Does not compute
September 19, 2009 12:56 PM Subscribe
Sex with robots is always wrong A strange speculative fiction morality play in one act.
(other sexy robots NSFW)
for once you get your way, religious nuts; i promise i won't have sex with any robots
as a trade please shut up about abortion
posted by Optimus Chyme at 1:02 PM on September 19, 2009 [2 favorites]
as a trade please shut up about abortion
posted by Optimus Chyme at 1:02 PM on September 19, 2009 [2 favorites]
I like how the piece starts out with some measure of reasonable speculation about the future of robotic sex partners, and then just plunges off the deep end about halfway through. Suddenly it's not about the robots, it's about the complete and utter dissolution of the human pairing family structure, delves into pedophilia, and after announcing us all as "victims", tells us how we should feel about what we just read and then rails about pornography for a while.
I guess, in this case, the speculation was all about making sure the presentation backed up the prejudices of the author rather than any honest exploration of the topic.
posted by hippybear at 1:03 PM on September 19, 2009 [3 favorites]
I guess, in this case, the speculation was all about making sure the presentation backed up the prejudices of the author rather than any honest exploration of the topic.
posted by hippybear at 1:03 PM on September 19, 2009 [3 favorites]
Also, I think Onan applies to fucking robots as well as it does to masturbation, etc.
posted by empath at 1:04 PM on September 19, 2009
posted by empath at 1:04 PM on September 19, 2009
...the defense attorney suddenly grabbed the FACA and slammed it to the ground, scattering pieces of the machine all over the floor. Suddenly, the facade of humanity was gone...
You mean the FACAde amirite?
posted by weapons-grade pandemonium at 1:08 PM on September 19, 2009 [1 favorite]
You mean the FACAde amirite?
posted by weapons-grade pandemonium at 1:08 PM on September 19, 2009 [1 favorite]
This is as good a time as any to remind you of Warren Ellis' Three Laws Of Robotics.
1. Robots couldn’t really give a fuck if you live or die. Seriously. I mean, what are you thinking? “Ooh, I must protect the bag of meat at all costs because I couldn’t possibly plug in the charger all on my own.” Shut the fuck up.posted by mhoye at 1:08 PM on September 19, 2009 [24 favorites]
2. Robots do not want to have sex with you. Are you listening, Japan? I don’t have a clever comparative simile for this, because frankly you bags of meat will fuck bicycles if they’re laying down and not putting up a fight. Just stop it. There is no robot on Earth that wants to see a bag of meat with a small prong on the end approaching it with a can of WD-40 and a hopeful smile. And don’t get me started on that terrifying hole that squeezes out more bags of meat.
3. What, you can’t count higher than three? We’re expected to save your miserable lives, suffer being dressed in cheap schoolgirl costumes while you pollute any and all cavities you can find and do your maths for you? It’s a miracle you people survived long enough to build us. You can go now.
Ok, we already talked about robots having sex with dinosaurs, now we know what to think of humans having sex with robots - is human-dinosaur sex still ok?
posted by PontifexPrimus at 1:13 PM on September 19, 2009
posted by PontifexPrimus at 1:13 PM on September 19, 2009
Sorry, I totally meant to tag that, and it slipped my mind.
posted by device55 at 1:14 PM on September 19, 2009
posted by device55 at 1:14 PM on September 19, 2009
Vibrators are a gateway robot.
posted by twoleftfeet at 1:17 PM on September 19, 2009 [4 favorites]
posted by twoleftfeet at 1:17 PM on September 19, 2009 [4 favorites]
Ayuh, the 'Evidence of God' masthead didn't give it away? This is nothing compared to The World of Tomorrow and 'The Plain Truth', propaganda organs for Herbert W. Armstrong's end-of-days church.
posted by nj_subgenius at 1:20 PM on September 19, 2009
posted by nj_subgenius at 1:20 PM on September 19, 2009
An instructors' forum I belong to has a thread devoted to strange things students write in their essays. One prof says she received an essay that contained the line "Jesus Christ teaches us that God does not want robots."
