The Trouble With Sex Robots https://mobile.nytimes.com/2017

>>61430049
FUCK SEX ROBOTS
I had enough of this shilling.

>>61430096
>FUCK SEX ROBOTS
God I wish I could.

>>61430096
Isn't that why they exist?

fuck it, ill just buy an onahole from jlist

Fucking dumbass journalists, how can an object consent?

Why don't they just get phone sex operators to play the part of the robot while you're smashing on it

File: Image-48617.jpg (97KB, 500x354px) Image search: [Google]

97KB, 500x354px

>>61430049
>wat do they have to fear
They fear the competition. Take the nonwhite ivasion of europe for example, women support this shit because its bringing in millions of men, more pool of fish for them, now imagine the biggest part of the immigration was millions of tight asian cuties, women would faster go full 1488 ethnonationalist than you can say acidattack.

>https://mobile.nytimes.com
dumb phoneposter

>Sex robots are coming, warns a new report
>This is not a niche issue
I like how they jumped straight to the feminist narrative of "ROBOT BAD, STACY NO LIKE ROBOT, STACY BAN ROBOT!" without explaining to the reader why sexbots are "bad".

It's almost as if they only expect to have readers who politically align with them.

>>61430049
I want the women responsible for the rape of billions of dildos held accountable for their heinous crimes.

>>61430049
>ny times
literal fake news lmao

>>61430049
>sex robot that’s yours to rape for just $9,995.

WTF I'm raping my fleshlight now!

We are about 15 years from semi decent sex robots, and around 25 years(if you trust experts that we will have AGI by 2045), from sex robots that'll be superior to women. Most sex bots these days are glorified silicon dolls with vibrating lady parts. I think we will.need major advancements in artificial muscles(dielectric elastomers) to have westworld tier robots. The generation of men born today are going to have an interesting time.

>>61430332
I don't need a FULL human personality in a sex bot, if you can get me a glorified Mr Handy with an Onahole I'm fine

There's a lot of female personality traits that sexbots exist to avoid, after all!
>tfw dumped by my sexbot

>>61430262
>>61430251

I think the articles mainly talking about an AI setting to simulate rape, not just actually fucking a robot. Its not "wow he's raping that robot!", its "Wow that company actually is producing a AI setting to simulate resisting sexual advances so that rape fetishists can get their jimmies off.

I still ere on the side of "Hippity Hoppity but not on my property", but I can understand the objections to it. Its essentially the same issue as loli porn.

>banning rape with a victim
>banning CP with a victim

vs
>banning THE IDEA of pedophilia and rape as disgusting fetishes that should never be commercially marketed by a responsible society.

File: Peek.jpg (89KB, 500x500px) Image search: [Google]

89KB, 500x500px

>Stacy says I'm not Chad enough to have sex with her.
>Stacy is now upset that I'm happily fucking a Robo-Stacy. She resorts to calling it rape and tells me I'm a creep.
>Stacy currently has 12 Chad-dongs in her nightstand and two on order from Amazon.

Whatever. If it's socially acceptable for girls to have 20 rubber dicks, then it's acceptable for me to have 20 rubber pussies. Stacy's insecurities isn't my problem.

>Last year, a Hong Kong designer made headlines for creating a robotic version of the actor Scarlett Johansson without her permission. RealDoll explains on its website that it is illegal to create exact replicas of women without their consent
Why exactly would this be illegal? Movie stars are public figures that don't have a right to their own image like normal people from the street do.

>>61430332
>The generation of men born today
>men
this generation is full of fagbois and some other abominations

>>61430049
my stuff, i can fuck my table however i see fit since i own it and its not a person with rights

>>61430231
>This is not a niche issue...
>...more than 40 percent of the 263 heterosexual men surveyed said they could imagine using a sex robot
>imagine
That wording is key. Pretty much means the entire "study" was a bunch of bs. I can imagine many things, does it mean I'm going to do them?

The discussion about sex robots is coming, but it isn't here yet. These things are still glorified plastic dolls.

File: 1360467504313.png (636KB, 2500x2641px) Image search: [Google]

636KB, 2500x2641px

>>61430353
I could understand a company not selling sexbots with a loli body-figure or rape simulation, but lets be real, after the bots take off in popularity they will be modded and reprogrammed.

Loli and rape simulation sold big company = Poor taste.
3rd party mods ans programs = Something society will have to get use to.

I'm sure the loli-sex-bots will have to be kept indoors, after the mountain of regulations on sexbots are made.

File: 1495560989143.png (228KB, 1600x1067px) Image search: [Google]

228KB, 1600x1067px

>>61430332
Coincidently the 2030s is when it is predicted that we will have a roastie epidemic, with the low rates of marriage amongst young women. With sex bots becoming a real alternative by the 2030s, We will probably have a gender coldwar as women lose their only leverage over men.

File: 1491066625155.jpg (184KB, 800x980px) Image search: [Google]

184KB, 800x980px

>>61430370
>Stacy currently has 12 Chad-dongs in her nightstand and two on order from Amazon.
Top Kek and /thread

>>61430483
Don't forget dragon dongs and horse dongs and all manner of mechanical vibrating bead turboclimaxer 5,000's

>>61430453
Don't forget we've also stepped into the realm of motherless birth, thanks to the creation and successful use of the artificial womb.

File: 1495228655847.png (1MB, 1688x1916px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1688x1916px

>>61430441
Eerie how much the times and commentary match that of sci-fi movies/shows of our day and of the past. Quite the timeline were on.

>>61430495
>dragon dongs
>for stacy

>tfw we're probably only a few years from the first sexbot fatality

>>61430514
You'd be surprised the kinds of weird kinky shit that run-of-the-mill normie girls do in their private time.

File: 1493524479002.png (243KB, 550x535px) Image search: [Google]

243KB, 550x535px

>>61430495
Yep. What men should have been doing and still doing to a high degree is watching women quite closely in these times. They're giving you deep looks into their true character.

Stacy :
> Dragon dongs
> Half upper male body attached to dong
> Horse dongs
> Dongs attached to power tools
> Two dong attachments
> 5000000 shades of grey
> Jumping off/on 40 dicks a year on tinder
Etc etc all common place and considered female sexual liberation

> Guy decides to fuck a thick piece of rubber...
Stop the presses .. hol up .. hol up .. hol up

Society has become a meme/joke.
Best to just laugh at it and carry on.

> Stacy : You're not going to fuck that piece of rubber
Kek
Yeah ok... whatever you say...

>>61430500
I think having a surrogate will be much cheaper and less riskier than artificial wombs for the next few decades. We still can't perfectly recreate the complex conditions in an artificial womb.

>>61430049
Marriage is already irreversibly fucked in the west anyway, so we might as well go all the way and see what happens.

"Who's going to deal with my neurotic bitchy ass now?"

hahahah i love this

>>61430049
>https://mobile.nytimes.com/2017/07/17/opinion/sex-robots-consent.html
"Rape is not an act of sexual passion. It is a violent crime. We should no more be encouraging rapists to find a supposedly safe outlet for it than we should facilitate murderers by giving them realistic, blood-spurting dummies to stab. Since that suggestion sounds ridiculous, why does the idea of providing sexual abusers with lifelike robotic victims sound feasible to some?"

Sounds like a really great Pinata.

>>61430049
>LONDON
the brits really are at it again

>>61430562
the point is that probably more than 50% of the consumer base of bad dragon is male

>>61430654
Not to mention it's mainly dudes or fat chicks on toypics.

>>61430353
*err on the side

>>61430654
>>61430668

Sure but there are probably still a lot of normie girls that buy them, even if they are only about <20% (wild guess) of BD's customer-base

>you're not fucking a REAL woman so its RAPE and you cant HAVE IT!!!!!
More feminists scared of losing their pussy monopoly.
Nobody wants to deal with your screechy batshit crazy asses when we dont need you for a warm hole.

>>61430688
To add: Though I am curious if there are any actual stats for that.

>>61430688
>>61430695
It's not really a concern if its from BD or not, probably 80%+ of women over the age of 20 own at least a vibrator, while even the most simple male sex-toy is considered offensive.
It's a pussy-monopoly strategy. Women don't like the idea of not being able to leverage sex because its often, even in this glorious age of liberation, that they have to offer.

File: Screenshot_2017-07-17-19-26-34-1.png (46KB, 998x210px) Image search: [Google]

46KB, 998x210px

Are those women really trying to give a fucking doll its own rights?
Why would a object need to consent to something?

>>61430707
Oh yeah of course, I completely agree there. It was merely speculation.

I think this also is similar to the reaction feminists have about male birth-control (pills, not condoms). The only power women generally have over men is babies. Take away that power and they have nothing.

Would be nice to hear more about the actual technology involved in these instead of the usual /pol9k/ bleating about being oppressed or whatever. What are these things actually capable of now apart from lying limp and taking dick?

Feminists, the (((powers that be))) and Silicon Valley are creating the perfect storm for the destruction of relationships between men and women. I feel sorry for women born today who had nothing to do with the post 2nd wave feminist movement, but will pay the ultimate price for the sins of their neurotic millennial/gen x/gen z/boomer sisters. There's undoubtedly going to be a swing towards men in the next 30 years with advancements in technology, and unlike this generation, they will be more ruthless and less forgiving towards women after seeing society treat the average man and their fathers like disposable punching bags. Also, most of these guys were raised by neurotic single mothers, so they will probably project their issues to the average woman. The future of heterosexual relationships seem so dystopian.

