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.
So much for sticking that flounce, Fallacy. Don’t you have anything better to do than troll us?
And we’re not all Gen Y morons, some of us are a bit older.
1. “Normal” isn’t a thing that matters. “Abnormal” does not imply wrong or dangerous.
2. And if it did… masturbation is pretty goddamn normal.
“Whouldn’t want to offend anyone, oh nooooooooooooooo, not even if it means encouraging the person to do thinks that place their lives at risk.”
Still ignoring that this is the exact same “logic” that was used to call GLBT people mentally ill. Perhaps you simply missed where I had said this?
“You really sound a lot like the people who thinks GLB people should not engage in any public displays of affection, and trans* people should not try to pass if they can’t pass well, for their own safety.”
Dvärghundspossen —
1) The sunlight thing, that one was universal until twilight.
2) That’s why I like white wolf so much, they basically go with “they’re different types of vampires and humans are too stupidly afraid to know that” (eg only some vampires can turn into bats, it’s a clan trait, etc) — but they’re doing RPG were complex rules are the norm.
I see that Fail-o-see has just claimed to be a psychiatrist, not merely a counselor, so add another 68 years,or so, to the estimated claim of age (med-school, residency, specialisation, certification).
Which calls his credentials into question. Psychiatrists don’t call themselves counselors.
So I smell a whiff of falsehood? I DO! I DO!
Argenti: Who the fuck said I was 20? I wish (no I don’t, I like being able to buy my own booze on the rare occasions I drink) I am young enough to have been taught IV, not III though, admittedly III is more into shaming people for their fetishes.
IV isn’t all that recent, and anyone who is still using III, is a doucebag. But I’m an older-fart, and I still think this idiot is an idiot.
Pecunium — I didn’t mean still using III, I meant trained on III, because it is way more “fetishes are not normal and are thus BAD!!!” whereas IV is explicit about fetishes being not of clinical interest if they’re not causing distress. IV dates to 1994, so anyone teaching/practicing for 16 years would basically have to have been about to graduate when it was published.
Though yeah, I have serious doubts it isn’t all a load of crap (with Pell written all over it).
Argenti: You will not enjoy the gobsmacking wonderment that is Brandon… his ass is banned (and the rest can’t come along without the ass).
He’s never shown any propensity for sockpuppetry; internal evidence shows that he’s not averse to getting a tag-team partner, but his narcissism is such that to hide his light (however dim it may be) under a bushel isn’t a thrill.
He wants the glory of putting us in our place to be in his own name. He’s tried to carry the candle to other places (where we chewed him up, and spit him out) but his dickishness quickly outs him, and most places have not our patience.
So he’s quickly relegated to laughing stock, and then gone.
1) The sunlight thing, that one was universal until twilight.
Unless, of course, one reads Stoker, who has Dracula walking around at mid-day, weakened, and not in complete control of his other powers. Saberhagen used that in his Dracula novels (The Dracula Tapes, The Holmes Dracula File, An Old Friend of the Family, and some more. Merlin was probably the point it jumped the shark).
If it is Pell, Pell has learned a lot.
“Unless, of course, one reads Stoker…”
Argh, why do I keep forgetting that?! You’re right, and I’m dense apparently.
As far as I’m aware, the first incidence of sunlight killing vampires was in the film Nosferatu, which was itself an unauthorized Dracula adaptation. It’s really good movie, by the way. Max Shreck is brilliant.
I went to a screening of it once with a live band performing the score. It was awesome.
Hm, I’ve got a couple pre-Dracula stories on my computer from when a took a vampire class years ago (and a full HD because I delete nothing >.<) — it looks like I was classifying "harmed by sunlight" and "usually/only awake at night" as the same thing. D'oh!
I’ll just remind everyone that Fallacy’s comment that prompted this shitstorm was as follows:
Why a mental health professional would be using a word like “insane”, a legal term with no clinical utility whatsoever, a word that she would know is used against her clients by others in order to dismiss anything they do or believe as irrational; I don’t know. Why she would, herself, use it to deliberately dismiss and belittle a group of people (who are not even mentally ill) as irrational, I don’t know. Why she would call individuals she has decided are mentally ill, and who she is therefore supposedly committed to helping, “freaks”; I do not know.
I have no idea if you’re a real mental health professional (Psychologist? Psychiatrist? Do you understand the difference?) but if you are, goddamn are you a bad one.
Maybe it’s because I’ve never heard it with a good score, but I didn’t think Nosferatu was that exceptional. Character design, yes, but all the day-for-night really undermines the scariness (especially compared to the use of light in something like Caligari), and Dracula is so much better plotted.
Yeah, I think it was mostly the live scoring and Shreck’s performance that sold it for me.