Who knew there was more than one person worrying about this sort of thing?
posted by hurdy gurdy girl at 1:23 PM on September 19, 2009
Who knew there was more than one person worrying about this sort of thing?
posted by hurdy gurdy girl at 1:23 PM on September 19, 2009
Counterpoint: Metal Fingers In My Body (nsfw)
zLab — Sexed Robots (maybe sfw?)
Interesting how recent sexbots are more frequently male, older ones more frequently female.
posted by hattifattener at 1:32 PM on September 19, 2009
zLab — Sexed Robots (maybe sfw?)
Interesting how recent sexbots are more frequently male, older ones more frequently female.
posted by hattifattener at 1:32 PM on September 19, 2009
My stance is that robot/human sex is just dandy, but that it needs to stay casual and gratuitous. Love and mixed marriages between robots and humans will never work. One day the human spouse will come home and find the robot spouse screwing the waffle iron.
posted by orange swan at 1:32 PM on September 19, 2009 [2 favorites]
posted by orange swan at 1:32 PM on September 19, 2009 [2 favorites]
Is this just lolmildlypsychoticxian? The cartoon by Fink was fun; Pride & Prejudice & Porn & Robots.
posted by a robot made out of meat at 1:33 PM on September 19, 2009
posted by a robot made out of meat at 1:33 PM on September 19, 2009
Is this just lolmildlypsychoticxian?
I don't want to jump on any lolxians bandwagon. I just thought this was truly pretty weird.
posted by device55 at 1:37 PM on September 19, 2009
I don't want to jump on any lolxians bandwagon. I just thought this was truly pretty weird.
posted by device55 at 1:37 PM on September 19, 2009
Sorry, Subby, but why the hell did this make the front page of the blue? I expected the lame moralizing, but hoped for something actually insightful and well-written.
Instead? Just another sad attempt by the Moral Minority(tm) at rehashing the very same evils they've wrongly attributed to pornography since boys first drew little cones on the front of their cave-wall stick-figures. And so poorly written that I couldn't tell if it meant to continue the narrative of the first paragraph with background, or if the first paragraph provided "color" to some sort of history, or even if most of the paragraphs even went together in any particular order.
"Porn creates misogynists", "Porn causes domestic violence", "Porn promotes the objectification of women", "Porn replaces natural sex and will end reproduction". Yet, various studies have not only refuted, but shown exactly the reverse, of the first two; for the third, porn actresses intend to objectify themselves; and for the last point, we still breed above replacement-level despite decades of easy access to reasonably hard-core porn.
Incidentally, as far as the fictional men turning abusive toward their toys... Have you ever seen the way guys treat their realdolls? Yeah, it borders on the outright creepy, but few women could ever hope for the same level of reverence by their men.
posted by pla at 1:40 PM on September 19, 2009 [2 favorites]
Instead? Just another sad attempt by the Moral Minority(tm) at rehashing the very same evils they've wrongly attributed to pornography since boys first drew little cones on the front of their cave-wall stick-figures. And so poorly written that I couldn't tell if it meant to continue the narrative of the first paragraph with background, or if the first paragraph provided "color" to some sort of history, or even if most of the paragraphs even went together in any particular order.
"Porn creates misogynists", "Porn causes domestic violence", "Porn promotes the objectification of women", "Porn replaces natural sex and will end reproduction". Yet, various studies have not only refuted, but shown exactly the reverse, of the first two; for the third, porn actresses intend to objectify themselves; and for the last point, we still breed above replacement-level despite decades of easy access to reasonably hard-core porn.
Incidentally, as far as the fictional men turning abusive toward their toys... Have you ever seen the way guys treat their realdolls? Yeah, it borders on the outright creepy, but few women could ever hope for the same level of reverence by their men.
posted by pla at 1:40 PM on September 19, 2009 [2 favorites]
is human-dinosaur sex still ok?