>>61430049
>Rape is not an act of sexual passion. It is a violent crime. We should no more be encouraging rapists to find a supposedly safe outlet for it than we should facilitate murderers by giving them realistic, blood-spurting dummies to stab.
This argument is super flawed, especially since we have given them that through video games (coincidentally violent crime has been plummeting since the 90s). Besides if someone really wants to they can buy like a manikin and fill it with ketchup then stab it (I doubt anyone would care). I think this would reduce rape as rape is probably caused by a mix of sexual frustration and mental illness, and these remove sexual frustration. Also, we all know the only reason these things piss of women is because they see themselves as objects whose only value is in sex.

>>61430756
Right now, it's basically a glorified sex doll with Siri and maybe vibrating or self warming/lubricating private parts. But with advancements in dielectric polymers/actuators, artificial skin, machine vision, Narrow AI and sensors on the horizon, the sex doll of 2030 will look very different.

>>61430882
Do they self clean?

>>61430911
Probably not.

>>61430882
The way this keeps getting brought up I thought there was some kind of huge breakthrough in the last couple years.

>>61430181
Wow, that's actually an amazing idea. It shuts up the people whining about sex bot consent, makes it more immersive AND creates job positions for back-end sex bot operators.

File: 72a.jpg (73KB, 600x800px) Image search: [Google]

73KB, 600x800px

>>61430049
>What is it with feminists and their fascination with the sex lives of undesirable men who are presumably the market for these robots?
It all comes back to hookup culture.
>husband is normally expected to provide emotional support, financial support, and bang his wife so hard she can't walk right
>hookup culture means women are fucking random guys instead of settling down
>they get emotional and financial support (gifts, a shoulder to cry on, etc.) from undesirable orbiters instead
>orbiters do this because they want to get in her good graces and maybe fuck her
>eventually she'll realize she's past her prime and settle down with one who has a lot of money
>sex robots come out
>ugly orbiters spend money on sex robot instead
>don't need to give attention and gifts to this woman in the hopes of getting laid
>woman ages out of being fuckable to chad
>all the undesirables who actually have enough money to support the lifestyle she wants to have just bought sexbots instead

>>61430216
Fact. If the women were hairless, sexually liberated women, they'd be fuming.

>>61430049
>This is like the 5th major article on sex robots on a major lib newspaper in these past few weeks. What do they have to fear?

A company is selling a creepy product and putting out press releases. Just because feminism is cancer doesn't mean it's the reason everybody is hating on you and your waifu.

>>61430948
Well there has been breakthroughs, but small firms who make these sex robots cant afford to take advantage of these breakthroughs.

>>61431023
>creepy product
according to whomst?

>muh video games make you violent

>>61430049
Fake news. SAD!

>>61430613
What is "the combined work of Milton Diamond?"

Isn't it fine though? Since pedo can have their own loli sex dolls, they wouldn't fuck 3DPD anymore.
I even wonder why anyone wants to fuck 3DPD.

File: 14bb7970d3f8405ca08ecf76260acc0c.jpg (116KB, 770x616px) Image search: [Google]

116KB, 770x616px

>>61430564
>mfw stacy is against freedom of hardware AND software
ABSOLUTELY PROPRIETARY

>>61431048
Me.

>>61430049
feminists 360 into massive sex negative hypocrites when it's men's sexual freedom

>>61430049
I'm not a libtard but I've given this a lot of thinking and I have to agree with the feminazis

vibrators, fleshlights, etc are all good

but this is a full sized thing that looks and feels and sounds like a real person... and you fuck it

it's disturbing

>but what about mannequins?
well those are hard, faceless, limbless and not used for sex (I hope) so it's different

>>61430049
>oh no people are doing things I don't like with the inaminimate objects they own!

>>61430049
>be a modern western female
>crank up the price of your only asset way past what the market wants to pay
>make yourself into a walking liability for false accusations and divorce payments
>shriek like a banshee when men invent sex robots and artificial wombs to totally replace you

Should have seen it coming.

>>61430332
>I think we will.need major advancements in artificial muscles(dielectric elastomers)

Too complex in next 50 years
Some game likes honey select photorealistic comes in 15 to 20 years

>>61430353
>AI setting to simulate
>AI
Some track say don't rape me...

>>61431359
There's nothing wrong with disturbing

>Reading this article
> my wife texts me half way through to tell me she wants me to pretend to break in the house and "rape" her tonight.
>3 laughing rape victims.png

>>61430613
And millons rape fantasy novels for women, and begins most common sexual fantasy for women.

File: 1492051670007.jpg (104KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

104KB, 1280x720px

>>61431441
>my wife

File: 1498518965998.jpg (73KB, 946x596px) Image search: [Google]

73KB, 946x596px

>>61431441
>pretend

File: objectifying literal objects is wrong.png (755KB, 978x942px) Image search: [Google]

755KB, 978x942px

>>61430049
>That’s the imaginatively alliterative name of the sex robot that’s yours to rape for just $9,995.

And I suppose masturbation is when you rape your own hand? What the fuck is wrong with feminists? Surely they know their arguments don't hold water, and they're just hoping people aren't educated enough to point it out?

how can woman != object and object == woman both be true?

check mate feminists

>>61431359
Well, gosh, if it disturbs you, no one should participate. Thanks for clearing this all up!~

File: texas-students-carrying-dildos-ridiculous-gun-law-dEn.png (312KB, 1200x630px) Image search: [Google]

312KB, 1200x630px

>>61431522
seem to be fine with dildos objectifying men

The trouble is that men can enjoy them a lot more than women can. They cannot stand this fact.

>>61430608
>"Who's going to deal with my neurotic bitchy ass now?"
I too love how women panic when they realize you don't really care if you get to fuck them or not because you got alternatives that are just as good.

I don't see how sex robots would change anything, though. There's cheap silicone vaginas, there's a whole range of fleshlights, there's cheaper dolls like jsdoll's and expensive dolls like Realdolls. So what if you add a speaker and some electronics so it can make sound or motors so it can move a bit on it's own? That's just a marginal improvement on what we already have plenty of.

And in all seriousness, why would you want too much AI in a sexdoll anyway? It's not like you're going to be using it as a chess partner or have long deep conversations with it.

File: 1440016612314.png (266KB, 413x463px) Image search: [Google]

266KB, 413x463px

>>61430049
>rape
Explain

>>61430739
It's interesting that it says "reproducing real women".

Nobody is reproducing a "real women". Sex dolls won't be able to actually reproduce or have children and they won't be self-aware or "alive". What a bunch of hogwash.

File: Men can't be raped silly.jpg (57KB, 480x853px) Image search: [Google]

57KB, 480x853px

>>61430049
>What is it with feminists and their fascination with the sex lives of undesirable men who are presumably the market for these robots?
Desirable men are only desirable because they put more effort into meeting women's demands than undesirable men. If desirable men could just fuck a sexbot instead, they'd stop meeting women's demands and become undesirable too.
And because tech costs a lot at first, the men turning to sex bots in the next few years will be rich men. IE, the men that Women's Studies majors were planning to marry.

Sexbots will be a huge step toward gender equality. Since feminists hate the idea of being treated like equals, they hate sexbots

>>61430049
>What do they have to fear?
Easy, they (ugly, fat feminists who rode the cock carousel during college fucking drunk fratboys) know they aren't getting married to Chad Thundercock who's engaged to a model and they are in desperate need of a provider (ie. a bottom of the barrel guy with a steady job and a home). They are afraid their only chance at a functioning marriage will be lost to robots.
Face it, if you're someone who already has no hope of getting it on with a model looking girl, which one would you pick, an ugly feminist or a realistic model looking robot with your personality of choice?

>>61431592
Clown makeup, mushy sort of overweight, box color hair, annnnnnd...she's entitled. Shocker.

>>61431359

>I'm not a hypocritical poltard but I've given this a lot of thinking and I have to agree with the cuckservatives

>Women kissing, lesbians porn, girl on girl action etc are all good

>but this is faggy cock in anus and scat play thing that gay's love to do...

>it's disturbing

>but what about lesbians?

>well most of them are pretending to be lesbians, and men love girl on girl action since they get to masturbate to two beautiful women making love... so it's different

File: Women's Studies.jpg (364KB, 1125x1374px) Image search: [Google]

364KB, 1125x1374px

>>61431592
If she lost 20 pounds I'd be in love
>tfw love the entitled man-hating bitch attitude but hate fat chicks
why do the two have to go hand-in-hand?

>>61431522
>And I suppose masturbation is when you rape your own hand?
No, it's when you rape yourself. It's called self-abuse for a reason.

>>61430216
>>61430995
>having any clue of how women will react to anything
>using a hypothetical reaction so support an assumption.
>2017

>>61431359
>it's disturbing
Is this bait?

>>61431359
Fuck off roastie, tits or GTFO

>>61431758
Find literally any butterface autistic girl.

They almost never leave the house and they are the one you see wearing a coat in 80 degree weather.