Speaking of, Shadow of the Vampire. See it you haven’t. That is all.
@viscaria
on the one hand, you make a good point
on the other hand, is it any more implausible than a mental health professional where he angrily denounces women for the crime of existing and writes/endorses breathless conspiracy posts about endemic anti-male prejudice at every level of society?
Yeah, you’re right: some people just really, truly suck at their jobs, and that might be the only thing going on here.
One version of the vampire I find particularly fascinating is that is of the incorporeal spirit that’s attached to a specific person, which leaves their body at night in order to feed. And continues doing so from the grave. That happens more often in the earlier stories and legends.
I’ve got this great collection of pulp vampire stories from Weird Tales magazine I got at the library book sale a couple years back. I may have to give it another read soon.
My money’s still on lying troll, but you have a point.
*mental health professional starting a site where
“Yeah, you’re right: some people just really, truly suck at their jobs, and that might be the only thing going on here.”
Eh, maybe? I’ve never heard a psychiatrist call zirself a counselor, but could happen I guess. It isn’t even just the wording though — drug-psychs have no interest (or training) in being talk-psychs — there is no “tell the client they’re causing the their own misery” there’s just “so, an anti-depressant for that?”
My deepest apologies, Fallacy, for tearing away your tiny veil of “I’m not saying it’s OKAY, I’m just saying it’s a thing that happens and instead of stopping people from beating up dollfuckers we should stop dollfuckers from existing.”
http://pervocracy.blogspot.com/2012/06/missing-stair.html
Fallacy, do you do a lot of work with sex doll addicts?
Also, your clients problem isn’t that they use sex dolls, its that they have problems forming or maintaining relationships which has led to depression and anxiety. Or it could be that they had depression or anxiety and that lead to relationship difficulties.
There are all kinds of things people consider gross or abnormal about sex, even the mainstream stuff. Using sex dolls is a bit unusual, so finding someone as a partner who is okay with that might be a bit difficult, but not impossible.
I hope zirs private judgements aren’t leaking into the counselling.
Wondering what you think of my being asexual there Fallacy.
As a male feminist member of the ASFR community, people like this are a disgrace. (As a side note, when robots become self-aware and decide not to put up with these guys’ crap, that will be a double dose of irony)
I find it interesting to see these very privileged and entitlement-complexed guys go on about replacing relationships with actual flesh-and-blood women with female-looking robots/sex dolls, and then those who actually do go through with this actually LOSE privilege and status and suddenly have a ton of stuff in common with those who could get murdered for walking down the street dressed as the opposite sex or those who walk hand in hand with a same-sex partner. Isn’t it amazing how easily the cult of Ultimate Masculinity-Based Power crumbles, and how easily you can go from “Golden God” to “non-person who can be killed because it squicks those entitled types right the fuck out”?
I think that’s really what a lot of us are fighting- the idea that all you have to do to lose your right to be treated decently as a person and not fear for your life or your safety is to simply step slightly out of line with the Status Quo.
And lord knows, I’m so far left of the Status Quo that I can’t even see it from where I’m standing.
@Argenti: “It isn’t even just the wording though — drug-psychs have no interest (or training) in being talk-psychs — there is no “tell the client they’re causing the their own misery” there’s just “so, an anti-depressant for that?””
You can’t draw that sharp a line between “talk-oriented” and “drug-oriented”. When I first came in touch with psychiatry (I have a psychosis disorder with a few schizophrenia-symptoms, but not enough to actually be called schizophrenic, and sometimes I’ve also suffered abnormal mood swings) I had a psychologist to talk to and a psychiatrist to prescribe drugs. But for the last years I’ve only had a psychiatrist, and although I didn’t actually go to psychotherapy we did a lot of pure talking about my problems as well. Some psychiatrist are trained in doing psychoteraphy, but presumably they’re still gonna prescribe drugs as well.
Still, I agree that F doesn’t sound like a health professional either way.
@Argenti: Vampires didn’t burn in sunlight until MOVIES. It started with the Nosferatu movie, where they thought it would be a cool-looking demise for the vampire to burn up.
(A colleague said it must be due to the thinner ozone layer we have these days. *lol*)
After that, yeah, all vampires seem to have a problem with sunlight, but it ranges from “need sunglasses and sunblock”, “need to stay out of DIRECT sunlight”, to “can’t possibly have even a bit of sunlight reflecting on me from other surfaces so need to lie in a coffin or buried in the ground during daytime” (but moonlight is still fine, despite moonlight being reflected sunlight as well). And then came Twilight and they sparkled.
I think Twilight completely sucks, but I don’t think the sparkle-thing is problematic in itself.