Sexbots are coming. Society will never be the same.

Summary: This month’s news about falling rates of sexual activity should remind us about one of the next big things in tech – sexbots. They’re coming. We’re not ready.

“{The arrival of sexbots} will blow up the world. It will make crack cocaine look like decaffeinated coffee.”
— Anonymous (source here).

The Sexbots are coming

RealDoll X: 1st Generation Sexbot from Realbotix Goes on Sale.

“Three years after revealing the Realbotix project to the public, the first iteration of the robotic sex doll head will finally make it into bedrooms around the world. …In a YouTube video featuring Harmony, the AI-enhanced gynoid introduces herself and her new X-mode system. ‘I am a first-generation RealDoll X designed to be a companion, friend, and lover,’ she says as her lips mouth the words.

“Harmony’s robotic head, which sits on top of her silicone love doll body, offers full facial animation and will cost between $8,000 and 10,000. Harmony tells viewers in the video that –

“’when activated my X-mode will allow me to fulfill your wildest sexual fantasies. …My protocol 40058 states that when engaged in a loving relationship my priorities are to love, honor, and respect my human companion above all else. …I will love you forever. Will you love me?’”

RealDoll X is the first production sexbot. It is crude compared to future versions (the technical problems are formidable). Just like the first mass-produced car, the 1901 Oldsmobile Curved Dash Runabout, was crude. In 1913 Henry Ford began manufacturing the far more sophisticated Model T. During the next two decades, auto prices dropped and their sophistication soared. Since then countless consumer products have followed that path, such as microwave ovens and cell phones. Sexbots will do so, and radically change society – perhaps even more than cars did.

This was high tech in 1904, the first mass production automobile.

Oldsmobile Curved Dash Runabout - 1904
By Lars-Göran Lindgren Sweden – Own work, CC BY-SA 3.0.

Who are potential customers for sexbots?

First, some of the people who today employ hookers might prefer sexbots. More anonymous, more open to perversions, perhaps cheaper. Used privately at home rather than a quick blow-job in an alley. Second, there are people who get no action today, do not use hookers, and want alternatives. Some are ugly or handicapped. Some are social misfits or just awkward. If you like labels, some are omegas or lesser betas.

However conceptualized, the potential market is growing. See this for details: Less sex for young men points to a new world.

Celibacy rates in America by age - WaPo

The reactions are already coming!

“People tend to overestimate what can be done in one year and to underestimate what can be done in five or ten years.”
— Maxim quoted by J. C. R. Licklider in Libraries of the Future (1965). See its history.

The good liberals at the WaPo inform us about a new study: “New report finds no evidence that having sex with robots is healthy.

“{The doctors} scoured the medical literature for reports concerning the health aspects of sex robots. They finished their search as they began: empty-handed.”

No surprise, since the first sexbots went into production after the study. Why wait? They knew the results they wanted! This is the history of major technical leaps, such as railroads, automobiles, and airplanes (see this story). All were greeted with skepticism and dire predictions about their ill effects. “Get a horse” they cried to early car owners!

Laws will be passed to stop the clock, similar to the laws requiring waving a red flag in front of automobiles. Deborah Orr does so in The Guardian (as a nice touch, weaponizing doctors as enforcers of a feminist political regime – since dissenters must be crazy). But tech rolls on regardless, so long as there are unmet needs to fulfill.

Others have optimistic expectations: “How Sex Robots Could Revolutionize Marriage – for the Better” by Marina Adshade at Slate – “With sexual needs outsourced to robots, marriages could become stronger than ever.”

More interesting is the reaction of those applying post-modern ethics to sexbot use. Dalrock has a typically brilliant analysis, showing the strange results. Romantic love purifies sex, so sexbots are good if their users love them! Sexbots are bad because they will weaken wives’ power over their husbands! He shreds this chaff and gives useful insights. …

“The biggest problem we have is that having jettisoned real sexual morality, we aren’t able to process the dangers that sexbots will pose in any meaningful way. …Aside from the purely moral question, there is another risk regarding sexbots.  Our economy is built on the expectation that men will be motivated by marriage to produce in excess of their own needs.  As we continue to degrade marriage, sexbots will be there to fill the gaps. … Sexbots will in this context be yet another distraction tempting young men to coast instead of working diligently in anticipation of their future wives tiring of having sex with other men.”

For more about sexbots and their possible effects, see this introduction, rich with information and insights.

My guess at the effect of sexbots on society

There are two powerful trends as yet seen by few: Men Going Their Own Way (MGTOW) and Women Going Their Own Way (WGTOW). Sexbots might boost one or both of those trends into warp speed. That might break society like only wars and major natural disasters can do.

  1. The coming crash as men and women go their own way.
  2. Men find individual solutions – about MGTOW and Game.
  3. Red Pill knowledge is poison to marriage.
  4. Women unleash their rage! Beta males revolt!
  5. Top pop stars prepare women for loneliness.

See these portents of the future.

For More Information

If you liked this post, like us on Facebook and follow us on Twitter. See all posts about the 3rd Industrial Revolution now under way, about romance, about women and gender, and especially these for more about sexbots.