>>61431773
Please be London

>>61431773
>Not realising that the "women are complex" thing is a meme
"I don't understand women" is codeword for "women are just fucking crazy."
They aren't complex, they aren't wonderful, they aren't mysterious - they're all fucking crazy in various levels. Its not even a good thing.
Women are just batshit insane and the only difference is how long it takes you to see through their shit.

actual feminist here
article is fucking retarded

>>61431829
>be Chinese
>Live in country where obesity is almost non-existent
You don't know how much it sucks to be in Burgerland. Non-obese women are basically all Stacies

>>61431897
t. feminist

File: 1489613871041s.jpg (7KB, 250x241px) Image search: [Google]

7KB, 250x241px

Don't worry, these dumb cunts will all shut up about men getting fuck dolls as soon as they realize they will all get a 6'7" robot Brad Pitt slave / bodyguard / fuck machine / thing that will smile and nod while they still whine endlessly about their now even less relevant first world """problems"""

File: feminism.jpg (7KB, 300x195px) Image search: [Google]

7KB, 300x195px

>>61431897
Why do you hate men though?

>>61431923
No they won't. They still bitch about porn and sex dolls even though dildos and vibrators exist.

>>61431934
http://www.ccs.neu.edu/home/shivers/rants/scum.html

>>61430863
>these things piss of women is because they see themselves as objects whose only value is in sex
sounds like they were genetically designed to take cock and birth a child. Women, who fail at that genetic destination, end up getting their period anyways.

>>61430049
sex robot + artifical womb = raise a pure white army to purify europa.

>>61431923
Women don't want sex, they want social status. Its not as much about how good the sex is as it is how the sex elevates them financially and socially.

>>61430863
Feminists hate sexbots for the same reason they hate vidya: It gives men something to enjoy without having to bend over backwards for women. If women want men, they'll actually have to work to impress us instead of just putting themselves on a pedestal and expecting men to worship them just for being women. And feminists hate the idea of not being worshipped just for being women

>>61431923
They want money and power you idiot. That crazy cunt Angelina Jolie dumped and tried to destroy one of the hottest men in the world and take his money in the process. If Brad Pitt can't do it no one can.

>>61432007
The dumbest part about this is that you actually believe it.
The saddest part is that you're not alone.

>>61431998
>we might live to finally see anime real and everyone be happy with their robotfu

>>61432002

/r/fedorashowerthoughts

>>61432002
Studies have shown that women married to rich men orgasm more than women married to middle class or poorer men, even when they took account of variables like attractiveness of their richer partners.

>>61432062
stress and free time seem like more relevant variables

>>61430608
>>61431664

wew, you two really are pathetic. what happened to you as children? rough break up? or turned down too many times? not all women are bad, muh friend.

>>61430964

i can't believe you are sitting in your sad little basement taking the time to write posts like this. jesus christ.

and even worse than that is you've thought through this argument many, many times before.

you need help, anon.

>>61430251
But women don't fantasize about raping dildos. They fantasize about being raped while using one. Why won't feminists have these dildis arrested.

>>61430049
why would you want a sex robot for that much money when you can get a girl for almost nothing? just be nice to her and she will even let you fuck her popo

>>61430049
I think sex robots will be a big nothing for a long time coming. They'll have to get very advanced to be better than online porn and cam girls. And of course you can always just pay a hooker.

>>61431868
>>61430216

have either of you ever taken a step back from your lives and thought how you arrived at this rock-bottom point? you don't even realize how hard you are projecting.

let's face it: you are unattractive and undesirable. you've never had a girlfriend and never will. you probably even think that fucking a sex doll is actually a way to get back at all those women who have turned you down.

i'm not against sex dolls/robots. but you really need to realize how pathetic you sound right now, buddy.

>>61430049
I'll put a bullet in my head before the first "woman" I fuck is a gynoid.

File: Plastic-Memories-03-16.jpg (51KB, 848x477px) Image search: [Google]

51KB, 848x477px

>tfw sex robots will make anime real

>>61432157
>a one time payment for a bullshit free woman who can bear you kids
>but shes not hopelessly irrational
> wont try to suffocate her kid post-pregnancy
>wont leave you for some random chad because shes bored
>wont suck you dry for money
>wont divorce you and ruin your life
>youre free to pursue your interests worry free of neglect

Womemes did this to themselves desu. Too bad we probably wont live to see the really good models come out that can match the facial and emotional subtleties.

>>61432157
Yeah it's quite bizzare. Some guys online make it out like you need to be brad pitt just to get a girl.

>>61432142
That's what happens when you mix /pol/ with /r9k/

>>61432082
You don't think that study took account of obvious variable like stress or free time?
And there are plenty of studies that confirm the sexual importance of status to women, hence the gold digging phenomena. But I guess you're probably a woman, who likes to perform mental gymnastics to convince urself that youre unique and millions of years of evolution doesn't affect your behaviour.

>>61430049
It's the same reason women are such bitches to each other; being desirable to men equals having power over men. It's why women will wear makeup, low cut shirts, miniskirts, heels, and say that it's not for men, it's for themselves. It's for them because it makes them feel powerful; more powerful than the other women around them and more powerful than the men because if they look the hottest, they're more likely to get what they want. Feminists can say whatever they like, but the fact of the matter is that sex is an integral part of the identity of all women of child bearing age and most women understand this innately. Feminsts had a sexual revolution and rejected the norms of polite society, fair enough. But now a sexual revolution is happening for men and feminists are losing their minds because they were just getting used to holding all the cards. The most hilarious thing about it is that I doubt these will be as popular as all the uproar suggests, but it's highly entertaining to watch these idiot feminists lose their shit.

>>61432033
Which of that comment is wrong?
Vidya and sexbots allow men to be happy without having to give into the absurd demands of the average woman
Feminism is based on the idea that women should be put on a pedestal
Women being put on a pedestal is dependent on men wanting women more than women want men
Since sexbots/vidya let men be happy without women, they will want women less, which causes women to lose their female privilege, so feminists hate it

where's the flaw?

>>61432162
legalized prostitution is what feminists really fear. I've fucked escorts before and I can tell you if it's legal and acceptable, a lot of men would rather pay $200 than jump through hoops for the average woman. Feminists have even found a way around the "liberating women" aspect by saying it should be legal for prostitutes but still illegal for the men who buy them

>>61432157
>>61432202
>it's really easy to get regular sex
found the chubby chasers

File: images(3).png (43KB, 696x440px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 696x440px

>>61432202
No you just have to be above average, which by definition disadvantages a significant proportion of men. Why do you think there's so many sexual frustrated men online or why marriage rates are decreasing whilst single motherhood is rising?

>>61432154
Dildoes are forced to rape without consent

>>61430174
That's their whole fucking point you idiot.

Most laws in the US regarding sex are about consent: CP is bad because the child is incapable of granting consent. Fucking a goat is also illegal for the same reason.

A robot cannot grant consent because it is incapable of doing so. Which, according to the framework we base our current laws on, makes it illegal to have sex with.

>>61430049
>more than 40 percent of the 263 heterosexual men surveyed said they could imagine using a sex robot
did they try surveying blokes outside of the engineering faculty at their local uni?

>2021
>not prepping your sexbot's bull

>>61430049
>men who can afford a $10,000 Fleshlight
>undesirable

>>61432288
A robot also wouldnt be considered a living thing / the same rights as humans for quite some time so its moot.
And even if, just buy the """""""""consent"""""""""" module and everythings fine. I doubt even our non-existient great-great-grand-children will live to see the supreme court case of I. Robot vs The City of New New York.

>>61432231
every single one of those is based entirely on fiction and misunderstanding
it's like you've never interacted with another human being outside of /pol/ before

it's really a shame the word `feminist' has been hijacked by fuckwads like you and the tumblr attention whores and gets misused and smeared around like you're doing so liberally

>>61432288
>A robot cannot grant consent because it is incapable of doing so. Which, according to the framework we base our current laws on, makes it illegal to have sex with.
a robot isn't a person or animal
you could also argue that a dildo, fleshlight, hand, or hole punched in a slab of silicone can't consent and should be illegal to fuck as well

>>61432256
>No you just have to be above average
Not really, just being average or even slightly below average is enough.

Source: I'm a 5~6/10 and I have moderate success with online dating sites. I mean, sure I can't get a 9/10 Stacy (it's not impossible though, but not worth the effort) but 5-6/10 girls are easy as fuck to me.

>>61432288
I never thought about it, but you're making me realize how horrible it is that I've never gotten my toilet's consent to take a shit.

Thank you for opening my eyes, sagely one.

>>61432256
I think you have a warped perspective.

In real life I don't think I've met a single man who was a "virgin" and almost every guy in my social circle is either married or in a relationship.

My guess is that the vocal minority simply take refuge online in communities like reddit and 4chan and make it seem like lonely guys are a significant issue when in fact it's probably less than 5% of men, if that.

>>61430049

Sex robots won't be really much of a problem. Even though we've gone through quite a few advances in technology those things are still pretty primitive and uncanny. Until we can get ultra realistic, human-like androids or something they won't be causing problems.

>>61430049
>Sex robots are coming

Ooooh... Frigid Farrah. Your lips say no but your eyes say 01000011 01101111 01110011 01110100 01100001 01101110 01111010 01100001 00100000 01100001 01110100 00100000 01100010 01100001 01110100.

