>
 |
| Roxxxy puts the moves on some dude. |
In a recent post, we learned that flesh-and-blood women only have about ten years left before they are made obsolete by sexy lady robots. Just so you ladies know what you’re up against, here are some videos showing what state-of-the art sexy lady robots can do already. As you can see, Roxxxy here, a sexbot from True Companion LLC, can turn her head like Linda Blair in the Exorcist and mechanically banter with non-robot men using a variety of canned phrases that sound a lot like what a perpetually dateless non-robot man might imagine a sexy lady would say if ever one deigned to speak to him. And, as you can see in the second video, she can wiggle seductively. So you non-robotic gals better step up your game, and fast, if you want to survive the sexbotapocalypse.
—
If you enjoyed this post, would you kindly* use the “Share This” or one of the other buttons below to share it on Twitter, Facebook, Reddit, or wherever else you want. I appreciate it.
*Yes, that was a Bioshock reference.
>Wow, that is so life like. I do not know how us women will compete.Does it also spew pea soup barf?
>What are sex-starved dweebs going to do, though, when the sexbots emasculate them by beating them at Jeopardy?http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/01/14/ibm_watson_jeopardy_dry_run/
>So you non-robotic gals better step up your game, and fast, if you want to survive the sexbotapocalypse.If that truly WAS every man's idea of what a true companion should be, rather than stepping up my game, I'd prefer NOT to survive the sexbotapocalypse.
>The user reviews are very positive.
>Roxxxy looks like a tranny.
>I don't even want to click on those videos.
>I see this as a way for men who either can't attract a woman or is choosing to stay away from women to satisfy their physical needs without the use of prostitution. I would think feminists would love this. It basically is the equivilant of a giant vibrator, and I know most feminists feel such equiptment empowers women so they do not need a man. Is it bad for men to have the same thing?
>It basically is the equivilant of a giant vibratorIt's different from a vibrator in two ways:1. the robot itself is really creepy.2. the fact that it's being sold as a companion (something you can have a relationship with) is really creepy.
>Remember when Real Dolls were announced and we all thought that was kind of creepy? And how now we know better? Actually it's all kind of creepy, and if Biscuit Queen has any problems with that, she should know that plenty of commenters at feminist-themed blogs will rain the same kind of judgment down upon women who buy those realistic looking baby dolls. The baby dolls are probably a better comparison to this than vibrators, since most women don't project their need for companionship on their vibrators. Mine doesn't even have a name:)
>Here is a thought for the men thinking about going to get one of these lovelies…what if it malfunctions during sex?
>"I would think feminists would love this."I do actually. I find it hilarious.
>Hey, it'll help cut back on human trafficking, right? Should make booboonation happy.
>There is documentary on Youtube about guys that have Realdolls :http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jNFUCF3qBAohttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7_nreFIczU0http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PxQsvWXdh8Mhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SS_VQrVLmTs
>Dr. Deeze, hey these guys aren't the kind of guys exploiting people on the whole. (…right…?)Different market… please tell me it's a different market…That would be great though if fembots could replace the exploited women and children. That would be wonderful. And don't think they wouldn't make little girl and boy bots and baby bots for these MEN if this were the case. It's amazing how many men like to rape children. It's pretty astounding. Now I'm sad again.
>Dr. Deezee: I don't think these sexbots will really cut down on human trafficking; dolls/sexbots are costly; you can rent a human body for much less cash.Also, sadly enough, there are some men who enjoy causing pain and humiliation to women or children during sexual acts. Sexbots would not satisfy these men.
>I can't handle this at all. Is there a widget that could filter out the robogina posts for me?
>Comparing it to those baby dolls is a very good comparision. I do remember reading posts on mra boards mocking the childless women that buy them, Hopefully the mra responding to this blog will see the comparision, and understand that what is good for the goose is good for the gander.I have no problem with these "perfect companions" because I do understand that they will be used by a small subset of men who have no choice in the matter because of poor social skills. But much like the real baby dolls the reality is normal people have a hard time not making fun of people like that! Interesting though that they are compared to vibrators, this is not a comparison. Vibrators can be compared to pocket pussies, when viabrators start talking back and are sold as companions then you can compare. I do wonder though being that mra like to say that feminists are lonely and can't get a man, why a male version hasn't been put out?
>@ magdelyn"Tranny" is a really awful slur, and there is nothing inherently grotesque or wrong with transgender individuals, transsexuals, intersex peoples, or genderqueer individuals. Don't drag a whole group of people–who have nothing to do with this issue–through the mud.http://thegenderblenderblog.wordpress.com/2009/04/01/tranny-is-a-form-of-hate-speech/
>I just looked at your profile, and it looks as though you self-identify that way. I apologise for being abrupt–obviously it is fine if you self-identify as a tranny, but a lot of people are really hurt and marginalised by that word if it is not the one they choose for themselves. Also, the media tend to use that word as a slur–a way of diminishing trans/z peoples' lives and experiences. I get that it can be reclaimed, the way of 'queer' and 'faggot,' but it still burns the eyes a little.http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20091220003950AABM7Ik
>I think only a very small minority of the whole male population of the whole world would be interested in getting one of these things. I am not sure if David is sort of making this as a MRA thing or just attempting to bash and intimidate men in general as that's the typical feminist way.
>Or it could be that David knows that it's getting tiring to show random comments from random people in mra sites that are mostly just shock jocks (mostly not serious people who are serious about men's rights) looking for offensive humour anyway. So he has resorted to this piece
>@switchintoglideSorry switch. Don't mean to offend. Just trying to be funny. I know it is a slur to many, although I personally don't mind if someone calls me a tranny.
>nick, this post is a followup to one in which I quoted a guy who is convinced sexbots will make women obsolete, a position that is 1) ludicrous, 2) insulting to women and 3)but so ludicrous that it's really not actually insulting to women, but a reason to mock the guy putting forth that argument. And as some people have pointed out, the (creepy) guys behind this sexbot envision her not just as a sex toy but as a "companion." Which is, again, a bit creepy. As for the MRA connection, there are a number of MRA/MGTOW folks who really do believe that technology (like this) will make women obsolete and/or destroy feminism. They are a minority, but they're out there, and a version of this argument was made in The Misandry Bubble, a stupid but very influential and widely cited MRA/MGTOW manifesto. So I'm not making up an MRA connection. It's there, and was there long before I even thought of this blog.
>I want a fembot. There was a tranz girl who wanted to hypnotize me into become a human fembot. I will go see if I can find the emails. They were pretty hilarious.
>Here is one of the emails this girlio sent me. She called herself PlasticDoll. She was tranz, and very cute. 8/24/09: "…that pic of you on the street corner. It would be unfortunate if I mesmerized you while walking past have you follow me only to become my robot…"