Why are so many feminists against Sex Robots?

Because it takes the power over sex away from women. Even if it's the "guys no one would ever fuck", they still want to remain the gatekeepers. Companionship and sex are two different things, and can be mutually exclusive. If a guy is getting his jollies from his sex bot, then he might treat women differently "not on a pedestal" since he isn't looking for a release from them. Historically, the control over the pussy has been the one thing women have had, and they are terrified of losing it.

>>38191468
How do you explain the feminists in favor of legalizing prostitution ?

>>38191368
Basically, they lose one of the two things they can provide; sex and a "relationship"

Men are hard wired to want females for reproductive purposes. Over time and with society's help, that changed into a desire for "love" in addition to sex.

Men can get companionship elsewhere if they have to, or they can live without it. The sex is the real thing they desire. So if the bot can provide it, even if it's not real, women lose their real power.

They probably view it like a disease; it may not affect them now, with only isolated cases here and here, but it is better to kill it or come up with a cure early

File: Robo waifu.jpg (272KB, 788x999px) Image search: [Google]

272KB, 788x999px

>>38191368
>Why are so many feminists against Sex Robots?
Because a love doll/sex bot will make them obsolete. I would panic too if I know my security and financial dependence can be destroyed by a few hundred $ love doll.

>>38191490

Again, power over sex. They can still turn men away if they want. And being able to charge for it will be "empowering". It used to be equality was getting the same say, pay, education, and opportunities that men had. Now it's about being a basic bitch, fucking tons of guys, and calling it feminism.

>>38191368

I think complete neural VR would be far superior. To each his own though

>>38191490
Many feminists are against prostitution actually. Feminists in my country tried to ban prostitution, citing concerns over exploitation and Mame infidelity despite the fact that by driving prostitution underground would make prostitutes more vulnerable.

>Why are so many feminists afraid of their bargaining chip being destroyed

You dumb dude?

sex dolls/robots are just big glorified sex toys, you don't see feminists getting mad over fleshlights so I don't get why they would get mad over a doll...

>>38191490
Under prostitution, at least the kind of prostitution sex-positive feminists favour (controlled by the women themselves rather than pimps), you have a system whereby men are giving money to women. With sex dolls the money is going to sex-doll creators, who would overwhelmingly be men.

>>38191368
It takes the power of pussy away. I wouldn't mind a qt 3.14 sex robot. See women would end up having to compete with a machine that does everything the man says. Compare that to a women and any sane man would choose a robot over them. You will see in the coming decade or so these robots being sold left right and centre. Meanwhile the feminists freaks will be with their cats and miserable. It's funny. They blame men for everything. Men built the modern world. So the men are basically seeing this as a problem and building a solution.

File: Women3.jpg (64KB, 530x530px) Image search: [Google]

64KB, 530x530px

WOMEN AREN'T SEX OBJECTS!
>oh ok, I'll just build a robot to-
STOP TAKING OUR PLACE AS SEX OBJECTS!

>>38191694
Because women these days are just glorified sex toys. They don't offer men much other than sex. As a man in a modern gynocentric relationship, you're expected to be everything(be funny, interesting, great in bead, be a fixer, ) whilst woman are just there to take advantage of men in exchange for sex. Perhaps even massage your ego. And when it comes to sex, the average woman behave like a starfish in bed if you're not a Chad. So they'd be in direct competition, when sex robots become advanced enough. Its telling that feminists believe that sex robots will end relationships and make men seek robots for companionship and sex. If women are that useless that they'd be in direct competition with a glorified sex doll, then you know there's something very wrong with modern women.

File: 1494783868053.jpg (92KB, 402x1024px) Image search: [Google]

92KB, 402x1024px

>>38191694
>so I don't get why they would get mad over a doll
It truly is a wonder why they would be so upset.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sz9MCCfgPMA
sex robot sex robot
sex robot sex robot
sex robot sex robot
sex robot sex robot

>>38192043
The processing power and AI that will make sex robots possible will also be able to make these robots be better cooks and cleaners than most women. You'll essentially have your own personal servant. Heck I bet in the future, you could program your robowaifu to be a worldclass pianist and it could play some Claude Debussy whilst you go sleep. The more I think about, the more I'm convinced sex robots and robots/androids in general will the end of women. Or perhaps women will have to change, to adapt to stay relevant. You can't act likens parasite when your only bargaining chip is gone.

>>38192760
What would be 'world class' if every robot can be given the same programming and hands?

Other than purists that would refuse these robots, why would anyone ever interact with another person if they could have a robot to act however they wanted.

Why would you want to raise children if you could just have some robot ones that have an off-switch when you don't feel like parenting?

Truly, robotics will lead to the end of the human race.

>>38192043
see a lot of words but few arguments. the only one one I can see see is "think about the robots feelings!" robots don't have feelings its like vegetarians who thinks cows are their intellectual equals

inb4 obvious joke about vegetarians being as dumb as cows

>>38193880
yea, that image is a shitty example of dancing around the issue.

They probably experience retroactive sexual trauma just looking at a sex bot.