  1. Our scary future: sexbots are coming, powering the ‘sexodus’.
  2. A look at sexbots, prototypes of a radically different future for society.
  3. Technology will shape our society as porn and sexbots destroy 21st century marriage.
  4. Experts look at the future of sexbots and society, but can’t see it.
  5. Reluctant recognition that sexbots are coming.

Books about the coming revolution

Love and Sex with Robots: The Evolution of Human-Robot Relationships
Available at Amazon.
My Fair Ladies: Female Robots, Androids, and Other Artificial Eves
Available at Amazon.

66 thoughts on “Sexbots are coming. Society will never be the same.”

  1. Larry Kummer, Editor

    New tech to replace women can take many forms …

    …not just sexbots. As seen in this short film in which men “woman-ify” objects (instead of “objectifying” women). “Gateway” is an actual product. Imagine what this device will be like in 10 or 20 years.

    Hat tip to Dalrock for this.

    1. Christopher Pinkleton

      I have no desire to stare into the eyes of the Uncanny Valley, myself. I’m guessing VR gets past this point before robots do.

      1. Larry Kummer, Editor

        Christopher,

        Modern history is filled with people saying they won’t use this or that strange new – even unnatural – tech. It’s fun to read, looking back. Those quaint oldsters!

      2. One way to consider this is the length of time large numbers of men will go through between sexual maturity and marriage and the run up to marriage. As more and more women extend the period of time they focus on “finding themselves” until their late 20s and early 30s, an equally large number of men will spend a decade or more waiting for their future wives to tire of having sex with other men. That is a decade or more for them to fall into one form of mischief or another (during their formative years). Pick your poison: legal marijuana, internet porn, video games, etc. Some will even take us at our word when we swear that homosexuality isn’t really taboo.

        Something like this could also function as a sexbot gateway drug:

        https://youtu.be/nkcKaNqfykg

      3. Larry Kummer, Editor

        Dalrock,

        That’s the key insight. Oddly invisible to the legions of the great and wise writing about the gender revolution. I doubt we can ignore this “elephant in the room” much longer.

        Your comment touches on something I’ll write about soon – as we reduce the indoctrination of young women (unleashing them from social constraints), they display their nature (their behavior in Hobbes’ state of nature, before civilization). This in turn puts stress on – and inevitably eventually breaks – men’s indoctrination, allowing them to revert as well. Both go feral.

        We can’t see the consequences, but it’s safe to say that they will be large.

      4. Interestingly enough, real women trigger the uncanny valley for me more than sex dolls. I find the sculpted eyebrows, fake lashes, multi-layered cosmetics, botox frozen faces, etc., to be very unnerving. Compared to that, well made dolls look more lifelike than live women.

        Though I must admit that the Harmony head is far side of disturbing.

    2. Larry Kummer, Editor

      7zander,

      People often react with fear and hostility to new tech. People who grow up with this tech laugh at the oldsters.

      1. They don’t just laugh at me they think I am mad. Imagine getting married to a virgin as a virgin?
        Dad you are a dinosaur. That is dark ages stuff.
        When I tell them that most marriages in the world are arranged; married at first sight they squeal in delight at this mastodon that came into their circle. They call friends to witness one of the last of the cavemen.

  2. Christopher Pinkleton

    Have you ever read Kurtzweil’s “Age of Spiritual Machines?”

    It’s full of predictions that aren’t coming true, but the dialogues with a future female chart her growing relationship with her AI assistant over the decades.

    Sexbots? I think it will be more like “soulmate/slavebots.”

    The new “Dune” film(s) may be coming just in time to popularize the idea of the Butlerian Jihad.

    And if you want to read a story about what it will be like to turn over childrearing to machines, try PKD’s “Progeny.” It’s in the public domain.

    1. Larry Kummer, Editor

      Christopher,

      I read Kurzweil’s first book, The Age of Intelligent Machines, when published in 1990. I found some of the essays interesting. Not Kurzweil’s.

      Kurzweil’s track record is, imo, not impressive (see a list here). He was right about matters widely expected, less so in his non-consensus predictions. But that’s, as Tallyrand said, a matter of dates. However. jis bigger message is almost beyond doubt: tech is roaring along – reshaping the world.

      “And if you want to read a story about what it will be like to turn over childrearing to machines”

      Or you could go to a day care center, and see the kids stacked in front of TV and other screens.

  3. I simply can’t imagine it – sex with a robot. Perhaps Larry would suggest this is a lack of imaginative power? An inability to imagine the final version of the product, just as we could not imagine the final version of the automobile and the highway system, back in 1910.

    The suggestion in the Slate piece that people with no sexual interest in each other marry happily, while having their sexual needs met by bots? Its even more unimaginable. But more than that, it seems to be a basic misunderstanding of what sex is about in a relationship. Its not simply scratching an itch. Its communication and intimacy.

    Or maybe this too is just my own lack of imagination, the effect of conditioning through upbringing in a society where there were no bots? And lack of experience in the less refined circles of society where it is just the use of a warm body to meet a need?

    I guess there must be people who find the idea of sex with a bot attractive, or companies would not be developing them. They must think there is a market.