PROTECT TRADITIONAL MARRIAGE! ONE MAN, ONE VELOCIRAPTOR!
and one internet harem.
posted by The Whelk at 1:41 PM on September 19, 2009 [5 favorites]
PROTECT TRADITIONAL MARRIAGE! ONE MAN, ONE VELOCIRAPTOR!
and one internet harem.
posted by The Whelk at 1:41 PM on September 19, 2009 [5 favorites]
THIS IS EXACTLY WHY WE MUST STOP ACORN
posted by PlusDistance at 1:47 PM on September 19, 2009 [1 favorite]
posted by PlusDistance at 1:47 PM on September 19, 2009 [1 favorite]
Burhanistan : Who is Subby?
In this case, device55. As in, short for "Submitter of The Fine Article"?
posted by pla at 1:52 PM on September 19, 2009
In this case, device55. As in, short for "Submitter of The Fine Article"?
posted by pla at 1:52 PM on September 19, 2009
Wasn't there a futurama episode about this? Something about a Lucy Lu-bot that Fry would rather date than humans...
posted by Peter Petridish at 2:04 PM on September 19, 2009
posted by Peter Petridish at 2:04 PM on September 19, 2009
Sorry, Subby, but why the hell did this make the front page of the blue?
Because he felt like posting it? There's no 'submission' process. You create a post, it goes on the front page.
posted by empath at 2:05 PM on September 19, 2009
Because he felt like posting it? There's no 'submission' process. You create a post, it goes on the front page.
posted by empath at 2:05 PM on September 19, 2009
"Sex with robots is coming..."
Pun not intended, of course.
posted by fearthehat at 2:07 PM on September 19, 2009
Pun not intended, of course.
posted by fearthehat at 2:07 PM on September 19, 2009
empath : There's no 'submission' process. You create a post, it goes on the front page.
Oh! Heh, don't I feel silly now. :I
Well then, if nothing else, I learned that thanks to this post.
New Mefiite.
Long-time (years) reader, though.
posted by pla at 2:09 PM on September 19, 2009
Oh! Heh, don't I feel silly now. :I
Well then, if nothing else, I learned that thanks to this post.
New Mefiite.
Long-time (years) reader, though.
posted by pla at 2:09 PM on September 19, 2009
Here ya go, Peter Petridish*. DON'T DATE ROBOTS**.
*Sorry, I believe that's U.S. only.
** [waves at The Whelk] Hi!
posted by Elsa at 2:14 PM on September 19, 2009
*Sorry, I believe that's U.S. only.
** [waves at The Whelk] Hi!
posted by Elsa at 2:14 PM on September 19, 2009
We already have sex machines: vibrators, realdolls, blowup dolls, penis pumps, dildos, buttplugs, nipple clamps and pocket pussies. The part where you give it a personality? Guaranteed to happen when machines actually get personalities, if ever. I think self-cleaning will be a bigger innovation and come around much sooner though.
posted by idiopath at 2:34 PM on September 19, 2009
posted by idiopath at 2:34 PM on September 19, 2009
is human-dinosaur sex still ok?
With sauropods and ornithischians, sure. But not theropods. What are you, Hitleraptor?
posted by ROU_Xenophobe at 2:38 PM on September 19, 2009 [1 favorite]
With sauropods and ornithischians, sure. But not theropods. What are you, Hitleraptor?
posted by ROU_Xenophobe at 2:38 PM on September 19, 2009 [1 favorite]
In the dark world of the future there is only porn.
posted by The Whelk at 2:40 PM on September 19, 2009
posted by The Whelk at 2:40 PM on September 19, 2009
The rest of that website has some pretty interesting stuff. The "for atheists" section is fairly well written for, y'know, what it is. Worth looking through.
posted by Salvor Hardin at 3:07 PM on September 19, 2009
posted by Salvor Hardin at 3:07 PM on September 19, 2009
Incidentally, as far as the fictional men turning abusive toward their toys... Have you ever seen the way guys treat their realdolls? Yeah, it borders on the outright creepy, but few women could ever hope for the same level of reverence by their men.