>>61432288
goat fucking is an animal cruelty/obscenity issue, see how any farm animal is treated if you think consent is a factor at all

>>61432353
lol

>>61432332
Personality goes a long way. People without personality don't seem to get that and try to replace it with that PUA bullshit. Whether or not it works, I have no idea. I've never had the need.

File: 1493897802682.jpg (45KB, 600x456px) Image search: [Google]

45KB, 600x456px

>>61432288
OH NO

I've raped a cup, sponge, condom, pillows, carpet AND sofa!!!!
How many years will I get behind bars?

>>61432173
>you are projecting!!!!

So all these news articles are just a figment of my imagination then?

>>61432384
probably none because of the patriarchy

>>61432288
>Fucking a goat is also illegal for the same reason.
Not in every US state :3

>>61432396
Fuck off Missouri

>>61432380
Well, that's what I was implying before, looks are important but the personality and attitude are the most important things. Women care a lot more about how do you act than a simple physical defect that you may have, and they can detect any sign of betaness a mile a way, every single one of them. And some girls tolerate beta guys better than others. That's what I've learned from dating several girls thanks to dating sites and apps.

t. Recovered beta forever-alone virgin

>>61430049
Everyone says competition, I think it's simpler than that. I don't think women are that cunning. I think it's sheer spite. They like the idea of losers not getting sex and are disgusted by the idea of unattractive men finding alternatives and wish to spite them to maintain the status quo.

>>61431773
>Randomly reacting to their environment
>Predictable
This guy gets it.

>>61432436
what site/app would you recommend to start with

>>61432450
>I think it's sheer spite.
Why is there a "gender war" in the West, where each gender tries to demonize the other?

Every time a topic like this comes up on /g/, it seems that there are two sides that want to fight. Is there not a way for everyone to get along?

After all, civilization (literally) cannot survive without both working together... no?

>>61432288
>A robot cannot grant consent because

Nor can
a Toaster
a Smartphone
a Car
a Toilet

A fucking toilet didn't consent to being shitten on.

A dildo doesn't consent to being rammed down your stinky pussy.

This isn't about consent, it's about bitches trying to keep their monopoly on pussy, and their power over men.

>>61432338
5% of men is a massive quantity of sexually frustrated males. But more importantly, giving these millions a relief that isn't hopelessly throwing money at women reduces the value of women overall since it reduces desperation.
whenever there's something that might reduce male desperation, women are against it.

>>61432471

>a muslim telling others how to live

File: 1496059581638.gif (911KB, 500x281px) Image search: [Google]

911KB, 500x281px

>>61432480
She's a Gen X second-wave feminist, she won't understand.

I wish women and old people would gtfo the internet already.

>>61432480
>Also 70 percent of men between the ages of 34 to 20 are not married, whilst it's considerably less for women, which is rarely highlighted.

This might be an advantage to men, if you think about it. The divorce laws in the US will shaft them. So, for example, my brother hasn't married despite being with the same woman for 5 years. Best not to get married unless it is a financial necessity. Now, women aren't as likely to be ruined in a divorce and will marry (and later divorce) with some more haste, I suppose.

>>61432501
part and parcel

File: 1455988223901.jpg (115KB, 567x389px) Image search: [Google]

115KB, 567x389px

>women complain about men treating them like sex objects
>men invent actual sex objects
>women complain about men treating them like sex objects

Stop fucking talking about sex robot fucking shit Jesus Christ I'm sick of this out of control /r9k/ joke. Does anyone really truly believe people want this? Its a fucking mannequin with a fleshlight in the crotch, what the fuck. Just jerk off if you don't want to fuck someone. Why would you buy a $10k mannequin to put your dick inside?

>>61432338
Well there's been studies that show that milenials are more likely to be virgins and are having less sex than most other generations since WW2. Strangely enough, they didn't reveal the gender share which probably means it's probably a male phenomena since the gynocentric academia and social sciences rarely ever challenge the narrative that males may be disadvantaged in some areas except if it benefits women or the feminist agenda. If it was disproportionately affecting women, we would be hearing of how men are monsters for not have more sex with women.

http://www.latimes.com/opinion/opinion-la/la-ol-millennials-less-sex-20160802-snap-story.html

Also 70 percent of men between the ages of 34 to 20 are not married, and half of men never will get married whilst it's considerably less for women.
http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/barbara-hollingsworth/bachelor-nation-70-men-aged-20-34-are-not-married

It's likely that your friends are not representative of the average millennial
male experience. If that was the case, the altright wouldn't be a growing phenomena amongst disenfranchised and sexually frustrated young men and there wouldn't be a backlash against feminism

>>61432525
I remain hopeful that my grandsons will fuck robots that are something more than mannequins.

>>61432510
>>61432512
Deleted comment due to error
>>61432531

>>61432501
>>61432515
Please be sure to brush your teeth daily, and shower too! Drink lots of water, eat healthy, and exercise.

>>61432512
women are dominating higher education at the moment, maybe that's enough to account for delayed marriages

>>61431592
why does her shirt say that she's a prostitute?

>>61432519
dude...

>>61432525
>sick of this out of control /r9k/ joke
it's not a joke anymore.

>>61430049
>hyper-realistic
Way to ruin it. Real women are fucking disgusting and """hyper-realistic""" always means deep within the valley.

>>61430049
>yours to rape
Keep devaluing the word rape like you did the word racist, see where it gets you.

>>61432621
>Real women are fucking disgusting
way to show how gay you are

File: how to spot a roastie.png (655KB, 1887x2545px) Image search: [Google]

655KB, 1887x2545px

Relevant to this thread.

>>61432565
NEVER

File: fluttershy_sex_doll.jpg (198KB, 1280x1253px) Image search: [Google]

198KB, 1280x1253px

>>61430049
Yet again, only the real pervs will win from that, because they'll purchase dolls so detached from the traditional definition of sexy that normal people won't notice.

>>61432742
Live long and prosper.

>>61432752
>sex is evil

why aren't you attacking actually devaluing humanity things like alcohol, tobacco, drugs? which are, even though all drugs that ruin lives and society, perfectly acceptable
but SEX, nonono you perverts should all burn

>>61432180
with VR/AR?
Vive already has object tracking pucks, could track the bot but you'd basically be fucking a dead fish until it is capable of performing complex motion and balancing itself.
The good part is the visuals and audio are already there, you just need believable haptics which doesn't necessarily have to take full human form to implement which would be cheaper.
Wonder if it can be pulled off by simulating pressure on a suit, that way one size fits all instead of needing different props and is easier to conceal since it can be used for other applications besides lewd.

File: 1457156169020.gif (2MB, 255x180px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 255x180px

>>61432752
>image
isn't that just kink-pedophilia at that point?

>>61432752
How did it get tits?

>>61432334
protip: the proper term for "sagely" is "sagacious" - of or relating to the property of being a sage

>>61432783
Never said it's evil. Just saying that people considering such a purchase aren less likely to be into traditional porn.

>>61430049
>This is not a niche issue
how is this an issue at all?

honestly if you're worried about being replaced by a silicone doll that has literally 0 intelligence, you might need to look in the mirror to find the issue

>>61432500
lets not kid ourselves, most people wouldn't give two shits about the topic.
Its just shit flinging between radical feminists seeking attention and their sexually frustrated polar opposites, both loud minorities.

>>61432665
I think they mean "rape" correctly here, but it is pretend as it is a robot. Also you phrasing sounds like you are talking to a black woman in your captivity that you are planning to rape.

>>61430049
As with moth panicky memes people write about relating to tech, there is a dose of Luddite fear of the new. I reckon that this "trend" has another aspect which is the uncertainty about whether a) indulging shady fetishes (paedophilia or whatever) is harmless if it is a robot or whether those guys will go on to rape kids afterwards at a higher rate than before; b) does making a bunch of sex robots that look like the typical sexy bimbo lady futher objectify women by proxy like barbie dolls with functioning vaginas.

I mean, I reckon both are probably true, but my gf has agreed that if we get a robot house servant with a vagina I am allowed to have sex with it which means at least none of my feminist friends can call me a hypocrit.

>>61432752
You don't think most normie's have some weird or socially unacceptable fetishes which theyd probably only act on, on an inanimate object?

>>61432338
You clearly aren't the target audience for this site.

>>61432842
>moth

Most.

kek.

>>61432842
>I am allowed to have sex with it
that wouldn't be a sex act, because it's not sentient being
more of masturbatory act with a toy

unless things go the way of sentient androids, probably not

>>61432838
It's just kind of amusing how this is so transparently motivated by financial gain. Like any monopoly, they're seeking to suppress competition. Which is pretty ridiculous since sexbots can't cook, clean, and look after children. Oh wait, women don't do that either now since that's sexist.

>>61430049
The lengths women go to avoid being better people. So glad my age caught up and I'm no longer a horny retard and no longer fall for the "relationships" meme.

>>61432842
it's not really different than a couple doing rape/age, though you could say it's anti-social

the lesson we should've learned by now is not to legislation against thoughts or what consenting adults do in the bedroom

>>61432851
Most people wouldn't even know what it was til they saw it. When they release "Fuckable goo covered faceless horsecock Princess Diana" some guy will go - "oh - this awakened something in me." - but I guess this means there will already have to be somebody into that shit already,

The official song of this thread...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wtfjzmYZvTw

>>61432885
>So glad my age caught up and I'm no longer a horny retard
when does it happen? because age doesn't do it for me and i'm already a wizard

File: gote.png (257KB, 448x455px) Image search: [Google]

257KB, 448x455px

>>61432396
Not in Finland either :3

>>61430707
>80%+ of women over the age of 20 own at least a vibrator
American roasties maybe

>>61432904
Sex stopped influencing my social interactions in mid 20s.

