Sex robots=the end of women, according to some

[LJ_Reloaded]

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/jun/10/feminism-sex-robots-women-technology-objectify

It’s still hard to get some people – men and women – to understand quite what sexual objectification is. It’s simply an act that reduces a woman to nothing more than a sexual vessel. Sex robots, of course, are its apotheosis. The problem is not that sex robots are available: it’s that they are wanted.

There is nothing less erotic than someone believing or insisting that whatever else might be going on in another person’s mind – even “I do not want this” – they still have the right to have their “sexual needs” met. The people who are attracted to the idea of sex robots are the people who look at women and sex in this way. The idea that business and technology are so keen to oblige such narcissistic and sociopathic individuals is repellent.

Business always has been, of course. The sex trade is huge, as is the use of sexually attractive women to sell absolutely anything possible. At last, the most egregious examples of such cynical and divisive marketing are being abandoned. Many men now understand what this kind of relentless cultural assault does to women and to relationships between women and men. This supposed technological advance runs counter to the progressive spirit. If the sale of sex robots is to be allowed at all, it must be highly regulated.

There’s always been a bit of sniggering about men who use prostitutes (though real contempt, counterintuitively, is directed at the women involved), or who “can’t get a girlfriend”. Blow-up dolls have always been a joke, as have “wankers”. This too is pitiless, petty stuff. Maybe it’s time to take misogynistic sexual dysfunction more seriously. Maybe people who want to buy sex robots need to present the agreement of a couple of doctors, before they are judged emotionally restricted enough to need to retreat to such an inhuman fantasy. Or maybe, out of respect for women, this technology should just be rejected.

Now not interacting sexually with women somehow equals objectifying them. Interesting.

In actuality, sex robots would liberate women. In the most extreme societal case, men will turn to sex robots for sex, and see women outside the context of sex. You know, the way washing machines and dishwashers eliminated a large part of (though not all of) the idea of “women’s work”. Deborah Orr’s logic is as silly as women saying that stoves, dishwashers and laundry machines oppress women because it means men want women who wash clothes and dishes. Literally, this is what feminists like Deborah Orr are saying.

Feminists say that sex robots somehow push the idea that women are a commodity, when it does the exact opposite. Sex robots totally eliminate the idea of a woman as a sexual commodity, by making a machine the sexual commodity.

Sex robots would thus free women (on a cultural level, not just an individual level) to do other things in life, just as dishwashers and laundry machines did. Fewer men would judge women by looks or sexual attractiveness, because there would be sex robots for that.

Feminism’s real fear is that women will lose control of who gets access to sex. Without the privilege of sexual manipulation of men, the feminist woman has nothing, she is powerless… rudderless.

But for womankind, sex robots will mean greater empowerment and freedom from old gender norms.

But it's not just feminists who fear sex robots. Conservatives also fear them:
http://thefederalist.com/2015/10/22/sexbots-arent-the-answer-to-feminism/

Imagine a future where masses of men divorce themselves from the world and have sex with robots instead of people. Maybe children would all be conceived through artificial means by then and raised by the government. If not, humanity would die off.

This is the dystopian future sexbots will bring about, as described by pick-up artists, men’s rights activists, feminists, and others. If we go down that road, it would be a fitting end to a human species that is unnecessary and undeserving of continued existence.

Humans are easily replaceable with robots, the champions of sexbots argue. Douglas Hines, CEO of True Companion, said his company’s creation, Roxxxy, will replace all aspects of human interaction, not just sex.

(This, from the same ideology that is eager to see workers replaced by robots to get back at workers who want to be paid an honest wage.)

 

[yossi]

Christ, we are a sad species.

 

[hashtag45]

This. I put it on my subscribed threads list.
Thanks for the chuckle, LJ.

 

[Emerson40]

Dave: Hello, HAL. Do you read me, HAL?
HAL: Affirmative, Dave. I read you.
Dave: Open the pod bay doors, HAL.
HAL: I'm sorry, Dave. I'm afraid I can't do that.
Dave: What's the problem?
HAL: I think you know what the problem is just as well as I do.
Dave Bowman: What are you talking about, HAL?
HAL: You were a little rough on the pod last night, Dave.

 

[renard_ruse]

Of course people "objectify" each other. What is the big deal? Feminists have some real hangups about sex and sexuality.

Andrea Dworkin even claimed all heterosexuality was "rape." These people are not normal.

 

[renard_ruse]

But for womankind, sex robots will mean greater empowerment and freedom from old gender norms...

"Old gender norms" are real freedom because they are natural and sexy for both sexes. That's why liberals and Communists continue to attempt to change them. However, as they are biologically programmed, they can't eliminate them entirely. They will only cause people to become neurotic and unhappy with this social engineering and ultimately the scheme will fail.

 

[Quintheeskimo56]

I hope the sex robots have an on off swith

 

[Pairaclities]

So what is the difference between a sexbot for a male, and a Hitachi for a female?
Diddly squat.
Absolute bullshit article when the whole scope of human erotic fantasy is considered.