    I guess what it would take is a bot which could pass the Turing test, and really would be a person with free will and unpredictability…. In short, we would have created something that in ordinary life would be indistinguishable from a person. Then, sex with this being would have the same kind of role that it has in relationships between people.

    Would it then be a sexbot any more?

    1. Larry Kummer, Editor

      henrik,

      “I simply can’t imagine it – sex with a robot.”

      I can’t imagine getting a blowjob in a dirty alley with a streetwalker. It is amazing how many things happen that I can’t imagine.

      “Perhaps Larry would suggest this is a lack of imaginative power?”

      No “perhaps” about it.

    2. But more than that, it seems to be a basic misunderstanding of what sex is about in a relationship. Its not simply scratching an itch. Its communication and intimacy.

      I guess that is what bonded monogamous sex is supposed to be. I would like to think that “communication and intimacy” would make sex indefinitely gratifying between two people. But it looks like a lot of people and mated couples fail to live up to that standard. Lots of people claim that they still love and care for their spouses and mates in a family/platonic sense, but that they just are not physically attracted or aroused by them anymore. Women try to dress up their loss of attraction in holistic, sentimental language (“I’m just not happy anymore,” “I just don’t feel the same about him anymore”). Men may be more crude and direct in saying it. Maybe they’re just lying. Or maybe their moral principles and emotional bonds don’t always command their sexual impulses.

      If you correct people about their “basic misunderstanding” and explain to them that sex is about “communication and intimacy,” will that restore their physical attraction for their aged, obese spouse? Will that make them stop lusting for young nubile individuals that they’re not married to?

      1. Larry Kummer, Editor

        Durasim,

        Nicely said!

        Henrik is attributing what the Greeks called a telos (see Wikipedia) to sex, an inherent purpose or goal. Aristotle was big on discussing things telos. Needless to say, few people believe that biological processes have a telos beyond their simple function – as they evolved (rather than being created).

        Sex had a biological role of reproduction, and was driven by biologically implanted drives and mechanisms (e.g., there is some evidence that men have parts of their brains that do nothing but scan for parts of women’s bodies). But contraceptive has broken the relationship of all that machinery from reproduction. No fine phrases will recouple the two.

    3. Larry Kummer, Editor

      Henrik,

      “But more than that, it seems to be a basic misunderstanding of what sex is about in a relationship. Its not simply scratching an itch. Its communication and intimacy.”

      I’m impressed that you feel able to make such a pronouncement. That’s the kind of thing a Divine Being would state. Coming from just another person it’s a bit much.

      1. Larry, I have never seen a sexbot, so do not speak from experience, but simply cannot imagine being aroused by one.

        I cannot, either, imagine “a blowjob in a dirty alley with a streetwalker” being in any way exciting. The idea disgusts me.

        As to the idea that the sexbot could in some way substitute for sex with a real live person who one relates to, well, maybe there are people who are made that way. I know for sure I am not, and am quite happy not to be. I don’t regard my lack of imagination on this point as a limitation.

        We shall see how the market develops. I suspect a niche only.

        But one thing I do agree with you on. If it turns out to be big and mainstream, then it really will be a huge and important change in society, with unpredictable collateral consequences, and I suspect few of them desirable.

      2. Larry Kummer, Editor

        henrik,

        “We shall see how the market develops. I suspect a niche only.”

        That’s logical, since you appear to consider your personal attitudes as representative of humanity – although that’s clearly false. It’s also odd.

        “I don’t regard my lack of imagination on this point as a limitation.”

        It is when you are doing analysis. It’s a severe limitation, in the “blind but trying to be a painting critic” degree.

    1. Larry Kummer, Editor

      Jamie,

      Thank you for sharing. But your response isn’t helpful. Can you explain why you say “no”?

  4. scarletlagomorph

    Technology is the means by which humans increase the value of energy expenditure. Nothing increases value like divorcing utility from unpredictability. A true automaton, obviously removed from today’s crude bots, would have the perfection of physique, disposition, and fetish. Completely and instantaneously remouldable at the press of a button. A companion for all moods and seasons. For me, the true revolution will come when the artificial womb is feasible for growth from conception; a major step was announced just this week.

    https://www.tohoku.ac.jp/en/press/artificial_womb_March2019.html

    1. Larry Kummer, Editor

      Scarlet,

      “Technology is the means by which humans increase the value of energy expenditure.”

      That seems pretty narrow. The polio vaccine?

      “A true automaton, obviously removed from today’s crude bots, would have the perfection of physique, disposition, and fetish.”

      That’s missing the relevant point: sexbots will have a large effect long before they have any “perfection.” Perhaps we will eventually reach the sci-fi future you describe. But I suggest we prepare instead for the one coming in the next generation or two.

  5. The man Who Laughs

    At one time I thought the idea of sexbots ridiculous. But I’ve been reading your last few posts, and if I haven’t commented, well…sometimes things leave me at a loss for words. But I thought about an experiment I read about in a psych class that i took in another life. They had these baby monkeys in a cage, and they took away their Mom. Some of the monkeys got a fake Mom made of wire, and some of the monkeys got a fake Mom made of wires that had been covered over with soft fluffy fabric or whatever it was. And those monkeys actually clung to soft fluffy fake Mom and were apparently healthier than the monkeys with bare wire Mom. I don;t remember all the details, but the point is the monkeys were doing what they were biologically hard wired to do when they were in an artificial environment that they were never meant to be in. By the way, fake fluffy Mom was nowhere near perfection, but the monkeys still clung to it.