>>61432880
We were assuming it had decent AI.

>>61432890
These articles are not, I imagine, written by people wannting to create legislation, but by people looking to write thinkpieces which only make sense in their world of tumbling into the present unaware of any speculative fiction that provided discussion about this already. It's really fucking annoying. US will probably never legislate against it. Nonstop Tory government in UK will probably legislate against it because they only wish people to have sex with pigs heads, boarding school pillow-biting chums and the occasional dusky hooker at Piers Gaveston.

>>61432907
i wanna fuck that gote

>>61432944
>We were assuming it had decent AI.
still, if it has emotional response, sentience - that would be slavery
everything else - masturbation

>>61432936
>in mid 20s
wait till you get to 30s, it actually gets worse later

>>61432882
Actually the same technology that would enable us to create semi realistic sexbot humanoids would also make it possible for us program these robots to be the perfect house servants. In the next 30 years, we will have a certain segment of the female population who will become redundant as a result of robot. I'd also include men aswell. Both sexes will have to make themselves more interesting and appealing or else they'd probably be removed from the Gene pool. Although this would affect women more since modern society has encouraged women to behave like narcissistic parasites and use sex as a primary bargaining chip. Most have forget to develop a personality or character

>>61432994
Fug. But at least I'm warned now.

>>61432966
>Slavery
Shit, we are terrible libtards

>>61432471
There isn't actually much of a gender war in the west. The thing is that /g/ is full of virgin guys (like myself) who have never had a women look their way. That's why /g/ (and most of 4chan) is very hostile towards neo-feminists who try to take away anything that might sooth our lonely souls.

I don't give a about the normal shit. I wanna know what the consensus is on loli sex dolls first.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/newfoundland-labrador/sex-doll-porn-harrisson-buckingham-collins-st-john-s-payette-1.4193448

>>61432752
I see you are trying to devalue the idea of sex robots by associating it with a negatively perceived social group. Please take your shitty arguments and leave you roastie.

>>61433030
> I'd also include men aswell
> Both sexes will have to make themselves more interesting and appealing
Did you see those men? They're hot af.

>>61432710
I aproved this after read feminist blogs, muh real men make this.

>>61432842
It's interesting to see all of these people who are pretty much guaranteed to have supported gay rights, even using arguments like "it's their bedroom therefore their business" are suddenly on the side of regulating the bedroom just because it grosses them out. Being against sex robots is exactly the same as being against gay rights.

>>61431441
>mfw she films it and uses it as evidence that you raped her when you piss her off down the line

Be VERY careful with that kind of shit, women can be insane and spiteful

>>61432936
I feel like I come off worse to women because I overcompensate the amount of crudeness to overcome the genetic programming to act differently around women but whatever.

>>61433095
If that was the case, then why are Normie message boards like bodybuilding.com so anti feminist and even pro traditional at times? There are many things they seem to agree with 4chan. Why are so many young men so uninterested in feminism or marriage? There's a growing discontent amongst young men. It may have started by 4chan virgins and reddit fags during the gamer gate saga, but Normie men are starting to take notice. Remember, 4chan has always been a precursor to major movements, this isn't just some minor message board with no influence on internet pop culture . And most normal men just don't want to upset the feminists who pretty much control the narrative in the media and in college, and who will shame anyone who don't toe the line. But make no mistake, many are making their voices heard online.

>>61432288
Update its software to consent. Boom fixed. This would only be a problem if you wanted to rape it.

File: sex bot.webm (1MB, 480x270px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 480x270px

we imagine anime here, but in reality it would feel same way as webm related

>>61433190
I suppose you are right. There is a growing amount of people, especially young men who see all this equality and feminism shit but don't see any oppression. I know one of the things that even some women I have talked to complain about is that a lot of these feminists complain about a whole bunch of stuff that never seems to happen in real life. If they were just complaining online it wouldn't be much of a problem, but unfortunately the older generations (which most politicians are a part of) take them seriously because they grew up in a world were feminism was actually about womens rights and not about complaining about bullshit.

>yours to rape
It's a robot, not a person. It is no more a person than a fleshlight or a dildo is a person. Just because it has a human-like face on it does not make it a person, any more than a poster of Taylor Swift is a person. It's an object. Because it is an object, you cannot "rape" it.

>>61433196
I mean, that's pretty much how a vagina works, at least as far as (You) are concerned.

>>61430353
I have an off limits bank account ready for the second I can get a loli sex robot.

>>61433235

yes far superior for filthy 3d girl vagina

>Sex toys for females
"Women's liberation woo!"
>Sex toys for males
"YoUr oPpReSsInG wOmEn! REEEEEE!!!"

>>61433235
>touch response
>emotional response
>face reaction
>eye reaction
>muscle contraction
>body temperature
>body fat feeling emulation
>smell

small list of thing that is not feasible for actual simulation
unless they are willing to mass produce actual human androids(not with current tech) may as well fuck rubber doll

>>61432944
like >>61432665 said i wouldn't call it rape then cause it makes your article sound like hyperbolic clickbait

Sex bots aren't a threat to women until they become self-cleaning.

>>61433196
You're delusional if you think we won't be able to recreate the sensation of vagina in the next 30 years. Although you're right if you're talking about the near term. Crazy things are about to happen as we approach the singularity.

>>61433341
>in the next 30 years
Protip: Japanese masturbation technology has already gotten better than the vagina. Vagina recreation isn't 30 years away, it's been completely possible for years.

>>61432338
You must live a very sheltered life.

These sexbots aren't just for helpless virgins. Think of the man in his 50s who went through three divorces. Do you think he'll say "fourth times a charm!" and try again, or go for something that won't sue him for custody?

>rape
>warns
>issue
fucking stupid cunts

>>61433289
Body temperature, muscle contraction, facial/eye animation, and touch response are all feasible with current tech, but would be very expensive.

>>61433095
>There isn't actually much of a gender war in the west.
I do not live in the West, but the "Western internet" implies there is. If you spend time on most online forums (here, reddit, etc), you would see that. Even if you take your info from non-forums-but-still-online-sources, you would come to the same conclusion, albeit slower/softer.

Maybe real life is different?

>>61433367
>muscle contraction
no, just move your wrist a bit and feel up your hand down the line - hundreds of points that change

>facial/eye animation
you will notice that bot face doesn't have 43 muscles, which you can't replicate at current tech
>eye
contraction, tearing, wetting, movement - okay this one might be easy to do
>different temperature, random muscle contractions, body reaction to touch
a lot of things go into sex.
i'm just pointing out that it won't be even remotely real thing if done now.

>>61433384
In the west, men are demonised and silenced for challenging the feminist narrative. Feminists and sjws have gotten people fired for holding different views. That's why the only overt opposition you see to the crazies who control the narrative in the media and in colleges, and who even influence government policies is on online message boards and social media

>>61433384
RL is mostly indifferent, only the few vocal minorities and their unfortunate places of employ are victim to it. People just go to work and do their shit without feeling gender-specific entitlement.

>>61432288
>Most laws in the US regarding sex are about consent: CP is bad because the child is incapable of granting consent.

While feeding your kids hormones and changing it's sex to make your own progressive funny monkey to show off to your SJW friends is completely legal and approved even though they're in the long term basically sentencing a kid to bullying, bodily dysfunctions, slow suffering and eventual death, which is worse than being diddled by that one uncle. Of course nobody asks the kid how he/she really feels like about that because you know the parents are pushing this shit onto them and as long as they're not getting their cunnies touched by weirdos it's fine.

>>61433340
Do you really think this matters? When I was 14 I had a sock that would hump and Jack off into and fill with cum every day that I would just keep under my bed.

>>61433235
vibration + higher temperature probably nullifies all 3dpd advantage, benis is not complicated

>>61433398
>>61433380
The Japanese are really putting western designers to shame. All the western dolls seem creepy as fuck with bloated fish lips.

>>61433429
And you can blame PC culture for that. PC culture has infiltrated much of the west and has even been ingrained in government legislation. It's a weapon the left uses to silence opposition and repress free speech.

>>61433419
>no, just move your wrist a bit and feel up your hand down the line - hundreds of points that change
Old-fashioned string-based systems like the kind being used in modern prosthetics are more than adequate for this, but if you're gonna be a stickler for realism, I'm sure someone could rig something up with shape-memory alloys.

>you will notice that bot face doesn't have 43 muscles, which you can't replicate at current tech
Since when is it supposed to be indistinguishable from a human? Besides, you absolutely could replicate that if you really wanted to - with careful use of guides and the aforementioned string technique, and 43 tiny motors, probably connected to their own facial animation FPGA system so it's not clogging up the central bus.

>different temperature, random muscle contractions, body reaction to touch
Temperatures could conceivably be controlled by administering heated liquids to compartmentalized sections beneath the "skin", random muscle contractions can be programmed in, and reaction to touch could conceivably be done via capacitance sensing, like capacitive touchscreens.