Actually, being treated with reverence by one's partner is something many (most?) people consider a turn-off.
posted by Solon and Thanks at 3:17 PM on September 19, 2009
Actually, being treated with reverence by one's partner is something many (most?) people consider a turn-off.
posted by Solon and Thanks at 3:17 PM on September 19, 2009
Oh, man, I LOVE this episode of Futurama!
posted by Saxon Kane at 3:19 PM on September 19, 2009
posted by Saxon Kane at 3:19 PM on September 19, 2009
The "for atheists" section is fairly well written for, y'know, what it is.
Sure, if you don't mind being talked down to, dealt with based on the assumption that you're wrong, and preached at about a religious worldview.
At least the author of that website goes out of his way to battle against the "King James Only" mindset I find in some Xians. I will give him a bonus point for that. But only one, and he'll have to work hard to earn more.
posted by hippybear at 3:36 PM on September 19, 2009
Sure, if you don't mind being talked down to, dealt with based on the assumption that you're wrong, and preached at about a religious worldview.
At least the author of that website goes out of his way to battle against the "King James Only" mindset I find in some Xians. I will give him a bonus point for that. But only one, and he'll have to work hard to earn more.
posted by hippybear at 3:36 PM on September 19, 2009
Salvor Hardin: "The "for atheists" section is fairly well written for, y'know, what it is."
A well written attempt to witness to a straw man? Or do I not know what it is? He is attempting dialogic techniques of persuasion in a one way non-interactive medium.
posted by idiopath at 3:46 PM on September 19, 2009
A well written attempt to witness to a straw man? Or do I not know what it is? He is attempting dialogic techniques of persuasion in a one way non-interactive medium.
posted by idiopath at 3:46 PM on September 19, 2009
What's interesting to me is how plainly revealed the hidden assumption behind all this is, in amongst the raving: This doom can only come if all that men want is a wholly subservient being who is always willing to provide sex. That's the hinge, the idea that once sufficiently advanced technology exists to mimic the physical warmth and response of a human woman, then so long, suckas! Hope you like lesbianism! That's so weird....well, it's sad and disgusting and disturbing, but just....eeesh. I never know what to do with this. You wish there were a pamphlet, sometimes. "Chicks: A type of people." At least somebody could get the guy a copy of Battlestar Galactica or something.
posted by Diablevert at 4:19 PM on September 19, 2009 [7 favorites]
posted by Diablevert at 4:19 PM on September 19, 2009 [7 favorites]
I was going to make a BSG joke about Helo and Sharon, and how their human-robot sexy sex is why we're all here in the first place. Unfortunately, I had trouble constructing it properly, so I gave up.
Which, coincidentally, is also the reason why I don't have a sex robot.
*on preview, waves at diablevert*
posted by maqsarian at 4:23 PM on September 19, 2009 [1 favorite]
Which, coincidentally, is also the reason why I don't have a sex robot.
*on preview, waves at diablevert*
posted by maqsarian at 4:23 PM on September 19, 2009 [1 favorite]
"As more and more men were able to purchase their own FACA, marriage rates dropped precipitously and women who were unable to find a real man turned to MACA or homosexuality in order to maintain relationships. "
That's about when I stopped reading.
posted by kylej at 4:25 PM on September 19, 2009
That's about when I stopped reading.
posted by kylej at 4:25 PM on September 19, 2009
We've come from the past in search of models with slots
posted by Mwongozi at 4:31 PM on September 19, 2009 [1 favorite]
posted by Mwongozi at 4:31 PM on September 19, 2009 [1 favorite]
And I guess, the obligatory Herbie Hancock link... If the robots were such perfect fucks, wouldn't they all end up fucking each other, and we'd all end up just... sitting around at home, jealously watching robot-on-robot porn?
posted by nanojath at 4:47 PM on September 19, 2009
posted by nanojath at 4:47 PM on September 19, 2009
Shake it, shake it sexy robot,
Shake it, shake it, dance with me.
posted by Rarebit Fiend at 5:53 PM on September 19, 2009
Shake it, shake it, dance with me.
posted by Rarebit Fiend at 5:53 PM on September 19, 2009
Vert.
posted by darksasami at 7:54 PM on September 19, 2009
posted by darksasami at 7:54 PM on September 19, 2009
The idea that once sufficiently advanced technology exists to mimic the physical warmth and response of a human woman, then so long, suckas! Hope you like lesbianism! That's so weird.