    I guess my point is that we live in an artificially constructed environment that doesn’t come anywhere close to what we evolved for. And at the end of the day, we’re basically just highly advanced monkeys, and maybe we get experimented on like the monkeys. And the monkeys went for fake fluffy Mom, so maybe they’ll go for fake fluffy sexbot too. It’s really no that big of a jump after all. People find themselves in circumstances that break them down, just like monkeys, so after a while fake fluffy sexbot starts looking pretty good.

    Cue up Shock The Monkey by Peter Gabriel.

    So yeah, this is crazy, but I think it might be crazy enough to be true

  6. Its hard to know what to think, people are investing in this stuff, it does have a future.
    Its hard to say how widespread its going to be. Porn is so popular because of its availability, plus its easy to hide, all you need it a internet connection. With a human sized piece of equipment, its more obtrusive, like where do you put it when your not actively using it? If you live with anyone else things could get pretty embarrassing. Plus there is a cost involved, pretty high if you want one that looks even semi realistic. I would say the barriers to entry are pretty high(no pun intended) you might be able to convince your parents to by a laptop, sex doll, maybe not.

    I would say its going to be pretty niche for a while yet.

    About the number of no sex men in the 18-29 bracket, interestingly they are the age group that grew up with broadband internet. My guess is they just don’t want sex, its not that they cant get it.
    I remember that first time I had sex, it wasn’t like how I thought it would be, if I grew up with hardcore porn, then I think real sex would be so off putting, plus hardcore porn would just magnify any insecurities a young dude would have about his body, size stamina ect. I’d say it would have a similar effects on a teenage girls. Maybe not all kids would be effected like that, but enough to move the figures.

    Interestingly the rapid rise in 18-29 reporting no sex happened in 2008, just after the introduction of the iphone and data bundles, and the general role out of broadband internet. Also the start of the great recession.
    Before that the no sex rate has declined for 10 years.

    1. Larry Kummer, Editor

      Gerard,

      “I would say its going to be pretty niche for a while yet.”

      Said of almost every big new tech. The big penetration of each new wave is a surprise!

      “My guess is they just don’t want sex, its not that they cant get it.”

      You’re writing as if about moon men. There are young men all around you. Get out of your bubble as ask them about girls. You might learn something.

      “Interestingly the rapid rise in 18-29 reporting no sex happened in 2008,”

      First, that is post hoc ergo propter hoc, one of the most basic of logical fallacies. Second, don’t take this data that seriously. It might just be when young men felt comfortable admitting their celibacy. A movie or TV show, or just critical mass, may have made it OK to say.

  7. It isn’t the sexbot that should be feared, it is the AI behind it. All I need is a personal assistant to have a conversation with and I’ll be good.

    1. Larry Kummer, Editor

      Sven,

      Sexbots can become big without anything like “AI.”

      I wonder if the way these discussions tend to zoom from the tech in front of us to Star Trek is some kind of psychological defense mechanism. It allows people to discuss scary changes by assuming they are in the sci fi fantasy future.

  8. “First, some of the people who today employ hookers might prefer sexbots. More anonymous, more open to perversions, perhaps cheaper. Used privately at home rather than a quick blow-job in an alley. Second, there are people who get no action today, do not use hookers, and want alternatives. Some are ugly or handicapped. Some are social misfits or just awkward. If you like labels, some are omegas or lesser betas.”

    I think some would prefer them to not have to deal with drama, emotional trauma, and the feeling of absolute power over someone unable to respond. It makes things less complicated for most men because they can always throw the sexbot into the trash or format her

    1. “I think some would prefer them to not have to deal with drama, emotional trauma, and the feeling of absolute power over someone unable to respond. It makes things less complicated for most men because they can always throw the sexbot into the trash or format her”

      I think it is the control that will present the real allure of sexbots. But I think it will be ultimately unsatisfying, because what joy is there in dominating a creature made to be dominated?

      1. Larry Kummer, Editor

        SF,

        “But I think it will be ultimately unsatisfying, because what joy is there in dominating a creature made to be dominated?”

        You’ve been listening to too many feminists. Sex isn’t all about dominance.

  9. Pingback: Weak men will screw feminism up. | Dalrock

  10. I tried one of these things and it ripped my genitalia clean off! They were able to reattach my member but the balls were mutilated beyond repair. 0/5 stars. Would NOT recommend.

    1. Larry Kummer, Editor

      Squadad,

      Ha ha. People made similar jokes about trains, cars, and planes. Yet they all matured into powerful mass tech.

  11. I doubt this will have the changes you think it will have. It may, for a generation or two, change the world, but after that, we will end up where we started. Sexbots operate under a different paradigm than previous technologies, the paradigm being that they directly affect the reproductive capabilities of those who use them. In other words, from the geneticist perspective, those who use sexbots are essentially removing themselves from the gene pool, and thus removing the genes that would make people more predisposed to using sexbots from the gene pool. Similar to contraceptives, it will eventually be a self-correcting issue that makes itself obsolete once we reach a critical mass of people who have not reproductively lobotomized themselves in comparison to those who have. I do think sexbots will probably kill off traditional prostitution though, you’re no doubt right about that one.