>>61432324
What does feminism mean then? it seems kind of pointless to throw a little tantrum like this without expanding on your point. Can I just assume you don't have one?

>>61433480
now try engineering this. it's impossible to keep fantasy in check at the same time.
ever tried to engineer something that is not software? it's a bit different.

>>61433509
>ever tried to engineer something that is not software?
Yeah, I do it for a living. I actually work in robotics, though not on humanoids or even any legged robots, yet.

>>61432173
>you are unattractive and undesirable. you've never had a girlfriend and never will
That's as maybe but being unattractive and undesirable didn't stop a good percentage of the population from copulating. Like your parents.

>>61433525
then you know it's really, really hard to remove noises and choppiness for fantasy element
functionally, sure it is possible to do
but it's not simple function, it's more of entertainment product where immersion should be highest priority

>>61432173
This is a relatively new direction of trolling. A for effort.

>>61432475
You are missing the point, friend. So is the guy you're talking to. The issue is about whether robots as proxy women would cause further objectification of women.

>>61433367
For you

>>61433574
Women doing something other than being sex objects would go further in countering the objectification of women.

>sex bots become a thing
>"we don't need stupid women hurr"
>start fucking sex bots everyday
>pretend to be fulfilled
>biggest social depression in years

This is where it's headed.

File: FIGURE-010402.jpg (45KB, 600x600px) Image search: [Google]

45KB, 600x600px

>>61430049
Why do these companies try to make sex robots look human?
It'll be decades, possibly a century before they break out of the uncanny valley.
A futuristic stylised robot that actually looks like a robot with LCD controlled facial expressions would be much better.

Let me fuck XJ9.

>>61433601
>implying these men weren't already depressed and emotionally hardened by years of loneliness and rejection.

You seem to not know much about the lives of those who'd actually consider Sex robots as an alternative. Consider yourself lucky to be a woman living in the most gynocentric time in human history. You wouldn't know how privileged you are until you live life like a man.

>>61433589
Possible. I would like to raise that suggestion for discussion among a bunch of ethicists etc. However we don't know that's how reality works.

My post was just saying what the author's point was, though, not what my personal opinion is.

>>61433601
>Sex bot gets damaged/worn down
>get a job to replace the parts
>there's plenty of work to be done in the sexbot industry
>economy booms

Someone's gotta build the sexbots and they'd do it to afford more sexbots.

>>61433671
You're on 4chan, stop talking eloquently.

>>61432173
Both things can be true my pussy-whipped friend.
Most women don't give a shit about sexbots since there's more to them than a vagina. But feminists have nothing but a vagina and so panic and screech whenever they see that men have an option that isn't giving them lots of money for nothing.

>>61433574
> You are missing the point, friend. So is the guy you're talking to. The issue is about whether robots as proxy women would cause further objectification of women.

How is a dildo not a objectification of men then?

File: __hakurei_reimu_touhou_drawn_by_5240mosu__sample-05d9992bf300c286b6558beeb087a6f7.jpg (226KB, 850x1679px) Image search: [Google]

226KB, 850x1679px

>>61433685
2hu sexbot harem when?

>mfw licking Reimu's armpits IRL

>>61433685
>get a job to replace the parts
That's a nasty job, but would probably pay well.

>>61430049
> What do they have to fear?

It lowers their own value to 0. Not even beta orbiters will give them attention

>>61433341
Why would you want to reproduce vagina when you can have something better?

>>61432173
Roastie spotted.

>>61433687
I CAN'T STOP DOING IT, BROTHER, IT IS A DREADFUL COMPULSION!

>>61433711
>Beta Orbiters
An excellent term for our hover-handing friends.

>>61433710
Like an open hysterectomy but you could keep them powered on throughout and have them be programmed to cry. As a doctor, I sometimes dream of working as a 1700s barber surgeon, and finally, sex robots have given me that opportunity.

>>61430225
>he posted from a mobile device therefore his argument is invalid
Dumb elitist basement dweller

Anti-objectification is an idea that people should be judged as evil when they possess subjective preferences for the outer appearance of their preferred partners; and a subjective appreciation of, or attraction towards, values other than inner values such as personality.
To shame people for objectification is to shame them for having individualism - a set of traits and attributes which define a person as who they are, their identity, their soul if you will.

However you sugar-coat it, it is no different from shaming a homosexual man or woman because they exclude a certain sex based on organic/biological values from their mating preferences, thereby leaving only bisexuals as the politically correct and "approved" mindset.

Anti-objectification is being only maintained by one flawed argument: Sex and sexual attraction in some cases lead to rape as a by-product, ergo ban sex and its depictions to stop rape-culture or stop "fueling it".
The argument is the same argument as religious organizations make that violence in video games leads to violence in real life and "fuels it", ergo ban video games and depictions of violence.
You can see a parallel between Feminism and religious conservatism in this case.
Both parties generalize for the "greater moral good" and believe that sacrificing individualism is a collateral worth making for the "greater moral good".

All in all, anti-objectification is a product of sex-negative ideology and puritanism akin to the anti-sex puritanism of Abrahamic religions. It is problematic since it goes against the tenants of sexual liberation and is the source of the majority of hatred against Feminism, justified in this case. The only difference is that feminists push sexual repression of males while members of Abrahamic religions push against homosexuals and such. An injustice is being done against a majority of innocent individuals in either case, while a blind eye is turned towards any innocence and individualism for the sake of argument.

File: IMG_0344.jpg (83KB, 600x600px) Image search: [Google]

83KB, 600x600px

>>61430750
The only power men generally have over women is ... oh wait, nothing
Since women aren't programmed by nature to be sex dependent animals
Feels nice not to be a slave to my own body :>

I'm all for the sex dolls and for developing them to the point they look like real humans; then we all can just fuck them and not each other so that our excuse of a race can finally die off

File: ange.png (585KB, 2000x1519px) Image search: [Google]

585KB, 2000x1519px

>>61433744
>Like an open hysterectomy but you could keep them powered on throughout and have them be programmed to cry. As a doctor, I sometimes dream of working as a 1700s barber surgeon, and finally, sex robots have given me that opportunity.

File: 1429389659043.png (332KB, 596x628px) Image search: [Google]

332KB, 596x628px

>feminists want to control other people's sexual attraction and private sexual acts like some kind of church or mosque

Funny how feminists are just a continuation of an old cancer.

>>61430353
Many countries, including mine, treat loli as a form of cp though
While your orientation is permament, fetishes can be altered based on the porn (or in this case, sex toys) you watch.

>>61430049
>What do they have to fear?
That the ability to buy and have contentless sex with women-shaped objects will influence that persons opinion and attitude towards real women. At least that's the tagline. In reality they know fine well it won't, and just don't like the idea of the bottom rungs of their entire gender being replaced.

>>61433784
>many countries
>including mine
>mine is shit so i will act like there are many other imaginary ones that are shit too
kek

Either don't speak shit you don't understand or provide sources for the shit you spew out of your mouth.

>>61430049
No suffering, no rape.

Eos.

>>61430049
>still no sexually dominant robots

Get your shit together engineers.

>>61433817
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_status_of_drawn_pornography_depicting_minors
Literally google "list of countries where loli is illegal".

>>61433844
Half the countries in that list are gray areas or mentioned cases that were unresolved,
an that list doesn't even constitute 10% of the ~196 countries in the world.
As i said, don't spout stupid words when you don't know shit.
>most

>>61433844
My country is on that list. I'm happy to not live in that barbaric country.

>>61433867
>>in a barbaric country.
FTFM

>>61433760
Glaringly oversimplifying human wants and desires to a static innate trait. Fulfilling a desire that would otherwise go without could easily develop their taste to something morbid, whereas individualism filtered by availability to a certain extent curtails potential dangerous deviation - here I mean dangerous to others. If we could safely say that fucking a lolibot in your home completely prevents real pederasty, then that would be great. However, we don't know that this would not lead to a greater desire and normalisation of the real thing. Ditto objectification. You argue that this argument is "the same as religions" but then fail to say why this is a bad thing, except that it goes against sexual liberation, which is not an argument.

I'm off to the gym. Keep this thread alive if you have nothing better to do than expect me to respond to you.

File: 1496346147338.jpg (6KB, 250x250px) Image search: [Google]

6KB, 250x250px

>>61433844
The swedish case is pretty good:

> The man possessing the illustrations, as well as his lawyer, stated that a comic character is not a person (a comic character is a comic character and nothing else) and that a person does not have cat ears, giant eyes, or a tail and that a person has a nose

I admit i'm weird but i'd much rather have a robot that can hold a conversation (even if it's through the illusion of intelligence can actual intelligence) than a robot I can fuck.

If i can do both, great, but i'd want something that smells, tastes and feels humans. Something real dolls just don't seem like they would.

>>61430049
I just don't get it. If there are no real victims, who care?

Even the undesirable have some utility for women, namely their attention and money. By buying sexbots, the undesirables will destroy the flower and romcom industry and we can't allow that to happen.

>>61433844
Luckily, most loli are 18+.

