Yep. Does that mean that we should ban sex dolls, or arrest people who take them out in public? Nope. People are free to take their Real Doll to the movies with them if they wish (as long as they buy it a ticket, so the theater doesn’t lose money on the seat), and everyone else is free to think that they look like fools when doing so.
“You shouldn’t take the doll outside because that’s nonconsensually involving *other people* in your sex life, people who might prefer not to be involved. I mean, it shouldn’t be illegal or anything, but it is certainly impolite.”
well then I guess it’s impolite for you to be getting your straight vanilla kissing on in public then too. Why are so insensitive to the sex doll fuckers preferences? That’s not normal for him and he thinks you are perverted. Can’t you get that normal but abnormal to him shit in your own house?
People who defend abnormal behaviour have no recourse to complain when the people who engage in that abnormal behaviour want to bring it out of the house and onto the streets. Hey, why shouldn’t they when after all youv’e all just told them they aren’t perverts and you’re cool with what they do.
However as soon as the fuck doll is on a “date” out of the house, I’m sure you’ll have a problem with it. Just like I’m sure most people with having a problem with women walking the streets with their dildoes in their hands. And considering the pervert is going to want to kiss his fuck doll at some point while out in public, because that’s like totally normal after all, because you told him so, women are also going to want to start masturbating themselves with their dildoes, also on the bus or at the library, supermarket queue, wherever children are. And you’d better be OK with that too otherwise you’re are of course, a misoygnist.
@fah lo suee
Them gays might want to kiss and fuck outside if we allow them to have relationships!!
Think of the children!
Ohhh, I know why Fallacy thinks my sex is tame. It’s because they though the examples in my question were meant as actual examples of my sex, rather than amusingly un-kinky practices meant to establish just how vanilla they might want me to be.
Hint: That was sarcasm. The actual kinky sex is documented at my own blog, not in the comments of manboobz, because that would be rude.
Fallacy says he isn’t religous buts wants to admonish us us for moral relativism?
Oh wait, he just wants to argue…
Since Ozy is neither straight, nor vanilla, I’ll field this by saying yes, I think kissing your doll in public is just as impolite as kissing a human in public. So if you want to give your doll a peck in public, go on with your bad self. If you wanna make out with your doll in public, I may or may not be squicked out by it, or feel awkward, just like with human couples.
Absolutely. The way to deal with that is to keep your opinion to yourself if that behaviour bugs you. Of course an alternate route is to ride in on your high horse and decide that the streets need to be squick-free for you, but you know, your gonna need another avenue to express that.
Either kissing must be forbidden, or random masturbation must be fine. Because people can’t handle complex rules like “A is okay and B is not”.
So in other words you’d personally love to see the perverts out in public on dates with their fuck dolls. I’m gonna have to ascribe a completely selfish motivation to your support for this kind of behaviour. It would make people watching oh so much entertaining, wouldn’t it?
Of course in reality you would have a massive problem with it as soon as the doll takes up the last seat at the theatre or on public transport (and he did have to buy her a ticket!!). You’d be having an argument, telling him to put it on the floor or the aisle. When he explains to you that it’s his wife and what you are suggesting is highly offensive and “inhumane” I would love to be seating nearby watchng this play out. There is a reason children prefer to play with dolls more than adults. Because adults are supposed to grow the fuck up.
I don’t care about his sexual kinks, or yours for the matter. I do care about idiots who are constantly trying to redefine what normality and abnormality really is. 1 +1 = 2 not fucking 5.
A man fucking a doll and thinking it’s real is not normal and anyone who encourages someone to continue in this kind of thinking or behaviour isn’t doing them any favours, even if you think you are, because you are being policitically correct and indiscriminatory.
This is why you see cis hetero people just out there having sex on the pavement all the time. Because they’re not perverts, so it’s okay.
seriously, why are we letting brandon rant and rave about how much he hates sex robots
I really don’t think I’ve ever seen anyone get so wound up about a DOLL.
And of course the world must be only black and white eh Fallacy. Otherwise, how would you feel so superior to the rest of us perverts?
@fah lo suee/brandon
you really need to calm the fuck down. you realize sex robots aren’t even real, right?
Far too many people think they can solve mental illness by simplying saying it doesn’t exist, which just adds unnecessary confusion to issues.
Oh Christ! Is it Brandon?
Seriously, this guy needs to get a new hobby.
(looks in DSM)
Man, I don’t see ANYTHING about doll-fucking in here at all.
@drst
i’m confused then, why were you bringing up pornography cases?
personally, i can’t see any reason why congress couldn’t ban sex robots, but i could be wrong, so im just trying to figure out where youre making the connection
In case my position isn’t clear enough yet for you seriously dumb asshats, I have an issue with people who redefine reality, saying what is not real, is. Which they do because they either (a) can’t accept reality or (b) can’t cope with it. You lost all have problem (a); sex doll fuckers have problem (b).
You do them no favours to be supporting their maladaptive strategy for connection and intimacy with others. You may think it’s OK for him to just hide himself away with his doll in the house, where it doesn’t bother others, I don’t. I think he has a real problem that actually needs to be acknowledged as such.
People with mental illness being allowed out in publc leads to masturbation in supermarkets.
How’s that slope doing, Fallacy?
Um dude…no one here has ever said that mental illnesses don’t exist.
People might want sex dolls or robots for a variety of reasons, many of them quite normal and healthy. Some people might want sex dolls because maybe they have difficulty dating, are shy, or want a very rare type of personality that’s hard to find (I’m thinking Meller here). And you know what? If they are happier and their needs as human beings are at least being marginally met then so be it. Its not harming anyone, not even children, who likely see and here a good deal more than the most cautious and conservative parents would wish
@pillowinhell
truth is in the middle, crushing solipsism, ‘my sex is so out there i even own a dildo’
i’m assuming it’s brandon until someone tells me he isnt
Wait, surely you aren’t saying that all “sex doll fuckers” (as you so tersely phrase it) believe their sex doll is alive, right? Cause that would be…
*puts on sunglasses*
A fallacy.
*YEAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHH*
Sharculese, it’s not Brandon, he’d have spelled his sock PHALL US EE.
Redefining your position to make it sound reasonable doesn’t work so well when we can just scroll up and see how you think that perverts are capable of anything, and that you’re a bigger pervert than me, and your definition of normal is the only one that won’t lead to masturbation in supermarkets.
says the dude whose getting his screamy scream scream on about imaginary future shit
cool story, brah. y’know who i think has a problem? people who make weird angry lists about proper and improper ways to get off.
But if it is him, he’s the last person who should be takling shit about sex dolls. Ashley, anyone?
I’m tired of debating morons. When you all figure out the differences between reality v’s non reality and mental health vs mental illness maybe I’ll come back. Until then, try and keep this oh my gosh novel consideration in mind: just because you label or define something as normal, doesn’t mean it is.
BYE, please stick the flounce!
that sounds like a healthy idea. maybe scream into a pillow or something until you work this rage out?
but just because YOU label something abnormal, it is, and anyone who disagrees is a STUPID REALITY IGNORING DOUBLE INGORAMUS FUCKHEAD
you are totally someone i will take seriously in the future
When the hell did sexbots being taken out on dates become a huge issue?
Trust me, there are plenty of other kinks that have been around much longer and you hardly see in public.