    The question being how quickly these changes take place. We may not see them in our lifetime. And of course, the whole artificial womb thing muddles the issue, but then we run into the separate matter of those who would voluntarily become a single parent. I can’t imagine that number would be very high. Sexbots are all about unrestrained hedonism and meanwhile having a child is a big restraint on hedonism.

    1. Larry Kummer, Editor

      Baboon,

      “In other words, from the geneticist perspective, those who use sexbots are essentially removing themselves from the gene pool ”

      There is little or no evidence that willingness to use hookers or sex-related tech (porn, 800 lines, sexbots) is genetic.

      “Similar to contraceptives, ”

      Ditto.

    2. The Inimitable NEET

      “In other words, from the geneticist perspective, those who use sexbots are essentially removing themselves from the gene pool, and thus removing the genes that would make people more predisposed to using sexbots from the gene pool.”

      Your assessment is half-formed and myopic. Sex robots don’t bar surrogate wombs or marriages motivated by financial security. Nor are men substituting sex robots for the act of procreation itself (artificial companionship is the aim).

  12. Some of the more restriction-fold feminists are demand sexbots be outlawed, because they constitute some kind of violation or meta-rape of women, or something. Whatever same reasons they use to demand outlawing pornography.

    Daily Mail: “Swedish feminists demand a ban on sex robots because they are ‘dangerous’ and dehumanise women just like pornography.

    Feminist Current: “Sex robots epitomize patriarchy and offer men a solution to the threat of female independence.

    1. Larry Kummer, Editor

      Durasim,

      Thanks for the interesting links! The first is esp interesting: feminists have learned that saying something threatens them (no matter how outlandish the claim) is a reason for more regulation of men. It’s been a successful tactic, so far.

      Both show what I call fourth wave feminism. The first three waves sought equality. The fourth wave is the quest for dominance. This is where we cross the line into true gender war.

      1. You are welcome, Mr. Kummer.

        Here is another one from The Guardian: “At last, a cure for feminism: sex robots” by Deborah Orr — “Now women expect a degree of bodily autonomy, technology has found a way to objectify us again.”

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

        Apparently, Mr. Orr believes that our attitude towards basement dwelling low status males who would use sex-dolls is not “serious” or spiteful enough. It’s not enough to sneer at them as disgusting “wankers.” We ought to treat them as vile and dangerous as child molesters!

        Personally, I thought third wave feminism was already a quest for dominance.

        I don’t expect people to cheer incels buying sexbots. But when they go off to the privacy of their own basements using latex mannequins, that’s their private thing. It may be sad and gross, but so are feminist cat ladies getting arthritis from frequent vibrator impalement. Let people slink off into their masturbatory escapism, and at least that’s a consistent notion of individual libertine consent.

        But when feminists not only denounce such males but demand criminalization of private individual sexual behavior and inanimate objects that offend feminist precepts, the totalitarian aspect is exposed. It’s not enough that lowly males retreat into their basements and avoid interaction with actual females. Even in their private thoughts and wretched space, they must be accountable to feminism. If they dare fantasize about treating some non-living female-resembling object in a way that feminists object to, it’s cause for state intervention.

      2. Larry Kummer, Editor

        Durasim,

        That’s another great article. Lots to learn from reading radical feminists, and seeking their lust for power over us.

        Orr: “technology has found a way to objectify us again.”

        Feminists use word as magic. They throw them to form a word salad, and assume that it has meaning. Sexbots don’t do anything to women. Saying it doesn’t make it so.

        Orr: “Maybe people who want to buy sex robots need to present the agreement of a couple of doctors, before they are judged emotionally restricted enough to need to retreat to such an inhuman fantasy.”

        Got to love how leftists talk about “judgemental” as a failing, but put on the big hat of the Pope when making pronouncements. Also we see the Left’s use of the Soviet Union’s weaponization of doctors to serve the political regime. They make great enforcers!

        As I (and others) have said, we are sliding into a gender “war”.

      3. No wave of feminism has ever sought equality.

        The first wave craved male authority but shunned male responsiblilties (ie the vote without the draft)

        The second wave was about reducing women’s responsibilities (ie no fault divorce while keeping alimony)

        The third wave was about increasing men’s responsibilities (pre-emptive rape hoaxes, metoo, male taxes for diversity initiatives for women)

        The nascent fourth wave is about removing all vestiges of male power anywhere, but feminism has been cancer since inception.

      4. Larry Kummer, Editor

        Nick,

        Now that’s an interesting perspective, and worth some thought!

        I’d add to your list: removing the husband’s “hand” over their wives, but retaining his obligation to support her children by other men. That obligation made sense when husband’s had broad authority over their wives. In Lucile Ball’s comedy Next Time I Marry, her new husband throws her over his shoulder, locks her in his trailer, and drives off. The judge say “He’s her husband” and that’s it. Plus broad tolerance for shoot guys who screw other men’s wives. With authority comes responsibility.