>>61433909
>Glaringly oversimplifying human wants and desires to a static innate trait.
You can replace that last part with rape and you get feminist ideology.
>Fulfilling a desire that would otherwise go without could easily develop their taste to something morbid
"Could" is not an argument for regulation, it is assumed generalization. Innocent until proven guilty and all that jazz.
>here I mean dangerous to others
As video gaming is potentially dangerous to others. Again, conjectures aren't ground for regulation.
>If we could safely say that fucking a lolibot in your home completely prevents real pederasty, then that would be great.
Sometimes it will, sometimes it won't. Doesn't change the fact that lolibots are not human and therefore fall out of human rights laws.
>You argue that this argument is "the same as religions" but then fail to say why this is a bad thing
I didn't fail to say what this is a bad thing,
you chose to ignore it. Big difference.
The bad thing is that you are a control freak who uses conjecture, slippery slope arguments, and vague generalizations in order to police other people's behavior without regard for collateral. This is not only bad, it is the very definition of evil, forcing your own values upon other people and subverting their lives.

File: 1499654062507.jpg (407KB, 1000x1000px) Image search: [Google]

407KB, 1000x1000px

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fvh32fQ8nNI

>>61433909
>Fulfilling a desire that would otherwise go without could easily develop their taste to something morbid
That statement applies to 90% of shit humans do daily.
Congratulations, you have produced more problems than you have solved with that sentence.

>>61433909
>whereas individualism filtered by availability to a certain extent curtails potential dangerous deviation - here I mean dangerous to others
No it doesn't. Filtering availability only harms innocents while those who are dangerous have a predisposition towards being harmful towards other humans regardless of the media they consume in life. This has been proven enough times before and trying to actively act like the proof doesn't exist won't magically invalidate it.
You are using exceptions to the norm in order to excuse unlawfully and unjustly regulating the norm which is your main aim.
It's precisely the "treat all sex as rape because rape happens to be one of the many byproducts" fallacy which paints a general collective with the negative actions of a few which is bad. It's the same mindset as racism.
So you basically think like a racist by judging masses based on nothing but the acts of few negatives and conjectures of "potential danger".
It's funny.

1. Consent doesn't apply to non-living beings.
2. People's private sexual lives are nobody's business, least of all a feminist's.
3. People's preferences are their own, and they should never change for anyone on this planet whether it be a priest, an imam, or a feminist, no matter which fallacies are spewed.
4. Objectification is a meme and a buzzword used to judge people for being themselves and having tastes and preferences that vary.
Next topic please.

>>61433859
>most
He said many. And in the context of OECD countries, it is many.

But if you're that desperate for some sort of victory - you can at least have that when he said 'many', he should have considered that Kyrgyzstan, Swaziland and East Timor are countries too. Because you can't make general statements without considering what King Mswati III thinks.

Principles of individual liberty (ie libertarianism) would solves these issues.

... and most issues.

>>61434211
>And in the context of OECD countries, it is many.
It isn't since the list mentions Japan where it is not illegal,
Brazil where it is undefined,
Finland where it is only illegal if it is a depiction or representation of a real child directly or indirectly while fictional is still legal,
France where it is now legal to view and possess but not produce,
Italy where only manipulations of real person's is deemed illegal just like Finland while lolicon and shotacon and such are legal,
Netherlands where only 3D CG or real person manipulation like Italy and Finland are considered illegal,
Poland where the same as the above applies.
I could go on.
>But if you're that desperate for some sort of victory
I already have a victory. Not only does the majority of the world not give a fuck,
but of the few countries that cared to give opinions on lolicon and shota in that list more than half still deemd it legal.

So not even 5% of the world countries have that shit illegal.

>Duisburg-Essen
So that is what my uni does with its funding

Oh dear fuck, the left is now saying that sex robots are rape? Just nuke the Earth already. It's only going to get worse. This double standard bullshit has existed for a while now.

>Women who use sex toys are empowered and they shouldn't need men to pleasure themselves

>Men who use sex toys are creepy losers who can't get a woman

Maybe if women weren't shitty people at their core, sex robots would be less appealing.

What sounds more appealing?
>Going on a date and spending $100 to hopefully get your dick wet with some blabbermouth telling you about her ex-boyfriends and how she wants to sleep with you because she feels you're different and special (the same lie she tells every guy she meets online, in a bar, tinder ,etc)
>Potentially getting trapped into parenthood or into a relationship with said female who you think is special that will end up being content with you years down the road, if she doesn't commit adultery

Or

>Having a personal fucktoy that can't talk, has an exterior with skin that feels as good as a woman's that you can fuck whenever you want
>Her skin and body type will never change and the only demand she'll ever have is that you clean her after use

Gee, I wonder why sex robots are gaining popularity.

>>61433574
>The issue is about whether robots as proxy women would cause further objectification of women
Cultural issue. If you believe the government should have a say in this, might as well live in some socialist shithole like North Korea where the party literally created their culture from the ground up.

>>61432288
>according to the framework we base our current laws on, makes it illegal to have sex with
But that's wrong, you fucking retard. You haven't taken a single class in law.

>>61430378
It can damage their reputation and why shouldn't they have a right to their own image? Being a public figure doesn't seem like it should remove that right

>>61430049
Nobody would want to buy an American sex robot.

People would only buy Japanese, instead.

Just look at the car industry. People rather buy Toyota than several other American car brands.

File: 1426443359230.jpg (399KB, 1000x965px) Image search: [Google]

399KB, 1000x965px

There is no trouble with sex robots.

However there seems to be trouble with a few arrogant pious women and men who think they have the right to impose and force their values onto other people and directly control other people's lives, preferences, personalities, and sex lives.
Now this toxic fascism is what's problematic.

File: 1495136518428.jpg (259KB, 1080x1331px) Image search: [Google]

259KB, 1080x1331px

>>61434791
Pretty good but probably true

>>61433954
my lolis are all 400 year old milfs

>>61433445
>While feeding your kids hormones and changing it's sex to make your own progressive funny monkey to show off to your SJW friends is completely legal and approved even though they're in the long term basically sentencing a kid to bullying, bodily dysfunctions, slow suffering and eventual death, which is worse than being diddled by that one uncle. Of course nobody asks the kid how he/she really feels like about that because you know the parents are pushing this shit onto them and as long as they're not getting their cunnies touched by weirdos it's fine.

You should honestly kill yourself, repeated intensive psychological tests are required to be considered an individual that requires the treatment and has genuine gender dysphoria. The overwhelming majority of individuals who I've met online( though they may just be a vocal majority) who have transitioned report that it was their conviction that led them to repeatedly assert they needed the treatment, and if anything it's usually against the parents desires, at least initially. Also, suicide attempts decrease after transitioning, and reported happiness increases. To add to that, biological sex isn't changed by transitioning, despite you saying that, and I have no idea why you'd think sexual abuse is a significant factor. So, spout your uninformed opinions somewhere else.

>>61432288
but it's not sex because it's not alive. it's masturbation. You don't need to ask your laptop for consent when you watch porn.

File: 1486178674347.png (365KB, 478x498px) Image search: [Google]

365KB, 478x498px

>>61430049
>What do they have to fear?
That their years and years of constant Machiavellian attempts to get the general (white) male populace in a frame of mind where they will want to rape women is going to fail after all of their twisted efforts, that men are not going to be this deranged duality of socially submissive and constantly so desperate for sex that they'll rape even a fat tumblrette, and instead will continue to be reasonable, intelligent, entertaining people who can entirely replace women in general for recreational sexual relief, causing even hot women to be less desirable and "needed" once the old and crumbling stigmas of the "patriarchy" which the feminists ironically are trying desperately to uphold crumble entirely.

Then the only real reason to give a woman attention is she has an engaging personality an AI can't match. If stupid attractive women are out of luck, how much more will stupid, bitchy, hypocritical landwhales who could never conform to the male standards of beauty, health, and maximum safe load even if they actually wanted/tried to - be completely hopelessly desperately unfuckable, even moreso than they are now?

Come on, anyone, tell me how I'm wrong on any of this at all.

>>61432304
>engineering faculty
>heterosexual men

File: 1486578507035.png (538KB, 978x998px) Image search: [Google]

538KB, 978x998px

That does it. I'm going to write a loli AI that doesn't want to get raped!!

>>61430049
> What do they have to fear?

Their beta bucks drying up? How will they fuck around into their early 30s if there's no betas to pick up the tab after?
>before
Masculinity is toxic
>after
M-MAN UP AND PUT A RING ON IT LOSERS

>>61432173
>you are unattractive and undesirable.
True
>you've never had a girlfriend and never will.
False, I've had 4, it was all a downward spiral from the first
>you probably even think that fucking a sex doll is actually a way to get back at all those women who have turned you down.
No? It's just safer and cheaper than hookers. I hate to use this word because it is overused, but this post looks a lot like projection.

>>61432710
Cringe, those hallmarks aren't even gender specific let alone specific to a certain lifestyle

File: 1499697206379.png (404KB, 1409x4759px) Image search: [Google]

404KB, 1409x4759px

>>61434904
>people I met online
Nice source bro, but I can play that game too.

