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.
@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.
But if you define something as normal, then it must be.
Right.
I’ll get to work on trying to believe that. Right after I finish making a belt for my alter ego in an imaginary universe – which, in my life, is a perfectly normal thing to be doing at two in the morning.
(actually, that’s not strictly true. I’m going to take a bath.)
I think I’ve missed someone here… Why was fallacy saying that pretending a sex toy designed to look human as if it were human was on the same level as random masturbation in public? I think I missed that brilliant step in logic…
kirbywarp: I have no idea what the logic was. What we got on the page jumped straight from one to the other.
Because… that makes sense?
Thank you Sharculese, you,ve just saved me some typing.
Consider this Fallacy: shaming and humilliating people who rely heavily on dolls to meet their need for human intimacy is not going to help them. Instead, you’re forcing them into a cupboard with their dolls and denying them the opportunity to reach out to other human beings and create intimacy.
I don’t see what’s so damn important about normality anyway. Do what makes you happy; it really doesn’t matter if you’re within a standard deviation of the norm or not.
Admittedly I’m not familiar with people who date dolls, but for most of them isn’t it a form of roleplaying, pretending to have a relationship? I don’t see where that’s wrong or harmful, any more than any other excessively complicated form of roleplaying.
Also, Fallacy, I’m queer and kinky, I’m not sure why you think I’d respond to a person with a sexdoll in public with anything other than mild curiosity, and I am totally an adult who plays with dolls. Sometimes even in public.
@viola:
I guess it makes sense once you consider that all people who have sex dolls are PERVERTS, and PERVERTS will do anything and everything rude and sexual in public. Just like WHORES will have sex with anything and everything.
It’s all so much simpler once you’ve dehumanized them.
Perhaps Fallacy has trouble understanding that using sex toys and a tendancy towards exhibitionism are two totally unrelated things?
Also, about dolls in my earlier comment, it only works if the person with the dolls actually wants human intimacy. If that’s not what they want, then by all means they should be left to their dolls. Forcing people to be intimate with others is a rather disgusting thought.
Sharculese, it’s not Brandon, he’d have spelled his sock PHALL US EE.
True. Also Brandon would have regaled us far longer about the details of his sex life and how awesome it is.
I wonder if Fallacy has a problem with sex toys in general. In a way, the dolls are better because there’s and entire body as opposed to dismembered and/or highly stylized body parts.
Its people like you who oppress those who are different or “abnormal” who make me sick. You know who else is considered abnormal by society? Disabled people, poc, queer people, people who don’t conform to their gender role, and so much more. I am sorry but “society doesn’t thinks its acceptable therefore you are wrong” is no excuse.
All I can say is that the eyes and particularly the hands on that doll really squick me.
Bless the internet. Without it, I may be one of those ignorant shmucks that thinks that I know myself better than some dude who read something I said and decided not to believe it!!
Also, conflating abnormal with mental illness is not politically incorrect intelligence, it’s just ignorant raging assholery
I picture Fah Lo Suee wearing a Batman costume and invading Adult XXX shops while screaming “I AM THE HERO NORMALCY DESERVES!”…before getting swiftly kicked out.
Just me?
Why are you so concerned about others mental states? If they are happy that way why make them change? The abnormal does not always need to be changed. I also have the radical idea that if someone is mentally ill and okay with that (and their life is not at risk) then they should be allowed to remain at that state.
I myself have a pretty abnormal life I suppose. I am not very social and don’t like to go outside very much but I am content this way. I don’t see why I or other abnormal people should have to radically change who I am because some moral guardians might be offended.
Oh, wait, shouldn’t that be, “I AM THE HERO PERVERTS DESERVE!!!”? And wouldn’t Fah Lo Suee be waving a dildo around as a weapon.