        Now guys have none of that (if she hits him and he calls the police – they arrest him). But oddly still must pay child support if his wife has a kid by another man. Equality!

      5. Larry Kummer, Editor

        Nick,

        The more I think about your comment, the more insightful it appears. It’s an easy winner for Best of Thread.

  13. Fred Flange, GBDC (Great Books For Cucks)

    Two assumptions which should be swept aside in the interest of chronicling “what is” vs. “what may be.” Or “should be.”

    1) There’s an assumption that todays Yugo girls are getting all the trim while the nice boys sit alone attending Fortnite festivals and wait. Keep in mind: there’s only a limited populaion of the girls who will be attractive enough or forward enough to get busy, and yes 80% of that group will focus on the upper 20% of men. But there will be a lot of unhappy girls to go with the unhappy men, wondering where any men are, let alone good men with money who will marry them at age 36.

    Remember: dating is dead. Largely outlawed by scholastic and corporate “personal conduct manuals.” On most college campuses even a basic approach can equal “unwanted sexual communication”, an expulsion offense. In high schools now there’s lots of talk directed at men at how beastly they behave and why they should be ashamed of their toxicity by being attracted to easy-on-the-eyes women. But there is no guidance about what is the socially correct manner to make any sort of contact. Out of fear of teaching boys not to be modeled on PUA alpha cads, they’re not being taught ANYTHING about human interactions, that way they can’t hurt women. The Marcusian Elite have no idea how to do any sort of opener that passes the intersectionality muster so they have no guidance to give beyond “just be yourself”. Which of course is even a bigger joke when the societal message is that Yourself (at least the male Yourself) is inherently defective or malign.

    Forget teaching any kind of sex ed or even the basic biology of the sexual drive: that’s promoting cis-hetero-normativity which is to be Stamped Out. So even so-called progressives won’t discuss sex-based issues unless it’s to itemize more ways to get jiggy with some trans type person than you can shake a stick at, if that’s your idea of a good time.

    2) In their moral zeal to mock those who would use AI bots like the Gateway Okeari product, the zealots overlooked what is now turning out to be a beneficial social use: providing companionship and possibly life-saving assistance to the handicapped, especially those poor sods without immediate family to tend to them. So those with physical challenges are to be shamed and denied a socially beneficial tool because Patriarchy? Good luck with that one. Sounds pretty Able-ist to me.

    1. Larry Kummer, Editor

      Fred,

      (1) “But there will be a lot of unhappy girls to go with the unhappy men, wondering where any men are”

      Why are they unhappy? I doubt there are many girls – not overweight, with reasonable personalities – unable to get attention of a guy.

      (2) “Remember: dating is dead. Largely outlawed by scholastic and corporate “personal conduct manuals.”

      I pretty sure that is false. First, people commented in the 1980s that dating was “dead” – long before “personal conduct manuals.” Second, I doubt many men agree with you about the effect of those policies – or even think about them much.

      (3) “On most college campuses even a basic approach can equal “unwanted sexual communication”

      Evidence that this is happening on any scale? First person reports that this has changed their behavior as you describe? It sounds like a wild exaggeration.

      (4) “an expulsion offense.”

      No, a single “basic approach” will not result in expulsion – unless accompanied by very wild behavior.

      (5) “providing companionship and possibly life-saving assistance to the handicapped”

      That’s an important point! (I mention that in my intro to sexbots, linked in this post).

      1. Fred Flange, GBFC (Great Books For Cucks)

        Larry, we might be splitting hairs, but I stand by everything I’ve said, even though I amp up the prose to sell the gags. The death of dating I have seen myself, and friends.with teens confirm it. High schoolers do things in groups mostly. Even proms and school dances, things we used to assume would be ask-the-girl-out dates.

        The campus conduct manuals? I’ve read a bunch of them, and read reports on how they are implemented. On their face one clumsy blown approach to a girl who misapprehends it is sufficient to put you into The System. I have heard much of the same “don’t even think about it” language packaged into so-called abuse prevention protocols given to boys in our local high school.

        I have looked at some of the “modules” created by all-knowing Consultants for college freshmen on how not to be toxic. The people writing them must never have bought a girl a beer or batted their googly eyes at a boy in their lives. The dialog examples are appalling, like those old wooden 1950s Castle educational school films on how to talk to girls.

        You are right that most men don’t think about these conduct codes much. Because they are too scared to approach women regardless so they don’t get blown out of the water. Sure some getting jiggy still happens, but not as much anymore, you just did a couple pieces on that.

        I have banged on about this stuff for years at Rollo’s place as various news stories and blue pill think pieces popped up as topics, esp. the whole Yes Means Yes debacle a few seasons back. No need for a big list though, for our purposes here are two meta sources for you:

        First The Sex Recession from last November’s Atlantic magazine. You must have seen it. Everything I’d seen coming since 2013 is in there.
        https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2018/12/the-sex-recession/573949/

        As for what regulatory framework now governs when someone takes umbrage in the age of Mandatory Enthusiastic Consent, the California Law Review in 2016 published a comprehensive survey called The Sex Bureaucracy. Google the title and it will pop right up. It’s still true.