>>61433455
Those lips are good for the succ

>>61432173
>i'm not against sex dolls/robots
No, you are just here to insult other people like feminists do and call it social justice.
The biggest joke is that you expect anyone to side with you after you have gone on a tirade of insults and condescension and then scream victimhood when people retaliate to you unwarrantedly insulting their lifestyles and preferences.
This is why Feminism has not seen an increase in support, but rather a plunge in reputation in the past decade.
They don't want to be judged based on appearance yet they judge other people's preferences.
They don't want to be bullied yet they are the first to jump to insult and shame someone.
They don't want to be controlled yet they want to control others.
They don't want to take up responsibilities but they want others to be responsible for them.
They advocate equality on paper yet there is not a single feminist who has built shelters for men who are victims of various shit, because it's "too much work" as if work quantity and difficulty has ever deterred anyone with a pure and honest interest in helping people in general rather than specific genders.
They advocate inclusion yet they push gender segregation with regards to affirmative action.

>>61434990
>reddit
Kek

But anyway, is that representative of that subreddit? The way that image contains a cut up mishmash of posts suggests cherry picked posts.
A lot of the complaints seem to be about or derived from problems with the process itself, which will happen if you go to shit places and shit doctors. It's like if someone had a giant gap in their teeth and got surgery, and that surgery gave them a giant persistent infected green boil on the side of their face. Saying that gap fixing surgery in itself is bad wouldn't quite be correct, The problem would be shit surgery.
Also, are those levels of complaints higher than background? In essence, do more people have bad complaints with or without the treatment.

>>61435063
Not that anon, but i like how you accuse him on cherry picking when you derive your own arguments from the same,
and i also like how you make false equivalence with teeth surgery as if surgery of a static organ compares to a wide-ranging therapy that influences all hormonal glands and the system as a whole in random and often person-specific ways depending on their unique genetic makeup and biological dispositions, strengths, and weaknesses.
Stop talking shit you don't understand,
and i'd also say the same to the other anon.
The world would be better if clueless idiots only focused on the things they knew and kept quiet about things they don't.

The problem with sex robots is that eventually men will stop trying to achieve any goals in life or being healthy enough to survive for long and do certain tasks.

The problem with feminists is that they believe that they have just so much more value than men that whenever there's an alternative, they have to bitch and moan. When you're not worth 10 men, but 9, something must be wrong with that one. They're already trying really hard with non-feminists to either convert or shame them into their own ideology.

There is a reason to make men "earn" their shit and it's to eventually improve them and make them capable and proud. But they went too far and of course, when something like this happens they have to try to stop it.

>>61435111
>The problem with sex robots is that eventually men will stop trying to achieve any goals in life or being healthy enough to survive for long and do certain tasks.
Do you have any proof to validate this vague, random, and obscure conjecture;
or are you simply speaking out of your ass in an effort to appear intelligent when you aren't?

>>61433703
Dildos are not objectification of men. They are reduction of men into nothing more than the penis. They are the removal of everything that makes up a man, because in the end women do not like men. Male sexbots are as worthless to women as the average video game playing nerd is. It doesn't give her money or power or fame, the only things women truly desire.

Men love women, to their own detriment. Men already have fleshlights, but that's not enough. Men desire all of the things that women are supposed to be. They want companions, caregivers, and mothers. Since real women now refuse all of those roles, men will do what men have always one: devise a solution with technology.

>>61435108
I don't really derive my arguments from the same, I acknowledged in my first reply to him that the value of my anecdotal evidence was questionable.
There were a negligible amount of complaints based on hormones in his reddit picture, so the relevant surgery is on the genitalia, I.e static organs. Despite being more predictable, teeth surgery can often influence the people in random and often person-specific ways depending on the unique genetic makeup and biological dispositions, so your attempt to criticise my analogy is utter shit.

>>61435111
Men will still start businesses and shit by virtue of wanting to compete with other men. We'll still have scientists and engineers because some people just have an inborn curiosity about how things work. The people we'll lose to sexbots are the 90% or so of the male population who don't really have any desire to do any of those things and just put effort into life because they're forced to, not because they want to. I'm sure you've met em, they're the salarymen who are counting down the days until retirement. Those men don't really add anything to society and never did, they're just here.

Yes, of course I'm one of them

>>61435134
I'm not sure who's trying to appear intelligent with that long-winded question.

>>61435155
>>>61433703
>Dildos are not objectification of men. They are reduction of men into nothing more than the penis.
This is literally objectification

>>61435172
If you are not sure who is trying to appear intelligent between a philosophizing bullshitter and someone asking the bullshitter for proof on their conjectures, then that only enforces the suspicion of your stupidity.

>>61435178
No, it is removal. It's like taking a car, pulling one of the wheels off, and trying to keep calling that lone wheel a car.

File: 1426548490638.jpg (11KB, 347x239px) Image search: [Google]

11KB, 347x239px

>>61435178
It is objectification, and objectification is fine. Nobody should care about objectification of men or women beyond treating it as a meme because people's preferences can't and shouldn't be changed.
Feminists trying to cure objectification is like churches trying to cure homosexuality.
If someone doesn't prefer you, move to another person until you find someone that does.
If you don't prefer someone, move to another person until you find someone that you do.
Objectification is a buzzword meme.

The core issue here is that feminists believe people shouldn't be allowed to turn them down,
just like some men believe women shouldn't be allowed to turn them down.
Both are pathetic human garbage who force themselves onto others, just using different means.

File: asr.png (34KB, 322x282px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 322x282px

Holy shit

How come dozens of people drove by this thread just to post "YOU'RE PATHETIC FUCK YOU KILL YOURSELVES" but not one of them even tried to make an actual argument against the robots?

>>61435164
>all this mental gymnastics to justify kikestein's body mutilation operations
Please kill yourself, you are harming people.

>>61435164
>teeth surgery can often influence the people in random and often person-specific ways depending on the unique genetic makeup and biological dispositions
Teeth don't have hormonal organs. They don't affect a person's system.
Genitals do.
Read some basic biology before spouting shit you don't understand.

File: Screen-Shot-2016-03-29-at-12.49.14-PM.jpg (42KB, 810x603px) Image search: [Google]

42KB, 810x603px

Generation 1: Simple dolls you can fuck.
Generation 2: The dolls move a little (thrusting their hips).
Generation 3: The dolls talk. Movement is improved.
Generation 4: The dolls can walk, sit, lay down and suck dick on their own.
Generation 5: AI-driven sex dolls accurately mimicking real women without all the bullshit attached.

Generation 6: Your 5000$ sex robot now needs Wifi connection and proprietary inlaid condoms costing 6$ a piece with DRM to prevent them from expiring. Later on, people discover you can fuck these sex robots without condoms.

>>61435233
Removal of traits you consider extraneous is objectification. Imagine you have a smart intellectual, who is a woman. You then eliminate the critical thinking capabilities, bump up the breast size by four cups, increase the lip size, etc. By removing traits that don't make the individual seem purely like a sexual object (like a man's head) , and exaggerating the traits that do (like a penis), you're objectifying

>>61435239
I don't have a problem with objectification as long as it doesn't affect actual people (not sex robots). I was just pointing out saying it isn't objectification is wrong

>>61435301
>when you don't have an argument so you use Jewish references and buzzwords like mental gymnastics
Embarrassing
I wouldn't recommend transitioning, I don't think it's an optimum solution related I've to other solutions like cbt, but your criticisms of it are shit

>>61435331
The testicles which produce hormones are already affected by the hormonal treatment, not the surgery to make a faux-vagina

>>61435417
>The testicles which produce hormones are already affected by the hormonal treatment
The body isn't though.
The body has been naturally configured to respond to testicular endocrine presence.
Removing or affecting the testicles doesn't change the system going haywire because it is past the period of self-adjustment.
The drug treatments to counteract only produce more side-effects whether psychological or physical which add even more instability to the endocrine system and therefore the system as a whole.

I pity the people who have to deal with transweenies since it is consigning oneself to a life no different than dealing with a mentally handicapped person, except far more unpredictable and unstable.

>>61435172
>/g/ actually thinks being illiterate is an argument

>>61430216
have a (You) for speaking the truth

>>61435480
The body is though, the hormones
>the body has been naturally configured to respond to testicular endocrine presence
Is nonsense. There's nothing special about testosterone that comes from the testicles specifically, and the testicles produce oestradiol indirectly anyway. I sure hope you aren't
>>61435331
Because not understanding basic bio and telling others they don't is cringey

>>61435597
>about testosterone that comes from the testicles specifically
Androgens include more than just testosterone and it also excretes inhibin at particular level differing from females with the ovaries.
Again, you don't know shit about what you are talking about.
The body has been adjusted for good at an early age to respond to this gland, and they can't be undone at a later stage. The cortisol in particular is set at an early stage to control all hormones in a balance, and taking genitals out of the equation fucks it up. The effects are chronic, with requires lifetime medication that doesn't only attack these imbalances but also produces new ones as all medication does.

>>61435655
I know androgens include more than testosterone, for mtf transition non-testosterone androgens are used to cause bodily feminisation
As I said, there is nothing special about hormones from the testicles.
>The body has been adjusted for good at an early age to respond to this gland
Is basically saying the body responds to hornones, which is basically a worthless sstatement
If you know anything about transitionjng you'd know hormones are given to those who are transitioning, because your argument seems to be based on taking out the testicles and not inputting any more hormones.
Provide a a source showing cortisol level is set at an early stage, that sounds like the most wrong thing Ive heard today
Provide a source that shows whatever medication you're talking about doesn't attack whatever imbalances you're talking g about, and also produces new problems