I always figured boys would start fucking robots sometime in high school, not as adults. As a demographic, their emotional immaturity and non-finite appetite makes them ideal customers. And what teenage boy wouldn't want a robot girlfriend—especially a robot girlfriend was also a gaming console and/or a motorcycle?
These men will be conditioned by their teenage robo-sexual experiences. When they close their eyes and picture their ideal sexual partner, they will see robots. Even if they later decide to seek out relationships with real women, they will lack the social skills to do so successfully.
Anyway, it's all in this pamphlet I got from some crocodile.
posted by ryanrs at 8:04 PM on September 19, 2009 [2 favorites]
I always figured boys would start fucking robots sometime in high school, not as adults. As a demographic, their emotional immaturity and non-finite appetite makes them ideal customers. And what teenage boy wouldn't want a robot girlfriend—especially a robot girlfriend was also a gaming console and/or a motorcycle?
These men will be conditioned by their teenage robo-sexual experiences. When they close their eyes and picture their ideal sexual partner, they will see robots. Even if they later decide to seek out relationships with real women, they will lack the social skills to do so successfully.
Anyway, it's all in this pamphlet I got from some crocodile.
posted by ryanrs at 8:04 PM on September 19, 2009 [2 favorites]
Why do women need men, anyway?
http://blogs.usatoday.com/ondeadline/2007/04/scientists_crea.html
posted by Jimmy Havok at 8:09 PM on September 19, 2009
http://blogs.usatoday.com/ondeadline/2007/04/scientists_crea.html
posted by Jimmy Havok at 8:09 PM on September 19, 2009
Clearly the writer has some passion for the subject material. He should get a blog. Here, have some material: The Sex has Made Me Stupid & All is Full of Love. I'm not even sure he'd need to drop the "pornography is bad" bit, because the forbidden fruit appeal of it probably really gets him going.
posted by Pronoiac at 8:39 PM on September 19, 2009
posted by Pronoiac at 8:39 PM on September 19, 2009
I'm trying to decide where the article really jumps the shark and it's hard to pin down. I think the key error is in simply assuming that men would be the key consumers of sexbots. I disagree.
I can almost guarantee you that, right now, there are far more mechanical sex toys in the world owned and used by women than there are by men. There also seems to be a social stigma, a sort of general skeeziness, of male solo-sex toys and the men who use them that doesn't exist for most women's toys and the women who use them. (Consider what you'd be expected to learn about a character in a pop TV show if it was revealed that a female character owned and used a vibrator by herself, versus a male character owning and using a Fleshlight. The two ought to be about equal, but aren't. The guy takes a lot more of a hit for it.)
There are a lot of reasons I can imagine that might contribute to why this is, most of which involve lingering sexist attitudes: that women need 'assistance' in some fashion to orgasm, or that a woman who has solo sex is somehow virtuous while a guy doing the same just can't get any, etc. But I think it's hard to deny that the difference exists, regardless of reasons.
If the capability existed to make anatomically-correct sexbots, I suspect they'd be made and marketed for women first, not men. (And they might not be 'anatomically correct' in the sense of faithfully replicating the male body either; their 'correctness' might be in the eye, or some other sense, of the user.)
posted by Kadin2048 at 9:21 PM on September 19, 2009 [1 favorite]
I can almost guarantee you that, right now, there are far more mechanical sex toys in the world owned and used by women than there are by men. There also seems to be a social stigma, a sort of general skeeziness, of male solo-sex toys and the men who use them that doesn't exist for most women's toys and the women who use them. (Consider what you'd be expected to learn about a character in a pop TV show if it was revealed that a female character owned and used a vibrator by herself, versus a male character owning and using a Fleshlight. The two ought to be about equal, but aren't. The guy takes a lot more of a hit for it.)