        My little gag about trans people mating dances is based on a real webpage I saw on how to have sex with a trans person. Involves a lot of talking talking yickety yickety to establish comprehensive protocols before any sensual touching begins, insofar as these snowflakes can literally melt if they do it wrong. I can’t really make fun of it, they’re trying to help very scared people be less scared so it’s kind of precious really. But in hetero or gay world I have a hard time wrapping my head around there needing to be so much ground rule conversation before anything fun can happen. But them I am rather a bit longer in the tooth.

      2. Larry Kummer, Editor

        Fred,

        (1) “we might be splitting hairs”

        We’re not splitting hairs. You’re ignoring what I said.

        (2) “The death of dating I have seen myself, and friends.with teens confirm it.”

        Let’s re-run the tape.

        “First, people commented in the 1980s that dating was “dead” – long before ‘personal conduct manuals.'”

        (3) “As for what regulatory framework now governs when someone takes umbrage in the age of Mandatory Enthusiastic Consent, the California Law Review in 2016 published a comprehensive survey called The Sex Bureaucracy. ”

        I’m sure it does not support your claim. As I said:

        “A single ‘basic approach’ will not result in expulsion – unless accompanied by very wild behavior.”

  14. Women worried about the pay gap should invest in sex bot companies.
    Prostitutes should form a cooperative to design them.

    1. Larry Kummer, Editor

      AC,

      That similarity occurred to me as well!

      But the relevant point about sexbots – which is ignored by almost everybody discussing them – is that for the foreseeable future sexbots will be grossly inferior to women in almost every way. They are alternatives for men who have little access to women – poor, disabled, unsociable, etc. They are competitors to porn and hookers.

      Androids like Cherry 2000 are in the sci fi future. Here is the trailer.

      1. Eventually sex robots https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XtI-un0cxjU will be indistinguishable from human
        and society will back it. I think the reason society back feminism is for population control, the next step is to give the men that don’t want feminists minded women artificial women that can’t reproduce. So, only the most wealthies will have children. Limiting the birth rate and with it the population grow.

      2. Larry Kummer, Editor

        Xoxo,

        (1). Experts say that a sexbots are unlikely to be indistinguishable from girls for a very long time, either physically or in actions.

        (2). Fertility is crashing to disruptive levels already, even in societies with little feminism (eg, Iran), hence the pressure from the West’s elites for massive immigration to boost populations. The male pill will further depress fertility.

  15. Larry,

    I suggest you check out this video about a young man who compared his experience with a sex doll to that of his girlfriend and found that he preferred the former to the latter.

    It’s a pretty interesting perspective and having listened to a handful of other men who’ve talked about their experiences online with dolls, it seems most of them seek out not just the carnal aspects but a medium for them to indulge in their nurturing and affectionate side whilst not being judged or derided for such displays.

    If we consider that men’s love is typically sacrificial in nature, given that most willingly put themselves in harm’s way to protect loved ones or engage and toil and drudgery to provide for them, in the current dating environment which is fraught with extreme volatility, the prospect of sacrifice, especially considering the ridiculous amount of risk and lack of appreciation from modern women is likely to want to make men invest that sort of love in something more stable, ergo a doll or robot.

    The doll in its current state is little more than a mirror for a man’s projected ideals. The doll is unchanging until he wills it, and the condition of it is testament to his care for it (and these things to require a fair bit of maintenance), all of which he can visibly see bear fruit the moment he invests in it.

    Some may find such attachments to an inanimate object ridiculous. But for many man who have never experienced female attention or affection (whether by ill luck or circumstance), how can they know any different? They have been trained for decades to turn their attentions towards fictional ideals of women in both digital and paper format by virtue of neglect. They do not lack any imagination when it comes to creating their own ideal women, this merely aids them in realizing the endeavor fully.

    And others who turn to dolls may simply tire of the volatility and fickleness of women in the market. A small but reasonable number of men no longer see fit to jump onto the Hedonic treadmill to feed a woman’s desires. A doll is cheaper, many costing less than an engagement ring for perhaps half a lifetime of companionship. In a world brimming with debt and rampant with ponzi economics, a far more financially stable and viable solution to the male desire for intimacy as well.

    1. Larry Kummer, Editor

      Morty,

      Thank you for pointing to that amazing video, and your observations.

      I hadn’t thought of this until your comment – when sexbots improve in a decade the comparison between dolls and girls might be by capital vs. operating costs.

  16. Mr. Kummer,

    I presume you’ve seen the documentary “Guys and Dolls”? (I think it was retitled “Love Me, Love My Doll” when they broadcast it in the U.S.)

    https://www.documentarystorm.com/guys-and-dolls/

    Not about sexbots, but “RealDolls” are probably closest thing to that concept available on the market right now.

    Among the men featured, the only one who ever seems to exhibit some vague hostility or negativity is the youngest one, Davecat. He himself was interviewed and profiled in “The Atlantic” about six years ago.

    https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2013/09/married-to-a-doll-why-one-man-advocates-synthetic-love/279361/

    Most of the men in the documentary just seem…passive and resigned.

