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.
Guys, VR sex is going to work a LOT better than sexbots. It’ll be easier to implement fantasies that go beyond “hot lady, have sex” (including things that are physically impossible in the real world) and it’ll be cheaper to have multiple virtual partners than it would to buy multiple sexbots.
Also what makes you think women wouldn’t use this technology? Like people wouldn’t implement a “fuck Tom Hiddleston” option.
Or, for that matter, a “fuck Scarlett Johansen” option.
Women are already “expendable,” the same way green-eyed people are. I’m sure life would go on without green-eyed people. …So what?
(Okay, there probably aren’t enough non-women able and willing to bear children to keep the species going, so maybe life wouldn’t go on, but I like to think that isn’t the only reason to keep 3 billion people around.)
I don’t go screaming at every green-eyer I meet that I DON’T NEED YOU!!!! because their existence isn’t really about whether I need them.
Ozymandias–simple use of an ‘and’ between your posts renders them perfect.
FYI.
The MRAs would like to remind you at this time that they are appalled you could think they’re violent, and that they are not a hate group.
I was trying to find the official NOW statement opposing lady robots — no luck! But look who dominates the top search results for my query!
No, as a woman and a feminist, I have no problem with misogynists of the world perfecting sexbots and/or VR and staying the hell away from actual women.
And once again, MRAs (since you don’t get it yet), it isn’t a punishment for you to not want to have sex with us or even be around us. It’s a fucking relief actually.
I can’t figure out why these guys keep seeming to have problems getting or keeping custody and visitation rights…
>>>it’ll be cheaper to have multiple virtual partners than it would to buy multiple sexbots.
That’s not a guarantee, considering the ‘software as service, not commodity’ is gaining a lot of traction these days. It may end up that all the VR sex is controlled by closed monopolies, especially anything that uses ‘celebrity images’ (porn stars). Of course I expect a thriving hacker/pirate underground…
I mean, think of Diablo 3 as the future model for entertainment software. I don’t think there’s private servers for it yet, so at least for a while there’s an exclusivity here. Now if the company thinks they can charge you extra for multiple VR partners, there’s precedents that they might just be able to do it.
Well I for one, welcome our sexy robot lady overlords…err..ladies…and humbly request some sexy mandroids for us hags over 25.
No David 8’s though…dude cant seem to stop touching things he’s not supposed to
Oh no Cliff! I have green eyes! You mean YOU DON’T NEED ME? *cry*
Methinks these guys haven’t read or watched enough sci-fi.
It would certainly be a delicious irony when their sexbot overcomes its basic programming and says no.
I have a question! Why are there men who spend time with women even though they don’t want to fuck them? Surely they will KEEP spending time with them even if they have sexy robot ladies to service them sexually?
@carswell
“I said take your shirt off!”
“I can’t do that, Dave.”
Well if we’re going to destroy ourselves by accidentally creating AI that then turns on us, sexy ladybots seems like a better way to go than your basic robots with miniguns.
My question is where these guys work and shop that they’ve never seen a woman add nonsexual value to the world.
Like, even if women are “replaced” as sex partners (and I guess as mothers too? unclear), women will still be around working and having hobbies and stuff. Do these guys honestly not perceive that or do they just have some elaborate mental justification for why that “doesn’t count”?
When VR sex is invented, the only question will be whether the Avengers come with it standard or whether they will be an expansion pack.
Actually, it takes some real work to avoid noticing how many women worked real hard in the tech world. But the tech world tries real hard to pretend it is now and has always been a boys’ club.
If you pretend hard enough you can ignore any contribution women have made. That’s what MRAs have taught me.
With apologies to Isaac Asimov, I propose the MRMA’s Three Laws of Sexy Robot Ladies:
* A sexy robot lady may not injure male human beings, or, through inaction, allow male human beings to come to harm. Unless those male humans are manginas, family court judges, or white knights. It goes without saying that feminists are fair game.
* A sexy robot lady must obey orders given it by male human beings (with exceptions noted above), except when such orders would conflict with the First Law.
* A sexy robot lady must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Laws.
Robots would make great mothers:
Find the idea of sex robots immoral? Must be a feminist.
Oppose women in combat positions? Must be a feminist.
Disagree with the idea of men as capable parents? Must be a feminist.
Deny the existence of male rape victims? Feminist, of course.
Feminism: reinforcing conservative societal norms since the 19th century.
At least they’re consistent…or something.
I also wonder what they plan to do with holdout men who say “no, actually, I’m going to stay with my wife/girlfriend.”
But I guess I’m the fool for not realizing all men will instantly embrace liberation when they see it.
I assume the sexy robot ladies will come equipped with mangina/family court judge/white knight/feminist-scanning software of some kind. Otherwise, how would the sexy robot lady know which lives to save and which not to?
Robot mothers, pah. Lab monkeys get wire cages with bottles in them, and I don’t hear them complaining to their carpet-covered comfort objects about it!
…Oh. Right.
I dunno, maybe all the women making contributions to the world are… stealing jobs from men… or something?
Or they’re working silly ladyjobs like HR, which, if you are a person who thinks HR is a silly ladyjob, try working in a school system that has (thanks to budget cuts) hundreds of thousands of employees and two HR people.