There are a lot of reasons I can imagine that might contribute to why this is, most of which involve lingering sexist attitudes: that women need 'assistance' in some fashion to orgasm, or that a woman who has solo sex is somehow virtuous while a guy doing the same just can't get any, etc. But I think it's hard to deny that the difference exists, regardless of reasons.
If the capability existed to make anatomically-correct sexbots, I suspect they'd be made and marketed for women first, not men. (And they might not be 'anatomically correct' in the sense of faithfully replicating the male body either; their 'correctness' might be in the eye, or some other sense, of the user.)
posted by Kadin2048 at 9:21 PM on September 19, 2009 [1 favorite]
Just to clarify, when I brought up the social stigma of male versus female sex toys, I'm thinking about the contemporary U.S. attitude; I'm not clear exactly on how they're viewed in other parts of the world. (Although it seems like it would be an interesting window into a host of gender and sexuality issues.)
posted by Kadin2048 at 9:25 PM on September 19, 2009
posted by Kadin2048 at 9:25 PM on September 19, 2009
"Ayuh, the 'Evidence of God' masthead didn't give it away?"
Says "Evidence For God" far as I can tell.
But that only raises more questions. I mean, is it evidence to prove to God this sort of thing is going on? Or is it God's evidence, as though only he gets to read it or build a case from it? Is it just general evidence that God can use? If so - how? I mean is God building a case here or something? And why would God need evidence if he's omniscient? And why would God need evidence on sex with robots?
No, none of this adds up at all. I think it's the work of the devil.
But that's a whole other can of worms. I mean, why would the devil promote sex with robots instead of sexy demoness sex?
All this aside - who's going to mow the lawn?
posted by Smedleyman at 11:00 PM on September 19, 2009
Says "Evidence For God" far as I can tell.
But that only raises more questions. I mean, is it evidence to prove to God this sort of thing is going on? Or is it God's evidence, as though only he gets to read it or build a case from it? Is it just general evidence that God can use? If so - how? I mean is God building a case here or something? And why would God need evidence if he's omniscient? And why would God need evidence on sex with robots?
No, none of this adds up at all. I think it's the work of the devil.
But that's a whole other can of worms. I mean, why would the devil promote sex with robots instead of sexy demoness sex?
All this aside - who's going to mow the lawn?
posted by Smedleyman at 11:00 PM on September 19, 2009
The article claims the following results from porn consumption:
1. increased callousness toward women
2. trivialization of rape as a criminal offense
3. distorted perceptions about sexuality
4. increased appetite for more deviant and bizarre types of pornography (escalation and 5. addiction)
5. devaluation of monogamy
6. decreased satisfaction with a partner’s sexual performance, affection, and physical appearance
7. doubts about the value of marriage
8. decreased desire to have children
9. viewing non-monogamous relationships as normal and natural behavior.
I never want to have monogamy, marriage, or children. I am non-monogamous and view it as normal and natural.
However, I am never callous toward women, I never trivialize rape, my tastes haven't "escalated" (although I wouldn't be ashamed if they did so long as everybody's capable of consent, and nobody gets hurt), and my sexual satisfaction with my partner(s) have not decreased.
I would absolutely get a sex robot if I could. And I'd share it with my partner(s). But if that were all I had, life would be lonely. I really like being in love. Can't get enough of it, in fact. The idea that men don't seek romantic attachment does not hold up under a moment's examination, and the article doesn't even address it. Overwhelmingly, they seek wild freakymonkey commitment-free sex on the side.
posted by Matt Arnold at 12:16 AM on September 20, 2009 [1 favorite]
1. increased callousness toward women
2. trivialization of rape as a criminal offense
3. distorted perceptions about sexuality
4. increased appetite for more deviant and bizarre types of pornography (escalation and 5. addiction)
5. devaluation of monogamy
6. decreased satisfaction with a partner’s sexual performance, affection, and physical appearance
7. doubts about the value of marriage
8. decreased desire to have children
9. viewing non-monogamous relationships as normal and natural behavior.
I never want to have monogamy, marriage, or children. I am non-monogamous and view it as normal and natural.
However, I am never callous toward women, I never trivialize rape, my tastes haven't "escalated" (although I wouldn't be ashamed if they did so long as everybody's capable of consent, and nobody gets hurt), and my sexual satisfaction with my partner(s) have not decreased.
I would absolutely get a sex robot if I could. And I'd share it with my partner(s). But if that were all I had, life would be lonely. I really like being in love. Can't get enough of it, in fact. The idea that men don't seek romantic attachment does not hold up under a moment's examination, and the article doesn't even address it. Overwhelmingly, they seek wild freakymonkey commitment-free sex on the side.
posted by Matt Arnold at 12:16 AM on September 20, 2009 [1 favorite]
Bjork rocks! Auto lesbian robot Bjork too!
posted by jeffburdges at 8:43 AM on September 20, 2009
posted by jeffburdges at 8:43 AM on September 20, 2009
I find the concern people focus on sex robots rather odd, usually carrying the impression of frightened females saying "oh no, our men will discover sex toys!" I kinda suspect men will simply continue spending their sex cash on better & more perverse porn, while women will continue spending on simply better toys, and trying to compete with the porn's perversity.
But I'll predict several specific advancements : (1) sex phone products for couples that are physically separated for extended periods, (2) personalized porn using both computer-generated imagery and selecting actresses through face recognition, i.e. guys buying expensive fake or look alike porn of that girl they never shagged, (3) pharmacological tracks for movies, porn being an early adopter, and (4) A.I. vibrators.
posted by jeffburdges at 9:03 AM on September 20, 2009
But I'll predict several specific advancements : (1) sex phone products for couples that are physically separated for extended periods, (2) personalized porn using both computer-generated imagery and selecting actresses through face recognition, i.e. guys buying expensive fake or look alike porn of that girl they never shagged, (3) pharmacological tracks for movies, porn being an early adopter, and (4) A.I. vibrators.
posted by jeffburdges at 9:03 AM on September 20, 2009
From a woman's perspective: HAVE MORE FAITH IN MEN!
Dildos and vibrators have been on the market for years, author doesn't seem to be worried about that.
posted by Neekee at 9:42 AM on September 20, 2009
Dildos and vibrators have been on the market for years, author doesn't seem to be worried about that.
posted by Neekee at 9:42 AM on September 20, 2009
... on the market for years...
That's an understatement, Neekee - try prehistoric.
posted by Pronoiac at 1:22 PM on September 20, 2009 [1 favorite]
That's an understatement, Neekee - try prehistoric.
posted by Pronoiac at 1:22 PM on September 20, 2009 [1 favorite]
To be fair, I have seen pretty similar screeds warning us all about the danger posed by dildos and vibrators, and how women will inevitably come to prefer these sex toys to flesh-and-blood men, and will withdraw entirely from male society. Men, without the civilizing influence of womenfolk, will have no option but to go around killing things indiscriminately and/or being drunken louts.
posted by hattifattener at 11:03 PM on September 20, 2009
posted by hattifattener at 11:03 PM on September 20, 2009
Wow, that started out interesting and quickly abandoned all premise of speculative fiction and devolved into typical conservative short-sightedness when it comes to the desires of men and the nature of society.
posted by tehloki at 4:22 AM on September 21, 2009
posted by tehloki at 4:22 AM on September 21, 2009
Maybe I can't speak for all men on the planet, but while the ideal of my own personal robotic Kari Sweets to play with whenever I wanted is appealing at a carnal level, I date women because (horror!) I actually enjoy talking to them.
posted by Uther Bentrazor at 8:32 AM on September 21, 2009
posted by Uther Bentrazor at 8:32 AM on September 21, 2009
« Older Don't trust Belgians! | Rammstein is not a subtle band (NSFW) Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by The Whelk at 12:57 PM on September 19, 2009 [6 favorites]