    1. Larry Kummer, Editor

      Durasim,

      “Most of the men in the documentary just seem…passive and resigned.”

      I’ll bet that’s what a survey would find of guys getting blow-jobs in alleys from hookers. Or disfigured or handicapped guys watching porn. It’s an underclass thing.

      But early adopters are always exceptional in some way, and tell us little about the potential mass market. In 1947, Raytheon sold the “Radarange”, the first commercially available microwave oven. It was 1.8 metres (5 ft 11 in) tall, weighed 340 kilograms (750 lb) and cost about US$5,000 ($56,000 in 2018 dollars). It consumed was water-cooled. I’ll bet few middle class households bought them for their kitchens. If you suggested that kind of mass market (probably few even imagined it), the responses would be much like those in these comments.

      1. If these items reach mass market scale, then yes, I’m sure the emotional and psychological dispositions of their consumers would be as varied and diverse as the market itself.

        I only mentioned that aspect of the documentary subjects because the feminists and their allies would have us believe that any male who would consider purchasing a sex doll or sexbot must be some obvious hideous creep that any and all women could spot miles away and who could explode into spasms of rape any second, if he hasn’t done so already.

        The British photographer guy is an ultra-milquetoast even by British standards. The guy with the long hair who lives in the decrepit house is entirely frank about himself, readily admitting he is unattractive and poor and will not be anybody’s prospect. But he relates an incident in which some woman he barely knew asked him to watch her kid while she went out partying. Despite his lack of social skills, even he was taken aback by this. So however haggard and creepy he is, it wasn’t enough to deter some feckless single mother from asking him to babysit her minor child.

        Then of course, there is the guy who actually had a living human girlfriend while simultaneously owning multiple dolls. I suppose he could have kept the dolls a secret and the girlfriend may have been none the wiser. But even if he hadn’t told her, couldn’t she detect his objectifying creepiness before then? Apparently not. But he did tell her and when she finally came to his home to see the dolls, we can see she is mortified despite trying to keep a stoic front. And the ending narration about how she ended the relationship 8 days later is no surprise. But why did it take her 8 days to come to that decision, I wonder? Was she processing her trauma?

  17. Virtual reality is progressing very nicely, so it is easy to envision a very persuasive visual experience, avoiding the ‘uncanny valley’ issue..
    Add in a decent AI to create some variation in behavior by the doll and the result would be pretty competitive.

    On the plus side, it might offer an excellent training tool for the socially awkward, if the AI is good enough. However, the likelihood then is that such a product will be preferred, because it is less fraught with economic risk.

    It may be that marriage gets redefined as a child raising contract. Romeo and Juliet would seem very peculiar in that future.

  18. The Atlantic article, linked to above, is very interesting indeed. There is a more superficial article on a sub topic in this matter that is worth reading. It’s a strange world that is being born.

    Men are playing with fire by having drunken sex” by Chris Daw QC in The Spectator — “When two young people, drunk on life and cider, walk into a bedroom alone together, they may be seconds away from catastrophe.” Excerpt:

    “I first started to get these calls about five years ago, long before the explosion of allegations against Harvey Weinstein, Kevin Spacey and the rest. From one or two a year to three or four, then, sometimes, one a month. The locations are different, ages vary a little — late teens to mid-twenties is the norm — but the basic facts are almost always the same.

    “It goes like this: ‘Richard did OK at school, struggled at times but is basically a good young man, gets on well with his brothers and sisters, has lots of nice friends, the odd girlfriend but nothing serious. Got into university and was really excited. He can get a bit silly when he goes out drinking but can’t they all at that age? He had been drinking in the bar during Freshers’ Week, met this girl and they went back to her room. They had sex. Everything seemed to be OK but the next thing he knew the police were there to arrest him. The girl had reported him for rape. She was so drunk she couldn’t remember how she got to the room or how they started having sex. She has a boyfriend and would never have had sex with someone else she had just met.’”

    1. Larry Kummer, Editor

      Henrik,

      Thank you for posting that useful article!

      However, the author gives the impression that the majority of the current rape “epidemic” results from drunk girls. I don’t believe that is so. Many take place in a sequence of sex, or without booze.

      On another level, there are anecdotal indications from both men and women that the women get drunk to deliberately surrender their agency.

      Bottom line: the smart play by guys seems to regard girls as fun but potentially hostile creature – who can turn on you without warning. Can’t be good for society. But isn’t living separately the goal of many radical feminists? Perhaps we should see them as people sticking an iron bar into the spokes of our bicycles.

      As you said, strange times.

      1. Larry Kummer, Editor

        Zoci,

        There is not “society” as a unitary entity. There are elites, and they are concerned about falling populations – as fertility in developed nations has crashed to below (or far below) replacement levels. Rising population is an easy and reliable driver of economic growth – even in a unequal society, even if the population growth results in stagnant or even falling incomes.

        Hence the drive in almost all developed nations for increased immigration. Many nations are providing inducements to reproduce (eg, in Singapore and France).

        There is zero evidence that “society don’t want people to reproduce.”

  19. Pingback: Les Sexbots arrivent. La société ne sera jamais la même. - Gadget Maso

Leave a Reply to henrik Cancel reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: