Robolove

Drudge has a link up today to a Daily Mirror article: Sex with robots to be ‘the norm’ in 50 years, expert claims.  What is interesting is the moral argument the expert (Dr Helen Driscoll) lays out:

We tend to think about issues such as virtual reality and robotic sex within the context of current norms.

But if we think back to the social norms about sex that existed just 100 years ago, it is obvious that they have changed rapidly and radically.

Robophilia may be alien now, but could be normal in the near future as attitudes evolve with technology.

She then ties this into our new definition of sexual morality, the existence of romantic love:

People may also begin to fall in love with their virtual reality partners.

This may seem shocking and unusual now, but we should not automatically assume that virtual relationships have less value than real relationships. The fact is, people already fall in love with fictional characters though there is no chance to meet and interact with them.

Since everyone, including modern Christians, has embraced the view that romantic love is what defines sexual morality this will be an interesting discussion.  My guess is the rebuttal will be that since robots can’t love back it isn’t really true love, and therefore isn’t Christian.  However, if we could program robotic women to give Christian men the wakeup call and thereby force them to submit to their robo wives, I strongly suspect the lack of reciprocation would no longer be a concern.

This entry was posted in New Morality, Romantic Love, Sexbots. Bookmark the permalink.

236 Responses to Robolove

  1. steve heller says:

    Hey Dal, I assume you meant that the lack of reciprocation would cease to be a concern?

    [D: Thanks. Fixed.]

  2. Pingback: Robolove | Neoreactive

  3. Jane Dough says:

    While this may be a game changer for individual men, I really don’t think virtual or robotic sex will ever go mainstream. I think consumers would likely be mocked and disparaged, much like the people who bought Real Dolls are/were. Yeah, VR or lifelike robots would probably provide a better experience than Real Dolls, but it isn’t the lack of interaction that causes people to look down on them.

    I could be wrong, of course. But at least for now that’s my prediction.

  4. Mal says:

    Nothing to see here. Most married men already get robotic sex (infrequently) with their wives. Buying a robot won’t change the experience, but will make the expense more budgetable.

  5. @ Jane Dough

    While this may be a game changer for individual men, I really don’t think virtual or robotic sex will ever go mainstream. I think consumers would likely be mocked and disparaged, much like the people who bought Real Dolls are/were. Yeah, VR or lifelike robots would probably provide a better experience than Real Dolls, but it isn’t the lack of interaction that causes people to look down on them.

    That’s naive.

    Just like pre-marital sex/fornication was mocked and now it’s mainstream?
    Just like divorce was mocked and now it’s mainstream?
    Just like having a child of out of wedlock was mocked and now it’s mainstream?
    Just like masturbation was mocked and now it’s mainstream?
    Just like porn was mocked and now it’s mainstream?

    Men’s sexual drive is going to go somewhere, and if it’s not going to women it’s going to masturbation, porn, VR, sex dolls, or whatever else comes out. Most men don’t care that they’re watching porn and masturbating because most women simply aren’t worth the hassle now.

    Every man that exits the marriage “market” puts significant pressure on women at the margins. As the stats that never married women in their late 30s rises there will be backlash.

  6. The fact is, people already fall in love with fictional characters…

    The reason men aren’t getting married is the “traditional woman” that would be submissive, feminine, loving and loyal is now pretty much an endangered species. There are still plenty of men marrying fictional characters these days, only to discover the fiction later when it turns out she isn’t submissive, feminine, loving or loyal. Then comes the pain and the payments.

    @Jane Dough

    I think consumers would likely be mocked and disparaged, much like the people who bought Real Dolls are/were. Yeah, VR or lifelike robots would probably provide a better experience than Real Dolls, but it isn’t the lack of interaction that causes people to look down on them.

    You should take a look at the sales figures for the Fleshlight. The stigma of sex with a blow-up doll was all about the inability of the guy to get a real woman in bed. What’s changed is the unwillingness of men (who are capable of getting laid or getting married) to get involved with what passes for women these days.

  7. The Question says:

    Somehow, these robots will acquire language in their code that requires they too must “feel” loved before doing anything. It will bring a whole new meaning to the line “I’m sorry, Dave, I’m afraid can’t do that.”

  8. Cube Archer says:

    @ Jane Dough
    “I think consumers would likely be mocked and disparaged…”
    In today’s moral climate of most anything goes, I’m not sure that I see public mockery as a big deterrent.
    I already see a large percentage of my male friends opting for their online “Square-headed Girlfriends” rather than deal with the modern day headache of trying to date or interact with a real woman.
    I think that the more realistic they make these things, the more inevitable it becomes that marriage as an institution, and maybe even real life relationships altogether, are going to rapidly become a thing of the past.

  9. Not for nothing, but they also said we’d all be driving flying cars about 50 years ago.

  10. Cane Caldo says:

    However, if we could program robotic women to give Christian men the wakeup call and thereby force them to submit to their robo wives, I strongly suspect the lack of reciprocation would no longer be a concern.

    Hurts so good!

  11. Bucho says:

    I’m sure the joke will write themselves when this catches on….

    “Gives a new meaning to Downloading Files and Shared Drive”

  12. People may also begin to fall in love with their virtual reality partners.

    This may seem shocking and unusual now, but we should not automatically assume that virtual relationships have less value than real relationships. The fact is, people already fall in love with fictional characters though there is no chance to meet and interact with them.

    This is a more believable future:

  13. Dragonfly says:

    Was talking with my husband about this a week ago or so…. We both think this will definitely go mainstream… as mainstream as porn has gone.

    And then… think of the ramifications of men being addicted to a perfect robot that feels like a tight 18 year old body, and looks (he wears those goggles so that she looks like a real hologram) like one. Women think they have to compete with porn now… just think how they will have to compete with a man being psychologically turned on by a “perfect” robot. Men that are low in SMV will be able to simulate having sex with pornstars. The artists have gone to extremes to make these women feel extremely real to the touch so that it completes the illusion, making the addiction even that more real.

    I’m sure most men won’t have that kind of addiction. It’s just that you always hear about women complaining about their men using porn… well… um, now they’ll be using a real life robot that can speak back to him, have a semi-intelligent conversation, and talks sexy to him. They’ve designed the program so that she does everything right to seduce him – like an “other woman.”

    Weird, but it certainly takes women’s issues with porn to a whole new level.

  14. “Traditional women” are fictional characters.

  15. Dragonfly says:

    “Most married men already get robotic sex (infrequently) with their wives. Buying a robot won’t change the experience, but will make the expense more budgetable.”

    lol… the difference is that these robot women are tailor made for men – exactly what these men would want (in a strange way, albeit). They are designed to say and do things that are sexy to men… they are intentionally created to build a fantasy. They even respond to certain things during sex with the guy – making them much more responsive than a “robotic wife.”

    Crazy!

  16. Novaseeker says:

    I really don’t think virtual or robotic sex will ever go mainstream. I think consumers would likely be mocked and disparaged, much like the people who bought Real Dolls are/were. Yeah, VR or lifelike robots would probably provide a better experience than Real Dolls, but it isn’t the lack of interaction that causes people to look down on them.

    I think there is a distinction between roots/dolls, on the one hand, and VR sex, on the other.

    VR sex is really a kind of enhanced porn. And no stigma has stopped hundreds of millions, if not more, men around the world from regularly watching porn, mostly because they can do so now in extreme privacy using cell phones and tablets and so on. VR sex is going to simply be an extension of this, and it will have a huge impact, precisely because it will extend the experience in a way that enhances it, and therefore makes it more enticing for men.

    This has just happened in the very recent past with porn itself. Modern porn comes from the 1960s sex rev era, after which porn movie theaters opened, and then eventually porn shops which sold magazines and videos. These were both seedy places, often located in dicey parts of town, and many men did not want to be seen frequenting them, or even deal with buying porn from another person in real life who looked them in the face. That delivery method provided some deterrence to men using it that much, in terms of procuring the porn. Now it didn’t shut it down altogether, but it did limit it.

    When the internet came along, it changed the paradigm completely, because now porn could be accessed “in private” on a PC connected to the internet — no more need to go to the seedy porn shop or movie theater. This removed a big barrier to consumption. And when the internet progressed to the point where ads dominated revenue, and most porn became free, that removed another barrier to consumption (not wanting porn on credit card statements, or simply not wanting to pay for porn in general). And then when smartphones and tablets came along in the last ~8 years, porn made another leap, because the somewhat “in the family” public PC, which could be tracked to some degree, was no longer needed to consume porn — it could be consumed with one’s iPhone or iPad, pretty much anywhere, in almost complete privacy. Improvements in bandwidth happening over the same period also made the real-time streaming of high definition video possible over even phone company data networks, which only served to enhance the “quality” of the product the porn industry was capable of delivering.

    At the end of that process, we are where we are now: a porn situation that in no way reflects what porn even was before the internet came along, before smart phones came along, and before broadband video transmission was perfected in high definition. When it all is taken together, because the technological advances enhanced the experience of using porn in many ways (higher quality, greater access, less cost, more privacy), the use of porn shot through the roof during the same period. Shame doesn’t enter into the equation, because it’s not like the guys who look at a lot of porn are walking around telling everyone about that — it’s all very private now to a degree that it never has been before. All of those technical changes resulted in a paradigm shift regarding porn, which dramatically influenced behaviors as a result. This has directly impacted relationships in numerous ways, ranging from expected sexual behaviors, to preferences in sexual grooming, to sexual preferences generally, to ED in some relationships and so on.

    VR sex will be on this same continuum. It will be an enhanced form of porn and video chatting, such that it renders many forms of even current porn obsolete, while also having an impact on how guys view real life woman. When the machine is able to stimulate you in a way that simulates in a “close enough” way what a real woman would be doing, while at the same time feeding your brain images of a 8+ woman doing it to you, this will have a substantial impact on the behaviors of the rather large group of guys who currently view porn regularly. It’s going to be another paradigm shift.

    I agree with TFH that this is coming sooner than robots — if you look at robotics, the application of it, in terms of perfecting movements of robots for simple ambulation in a human way, is still in very early stages and is proceeding more slowly than many expected. So it won’t be coming soon that you will have any sort of convincing female-bot who would work in a way that is “close enough” to how a woman feels to be enticing to a large number of men (this is also the problem with sex dolls). VR is likely going to be “close enough”, and the audience for it (the large number of guys who regularly view porn already) is going to be huge. It’s going to be very impactful because of that.

  17. dvdivx says:

    Depends on the AI. Is it the quality of the robots in AI or Blade Runner or the Terminator? Blade Runner females were basically artificial biological beings so it wouldn’t be a wild speculation they could have feelings. The robots in AI seemed like they had feelings and thoughts so it wouldn’t be a stretch. Terminators simply chose options from a drop down list so very basic. On the other hand robo-rape becomes less likely if she can literally rip someone’s head off (either head).

    VR sex without brain implants will never be that common at least no more common than 3d porn is now nor will it be any real substitute. It’s just a better version of 3d porn and about as useless.

    At Blade Runner like levels of realism then the impact would be staggering. Only race left reproducing would be Africans and the poor east Indians. Global IQ would fall off a cliff.

  18. Every new form of new media finds its most profitable application in facilitating human sexuality.

    Renaissance Painting Mastery – nude females
    Early photography – nudes & porn
    Early film making – home sex movies
    Magazines – Porn
    Video (VHS) – Porn
    Internet – Porn
    Digital Photography & Video – Porn
    Soon: Oculus Rift – Porn

    When open prostitution is legalized and embraced in our feminine-primary social order you’ll know the Feminine Imperative is anticipating the devaluation of its primary agency and the rise of robosex is imminent.

  19. dvdivx says:

    With VR it’s all about immersion. No immersion and its just crappified 3d. With immersion as in the matrix it would make heroin look like aspirin. That’s why the brain implant would be needed to make total immersion possible and that would be the big hold up. Otherwise is a crappy heads up display or some other useless gimmick and will never really take off. If a company did develop the brain implant needed it would have far more than money it could literally control peoples reality. Don’t think the government wouldn’t notice that level of power.

    On AI if it’s advanced enough to have real options and feelings then there would be an ethical question of if we are making artificial slaves and their rights would come into question. That level of AI would need a radical break through to happen nor do I see it happening in the next 50-100 years without a radical breakthrough.

  20. feeriker says:

    Somehow, these robots will acquire language in their code that requires they too must “feel” loved before doing anything. It will bring a whole new meaning to the line “I’m sorry, Dave, I’m afraid can’t do that.”

    If security standards for coding in the burgeoning sexbot industry are as abominably ineffective as they are in, say, the automotive or aviation industries, then any halfway tech savvie owner will be able to hack the code base and modify operating features to his heart’s content. And that assumes that customized software tailored to individual preferences isn’t offered as part of a standard package.

  21. Heartiste’s take on this:

    I foresee a massive groundswell of support for polygamy & polyamory coinciding with the widespread introduction of affordable sexbots to the consumer (male) market. It’s hard to predict if this outcome — that is, the complete removal from the dating market of omega and lesser beta males — will be dysgenic or eugenic, because women could just as plausibly want to share callous, undependable jerkboys as to share morally sterling, credentialed alpha male captains of industry. Then, in a sexbot saturated world, the pressure on women to look their very best for the few men left in the dating market who are still suitable mates will be immense.

  22. Krul says:

    Here’s an idea. Suppose people still get married, but only for economic and reproductive purposes, the latter via artificial insemination. Each spouse uses these artificial constructs for love and sex while the marriage itself becomes purely a business arrangement.

  23. DrTorch says:

    Since everyone, including modern Christians, has embraced the view that romantic love is what defines sexual morality this will be an interesting discussion.

    You’ve made it pretty clear that this is your working thesis for your blog. My son is approaching adolescence, so we’ve started having talks about a variety of subjects, including sex. I used this as part of my discussion with him to explain what was and was not an accurate interpretation of the Biblical view on sex…so I thank you.

    My guess is the rebuttal will be that since robots can’t love back it isn’t really true love, and therefore isn’t Christian.

    I think you’re right that there will be a feeble push back among Christians that robosex is wrong b/c the robot can’t love you back. Flawed logic being a hallmark of modern Christian conservatives. In short order though they will make their way into Christian households as a way to augment a frigid relationship and keep the husband from straying with a real woman. Some Christians will even support it since they propose that sex is only for procreation.

    I still believe that these warped interpretations arise b/c the point of marriage is ignored: that is a wife is to be a helper suitable for her husband and his mission. That’s hated by feminists, including a good percentage of the ‘conservative’ Church in the US. And much of this is b/c churches teach that there is only one mission: evangelism. Ergo, if you’re a man w/o a mission (b/c you’re doing something other than full time evangelism), then why do you need a helper?

    I’ll also add that evangelicalism as idolatry (b/c that’s what it has become in most instances) is connected to feminism, as it bears a striking similarity to female hypergamy and a constant craving for approval.

    However, if we could program robotic women to give Christian men the wakeup call and thereby force them to submit to their robo wives, I strongly suspect the lack of reciprocation would no longer be a concern.

    *smile* And people say that I’m sarcastic? Well done.

  24. BuenaVista says:

    Women are by far the largest consumer of mechanical sexual aids today. (Why I even know women with long hair and retiring natures who depend on sex toys, with or without their husbands in the room.)

    In contrast, the comments here *all* suggest that sexbots will be a man thing. There’s a disconnect there.

  25. Scott says:

    The effort manginas put into supporting ‘feminism’ will also go down.

    Today I was behind a car with the bumper sticker “Another man against violence against women.”

    This would be a welcome change.

  26. new anon says:

    There was an article recently discussing how the love of animals is really narcissism. It isn’t that people love animals or pets, it’s that they want something that loves them unconditionally. Pets love their owners; they don’t question the details or criticize their owners. So the pet owners love the pets, not because they actually love the pets, but because of what the pets provide the owners.

    Couldn’t this be true with robots? Robots will be programmed to love their owners unconditionally–without criticism or critique. Like a pet, the owners will love the robot, not because they actually love the robot for what it is, but because of what the robot provides for the owner.

  27. Krul says:

    “There was an article recently discussing how the love of animals is really narcissism.”

    Excrement

  28. new anon says:

    “…people already fall in love with fictional characters though there is no chance to meet and interact with them.”

    People? Care to be more specific about what type of people? Is it the type that start with F and end with E, or the type that start with W and end with N?

  29. Crank says:

    I sure hope they’ll be self-cleaning.

  30. Matt says:

    Why is it automatically assumed that men are going to be the only consumers of sexbots? Yes, many men are disenchanted with the dating scene and being shit-tested all the time, but there’s no way that only men will want this. Women, in fact, will want it just as much if not more, judging by the array of products available at the local sex shoppe. Hell, if you can build a stud robot that can give a good shagging, what need has a woman to explore any sort of SMV-related issues? Or a man. Seems like the market would be for both genders, and explosive.

  31. M3 says:

    My own paltry take on this coming age. NSFW or for the faint hearted/easily offended.

    https://whoism3.wordpress.com/2013/07/04/youll-need-more-than-just-your-vagina-to-compete-with-the-future-nsfw/

  32. Better yet, once they start yapping and nagging, you can switch them off with just the flip of a button. The best of both worlds.

  33. Concerned Citizen says:

    Dalrock, what do you think about the idea of setting up villages and townships away from the insanity and building defensive walls and such? Is that an ethically acceptable Christian response to all this? It is going to get to cannibalism and utter chaos pretty fast at this rate.

    I’m torn between the idea that we’re supposed to love our neighbors no matter what, and that my neighbors will end up eating me and my children. What the heck are we supposed to do?

  34. @Dragonfly

    Look at what you wrote:
    think of the ramifications of men being addicted to a perfect robot…

    Men that are low in SMV will be able to simulate having sex with pornstars…

    making the addiction even that more real…

    I’m sure most men won’t have that kind of addiction.

    Do you see a pattern here? The point is that *any* man will be able to simulate having sex with pornstars. You call this an addiction. What, exactly, is the addiction here? Does that mean a man who marries a woman is addicted to her because he wants sex? Is wanting to marry a beautiful, submissive, feminine, loyal woman wrong? Is having a high libido an “addiction” or is it wanting to exercise the libido that’s the addiction?

    the difference is that these robot women are tailor made for men – exactly what these men would want

    No, dear, what just about all men want. She doesn’t get fat, she doesn’t say no, she doesn’t nag or argue and she doesn’t max out your credit cards. Best of all, she can’t file for divorce. Eve was created to be exactly what Adam wanted and look what happened.

    All this shaming language you’re tossing around is just an indicator that you’re covering for the bad behavior of your sisters. Men come up with a way to get what they want and the female screeching begins.

    @dvdivx

    Drug induced hypnosis combined with VR. As soon as somebody develops a reliable way to bring the person back out when the experience is over, that’s it. If brain implants ever get developed along these lines it will only be someplace with lots and lots of incarcerated people to experiment with. There are several countries I can see working on joint ventures in this area and then offering the operations to anyone. That would give a whole new meaning to bringing home a foreign bride…

    @Rollo

    Polyamory is synonymous with feminism, the women forcing the men to participate in their cuckoldry. Polygamy means many marriages and it’s arguable whether what we have today is polygamy or serial monogamy with marriage 2.0. However, polygyny (many wives) is synonymous with patriarchy because it removes the power of the women in the relationship and forces them to compete with each other for the husband’s attention. The only way to compete is to give him what he wants.

    What’s happened is feminism has conflated the two in order to equate polygyny (which is perfectly moral) with the perversion of polyandric cuckoldry. Polyamory furthers the FI and reinforces feminism. Polygyny destroys feminism and reinforces patriarchy. It also harnesses the hypergamy and constant desire for approval within the marriage via competition between the wives.

    @BuenaVista

    I suspect the female consumption of sex toys is primarily the result of widespread promiscuity (Alpha widow syndrome). The women simply aren’t pleased/attracted to what they’ve got because they’ve polluted themselves, changed lanes and married a beta provider. Add in the amount of obesity and there’s a whole herd of women who cannot possibly attract a man they find attractive. It’s not that they can’t get laid, they just can’t get a guy that really attracts them to overlook their glistening rolls of lard because he has better options. Thus, the battery operated boyfriend and further contempt of the husband in particular and men in general.

    ( And if she gets pumped and dumped by a guy that really rings her bell, when she realizes that was all she was going to get, RAPE! )

    Second, with Hollywood convincing women that everybody else has one, the herd instinct takes over and suddenly they all want one. Since the size of many of these toys falls several deviations from the norm of the male population in that area, this combines with the first point to reinforce the problem of finding a man that attracts/satisfies them.

    Third, you’ve got the entitled, strong, independent women who have such absurd standards in men and display such horrible behavior that the battery operated boyfriend is the only relief they can get.

  35. new anon says:

    That didn’t work out for Harcourt Fenton Mudd.

  36. jbro1922 says:

    “Best of all, she can’t file for divorce.”

    Could femme bot be programmed to?

    “Somehow, these robots will acquire language in their code that requires they too must “feel” loved before doing anything.”

    Remember “I-Robot”? I believe there was a campaign in the movie (a sub-plot) that put forth the idea that robots are human beings. And so equal opportunity applied to them too. This is the stuff of dystopian fiction.

  37. I believe the word is “robosexual”.

  38. Cadders says:

    “While this may be a game changer for individual men, I really don’t think virtual or robotic sex will ever go mainstream. I think consumers would likely be mocked and disparaged, much like the people who bought Real Dolls are/were. Yeah, VR or lifelike robots would probably provide a better experience than Real Dolls, but it isn’t the lack of interaction that causes people to look down on them.”

    I find the fact that the first female response is to suggest men will be shamed for using sexbots absolutely fascinating. This is entirely in line with what the red pill would predict and is a guide, I suspect, to what we can expect from the ‘mainstream’ (i.e. women, as a group) when it wakes up to the threat that sexbots pose. It won’t work and will peter out quickly. Men will do whatever it takes to get sex. For the last 50 years feminists have used this fact against men to get what they want. When women are replaced (in sufficient numbers) as the focus of that drive by sexbots men will do whatever it takes to get with a sexbot. No one has ever quashed the male sex drive for to do so would be to doom humanity itself.

    “Women are by far the largest consumer of mechanical sexual aids today. (Why I even know women with long hair and retiring natures who depend on sex toys, with or without their husbands in the room.)

    In contrast, the comments here *all* suggest that sexbots will be a man thing. There’s a disconnect there.”

    No disconnect at all. Women can consume sex toys and still desire a relationship with real men. Because, ultimately men are more than just a penis. Men however, can consume sexbots and lose their desire for a real women. Because in today’s world, too many women are being raised to be (in men’s eyes) nothing but a vagina. Sexbots for men are disruptive in a way that sexbots for women are not because they cost women male attention. The average man lost the attention of average women years ago – sexbots cost him nothing.

    But I agree with VR all the above applies 10 fold for VR – and it’s only a few years (months?) away rather than decades.

  39. Dragonfly says:

    Hey Artisanal Toad, you misunderstand me. I have had a couple of emails from women regarding their husbands using porn, being addicted to it – unable to fully quit it even though they want to. I’ve asked my husband what he thought about it, since I don’t understand it myself really at all, why some men don’t seem to be able to quit porn even though they have a wife who’s sexually available. To these women, I assume they feel like they have to compete with their husband’s porn addiction (that they usually acquired before marriage).

    “What, exactly, is the addiction here? Does that mean a man who marries a woman is addicted to her because he wants sex? Is wanting to marry a beautiful, submissive, feminine, loyal woman wrong? Is having a high libido an “addiction” or is it wanting to exercise the libido that’s the addiction?”

    In my opinion, it’s an addiction if he can’t prevent himself from still looking at porn. I don’t think it’s wrong for a man to have a high libido, or want to marry someone who could be a porn star – that’s just masculinity and testosterone.

    “No, dear, what just about all men want. She doesn’t get fat, she doesn’t say no, she doesn’t nag or argue and she doesn’t max out your credit cards. Best of all, she can’t file for divorce.”

    ^That is exactly the point I was trying to make, the point that my husband and I came to after really talking about the sexbots. That if women think they have it hard competing with porn now, they haven’t seen anything yet!!!!

  40. Cadders says:

    “The thing is, they won’t even meet the men who are using it, so the shaming is into the ether. Bars/clubs will have more women than men (making it even easier for PUA who go out), while the men who stay in with their VR are just unknown, and cannot be shamed.”

    Indeed, as I have said before, Feminism had women create an army of millions to engage society to get what they wanted. Men have responded by creating a million armies of one who are actively dis-engaging. This is just another example.

  41. Mark says:

    @TFH

    “”It will not be in 50 years, but 5 years””

    About 8 months to a year ago,you posted a link on this very subject(forget the link).I thanked you for that I told you that I will be submitting this to the Family Office as I wanted our “money managers” to take this into serious consideration.I did this.They all laughed at me! They are not laughing today! They have been researching this “phenomenon” and now have been keeping abreast of this technology.I told them that “this is going to be a huge investment opportunity”……You were correct then….and you are correct now……Much Thanks!

    @Jane Duhhhhh!

    “”While this may be a game changer for individual men, I really don’t think virtual or robotic sex will ever go mainstream.””

    I think that you have been sniffing too much glue? Do you have any idea the effect of “free online porn” has had on the male population??? Obviously not! Maybe you should get your head out of your ass…..and take a look around…..Men have their video games,free online porn,beer and their bag of weed.There is no need to have to deal with tools like yourself!

    @Nova

    “”I think there is a distinction between roots/dolls, on the one hand, and VR sex, on the other.””

    Awesome Comment!

    @Deep Strength

    “”Just like pre-marital sex/fornication was mocked and now it’s mainstream?
    Just like divorce was mocked and now it’s mainstream?
    Just like having a child of out of wedlock was mocked and now it’s mainstream?
    Just like masturbation was mocked and now it’s mainstream?
    Just like porn was mocked and now it’s mainstream?””

    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^………………..THIS!!!!!!!

    @Dragonfly

    “”They are designed to say and do things that are sexy to men… they are intentionally created to build a fantasy.””

    Correct!…..As someone that rents call girls for business associates that arrive in Toronto.I can assure you that when the “married men” ask me to get them a girlfriend for their visit here,they want the “g/f experience”. How do I know this? I know a few “high priced” call girls.90% of their clientele are married men?…..and they all want the “g/f experience”???…..Go Figure!

  42. feeriker says:

    Hey Artisanal Toad, you misunderstand me. I have had a couple of emails from women regarding their husbands using porn, being addicted to it – unable to fully quit it even though they want to. I’ve asked my husband what he thought about it, since I don’t understand it myself really at all, why some men don’t seem to be able to quit porn even though they have a wife who’s sexually available.

    I seriously doubt that any man who is addicted to porn has a wife who is “sexually available” (i.e., ready and willing to f*** his brains out in her best imitation of a pornstar, on a regular basis, whenever he wants it). If that were the case he would never have turned to porn in the first place. Now it could be that wifey, having been a frigid bitch for the better part of a decade, suddenly had an epiphany one morning, realizing that “hey, he’s ignoring me – maybe I should put out a little more often.” Unfortunately, the damage in such cases has already been done; hubby has long since found greener (i.e., infinitely more satisfying) pastures in porn and sees no reason to go back to someone who could –and probably will– backslide into frigid bitch mode in a microsecond.

    Better yet, once they start yapping and nagging, you can switch them off with just the flip of a button. The best of both worlds.

    As I mentioned upthread, if their software is customizable, or if their manufacturers had the good sense to gather requirements from the user base before putting the models into production, they would be coded in such a way as to never yap, nag, cajole, whine, and bitch at all, ever. What man other than a masochist/fetishist would ever want to put up with THAT? It defeats the purpose.

  43. Pingback: Robolove | Reaction Times

  44. Ras al Ghul says:

    Assuming VR hits simulated realism which will be sooner than the austen powers sexbots.
    There will be a concerted effort to make it illegal, and before someone says it will be too late, the drug war is a perfect example of something happening after the fact, also prohibition.

    Assuming it goes smoothly I would expect that the impact will be like the various wars in Russia:
    in three generations the women in the west will be better looking because the lesser half of their sisters for the first time in ages will have been culled out of the reproductive picture. (there’s always been about a 20% reproductive failure rate among women, it will be closer to the male failure of 50%)

    Pornstars, the web cam girls, and a large portion of the instagram girls will make virtual porn of themselves and sell it (which will be one cause for banning it liking it to prostitution.) Some of these girls have millions of followers, imagine being able to sell a virtual sex program of yourself for $100 a pop to these followers. These women, especially the first ones to do it, will be millionaires.

    It will become saturated though quickly, just as the porn now is ubiquitous.

    Polygamy will be legalized.

    The marriage rate will continue to drop. The attractive men are still 20% of the population and they will be able to get not just sex, but women that will bring much more to the table, for very little investment.

    The divide between the men with women and those without will grow.

    If polygamy is legalized, the divorce rate will drop too. Simple math if a man has four wives, she’s looking at only 20% of the assets, not 50% and the likelihood the children will stay with the father and their other mothers will be high based on the court systems weird logic about caregiving and support systems.

    Reports of domestic violence and charges will decrease, what is defined as domestic violence now will occur more frequently.

    If the male pill gets legalized ever, it will be a double whammy because that will remove about 60% of the “oops pregnancies.”

    It will be interesting to see if society will be able to maintain itself.

    The old star trek episode would indicate that we probably can’t:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Menagerie_(Star_Trek:_The_Original_Series)

  45. ron says:

    How is this any different than gay sex? IT might be superior, in the sense that you are not degrading another human being. But aside from that it seems to be just another degenerate form of faggotry.

    Guys. Please. Wouldn’t it just be better if manned up and put the wlmen back in their goddamn
    place? Can’t you all see that this is sick? A society that does this isn’t human anymore. CS Lewis talked about a sexbot society as something that to his mind was the ultimate in degradation.

    A society that does not shut this down, is a dead society. It will have no chance of survival.

  46. feeriker says:

    I think that you have been sniffing too much glue? Do you have any idea the effect of “free online porn” has had on the male population??? Obviously not! Maybe you should get your head out of your ass…..and take a look around…..Men have their video games,free online porn,beer and their bag of weed.There is no need to have to deal with tools like yourself!

    Jane’s reaction is what we should probably label “the incipient stages of denial.”

    Be prepared for it to ramp up into mouth-frothing, screeching, shaming, apoplexy-inducing violent invective once the technology fully matures and the reality of just how popular it will be becomes to obvious for even the most terminally deluded to ignore. Expect loud and violent demonstrations by armies of women demanding a ban on the technology, which will of course fail (too much profit to be had by major players in the tech industry).

  47. Dragonfly says:

    @feeriker “I seriously doubt that any man who is addicted to porn has a wife who is “sexually available” (i.e., ready and willing to f*** his brains out in her best imitation of a pornstar, on a regular basis, whenever he wants it). If that were the case he would never have turned to porn in the first place. ”

    That’s what my husband thought… I do too, although maybe there are a few exceptions out there possibly (?) I usually send those women here:

    “I write to women on this topic because we are the ones who so often are the “gate-keepers” when it comes to sex. A healthy marriage has a healthy sex life. But what exactly does a “healthy sex life” mean? How do we know if ours is healthy? This is not meant to be a comparison article of who does what or how often, but more focused on the point of how we can be sure that we are having the best sex in our marriage. And since this is written to wives, I want to know… are your husbands sexually satisfied?

    It’s a loaded question, one that I wonder if many women dare to even ask their husbands, and one that entitled, spoiled women will never have the gall to ask their husbands.

    We have an obligation, a responsibility if you will, as the “gate keepers,” to make sure our husbands are sexually satisfied, and take responsibility for our own sexuality to make sure that we are, as well….
    http://girlwithadragonflytattoo.com/2015/03/02/is-he-really-sexually-satisfied/

  48. Ras al Ghul says:

    Rollo:

    “Not for nothing, but they also said we’d all be driving flying cars about 50 years ago.”

    Well, we’re getting self driving cars, we might get flying cars eventually now that we won’t have to worry about DUIs in the sky.

  49. FNG says:

    Add to the equation: upgrades, trade-ins, multiple willing partners, swapping, sharing… Once the door is open and the ethical questions resolved, things are looking worse and worse for non-RP harridans.

  50. Mark says:

    @BuenaVista

    “”Women are by far the largest consumer of mechanical sexual aids today.””

    Yes!….Yes!…..Yes!…….There are more vibrators and dildos on the market than you or I could count.In fact,we might need a Cray Super Computer to do the calculation.The irony here?????……..Women have a problem with VR sex and robo sex dolls? If you notice it is NEVER a problem….until it is problem for the Wimminz? Like Internet porn.Women do not have the problem that it “objectifies” them.The problem is that it removes their “sexual power” over men!!!!!!!!! This is the problem!…..and I for one!……absolutely F*****g LOVE IT!………Wimminz asked for it…..and now they don’t like the “unforeseen consequences”…..F*** them!

    This is what Naomi Wolf, a feminist, wrote:

    “The onslaught of porn is responsible for deadening male libido in relation to real women, and leading men to see fewer and fewer women as “porn-worthy.” Far from having to fend off porn-crazed young men, young women are worrying that as mere flesh and blood, they can scarcely get, let alone hold, their attention.”

    The more I have to deal with Wimminz….the more I cannot stand being around them.99% of them are useless clusterf***s who are running East looking for a sunset.What have wimminz accomplished? Abortion?????(1.2 million murders/yr in the US)?????……Wow!…That is something to brag about!

  51. Dave says:

    Polygamy will be legalized. And its legalization will be promoted by and supported by women

    There, FIFY.

  52. Ras al Ghul says:

    Ron:

    “Guys. Please. Wouldn’t it just be better if manned up and put the wlmen back in their goddamn
    place? Can’t you all see that this is sick? A society that does this isn’t human anymore. CS Lewis talked about a sexbot society as something that to his mind was the ultimate in degradation.”

    And what are you doing to “put women back in their places?” And how are you going to convince the men to do this, especially those with daughters?

    Tell me your plan, brother, I await to see the brilliance of it.

    Short of discharging E.M.P. blasts all over the globe, or shifting a large meteor to impact the earth, and setting us back to the stone age ( not something I’m advocating) I don’t see how you’re going to get there, but I recognize there are clever people out there, and you might be very clever indeed, so what’s the plan?

    It has to have two parts:

    1) Convincing 80% of the men to implement it and/or convincing every man in power to do it because its in their best short term interests.
    2) and an implementation that will work

    Spill.

  53. Magnus says:

    I can’t help but wonder what the religious response to this will be. Will sex with life-like sexbots (i.e. virtually indistinguishable with real people) be considered adultery? Or will it be just masturbation with a very, very advanced sex toy?

  54. feeriker says:

    Dragonfly wrote:

    “I write to women on this topic because we are the ones who so often are the “gate-keepers” when it comes to sex. A healthy marriage has a healthy sex life. But what exactly does a “healthy sex life” mean? How do we know if ours is healthy? This is not meant to be a comparison article of who does what or how often, but more focused on the point of how we can be sure that we are having the best sex in our marriage. And since this is written to wives, I want to know… are your husbands sexually satisfied?

    It’s a loaded question, one that I wonder if many women dare to even ask their husbands, and one that entitled, spoiled women will never have the gall to ask their husbands.

    We have an obligation, a responsibility if you will, as the “gate keepers,” to make sure our husbands are sexually satisfied, and take responsibility for our own sexuality to make sure that we are, as well….

    And God bless you for writing that. I would really love to be a fly on the wall next to women who are confronted with what you wrote and observe their reactions to it.

    That’s what my husband thought… I do too, although maybe there are a few exceptions out there possibly (?)

    No question that there are exceptions, men who indulge in porn even when their wives are not only sexually available, but willing and eager. I strongly suspect, however, that these are the outliers, men who have other issues (e.g., trust, inflated egos, promiscuity) that have caused or are aggravating this habit.

  55. feeriker says:

    I can’t help but wonder what the religious response to this will be. Will sex with life-like sexbots (i.e. virtually indistinguishable with real people) be considered adultery? Or will it be just masturbation with a very, very advanced sex toy?

    This prompts a question: has any major Christian figure ever preached on the subject of “sexual aids” from a Scriptural perspective? I’m gonna guess that the answer is no, given the usual churchian squeamishness toward anything having to do with sex or intimacy (ever wonder why there are no Christian sex counselors, even though it appears that this is an area more sorely needed now that ever before?).

    Briefly stated, I don’t know if this subject has ever been publicly brought up before (“sexual aids and the Scriptures”), but if it has been, I’ll look for consistency in application for both sexes (“what’s sauce for the gander …”). Otherwise, any such statement will surely be nothing more than another helping of the same old churchian extra-Scriptural pedestalizing hogwash.

    I really don’t think we have to worry, though. The churchian PTB have been lukewarm in their opposition to or completely silent about nearly every other cultural issue with potentially negative impact on the faith, so what makes anyone think they’ll get their heads out of the sand on this question?

  56. Jonadab-the-Rechabite says:

    @ Dragonfly

    That is exactly the point I was trying to make, the point that my husband and I came to after really talking about the sexbots. That if women think they have it hard competing with porn now, they haven’t seen anything yet!!!!

    Women do not compete with porn for their husband. Porn is not a helper, cannot bear children, does not make him sammiches, doesn’t great him with a smile, is not warm soft and appeals to all 5 senses. When a wife says she is competing against porn, what she usually means is that she cannot exercise maximum control over him. Her threats of frigidity no longer have the same power over him and she may have to step up her game in bed. After years of feeling entitled to being a miserly lover her ability to manipulate her man is diminishing. It means that her husband has grown weary of negotiating the price of sex and love with his wife, who is acting more the prostitute than a wife by covenant.

    Dragonfly what you do not seem to apprehend is how contentious north-American wives really are, how they defraud their husbands with impunity, but mostly how odious that is to him and to God. Men are sexual beings 24 x 7, not just for a few days a month. They express and feel love most intensely through sex and conversely they feel contempt and scorn most vividly when defrauded by their wife either by frequency or the lazy unimaginative, dispassionate playing possum type sex. A wife who despises the value of her beauty to her husband will certainly feel threatened by women on the screen who are not saying no to sex, but are saying no to seconds on pie.

    If wives truly worked on: being women of character, biblical submission, being a helper to her husband, frequently giving generous amazing sex, and being a delight to their husbands they would have no need to feel threatened. It is the feminists that teach her to be discontent, controlling and to contend with her husband. It is the emphasis on her individuality rather than the strength of the family that has excited her insecurities and taught her to drive her husband from her heart and driven him to seek release apart from Biblical command to rejoice in the wife of his youth, to let her breasts satisfy him and be intoxicated by her love all times simply because she is working another plan.

  57. “The onslaught of porn is responsible for deadening male libido in relation to real women, and leading men to see fewer and fewer women as “porn-worthy.” Far from having to fend off porn-crazed young men, young women are worrying that as mere flesh and blood, they can scarcely get, let alone hold, their attention.”

    It’s not that women can’t compete with porn star sex, it’s because they’re not inspired to. With all of their wild college lays behind them, most (Beta) men’s wives/LTRs already know how to please their husbands like a porn star. The truth is she just doesn’t want to:

    https://www.reddit.com/r/TheRedPill/comments/3fqxfy/the_best_blowjob_of_my_life/

  58. Darwinian Arminian says:

    I can see Robots and VR sex supplanting traditional porn for the same reason better technology always does: they offer an advantage over the previous model. But in this case, one of those advantages is a moral one.

    Church culture has railed against pornography for a long time. As luck would have it, they’re able to team up on this with another group that hates it just as much: the feminists. The feminists hated it for different reasons; their chief objection was that it exploited and “objectified” women and reduced them to commodities to be enjoyed by the male gaze. But hey, an ally’s an ally, right? So why not adopt their approach when it helps you combat a shared enemy? Ask a churchian today why porn is bad, and they’re going to say “. . . Because it harms women!” (See the clown at this link for a great demonstration. http://www.patheos.com/blogs/jeffandalyssa/the-relationship-between-porn-technology/ )

    Sexbots (and computerized VR erotica by extension) are great because they allow you to bypass that moral objection. I’m certainly not doing anything to (or with) a real woman, and there’s no reason to worry about “objectifying” something that very literally is an object made for nothing more than a man’s enjoyment. Look: I’ve watched some porn in my time but I’m pretty sure I’ve never met anyone who thought that in doing so, I was committing a sin against my television set. So when the object of your fantasy is just another part of the tech, what’s there to worry about?

    Maybe the church could come up with something, but then that would involve the church pretending that it actually still gave any thought at all to what Christianity is. On this one, I’m with Rollo: The modern American church isn’t so much a religion as it is a service industry that exists to cater to women.

  59. Dragonfly says:

    “who is acting more the prostitute than a wife by covenant.”

    Right because she’s making him have to somehow earn sex with her.

    “A wife who despises the value of her beauty to her husband will certainly feel threatened by women on the screen who are not saying no to sex, but are saying no to seconds on pie.”

    Well that is certainly true. I’ll never forget hearing a friend who had gained 40-50 pounds after saying “I do” say that she couldn’t even watch movies because seeing the women on screen (female celebrities and their bodies) made her so insecure it was actually painful for her. But what was making her insecure? Comparing herself to those women’s beauty and bodies or being overweight herself (not taking responsibility for her own issues)?

    “If wives truly worked on: being women of character, biblical submission, being a helper to her husband, frequently giving generous amazing sex, and being a delight to their husbands they would have no need to feel threatened.”

    ^I think a lot of women genuinely resent knowing that they need to give him “generous amazing sex.” Why I’m not sure… maybe their mothers never taught them that sex is wonderful and enjoyable, maybe they just have a sexual hangups, or maybe they married men they really aren’t that attracted to… but I think that issue of feeling they need to give him generous and amazing sex might be the main root of it.

  60. iamadamalani says:

    Most likely this will accelerate the grass eater trend (both sexes) and see western civilization fall irrecoverably into demographic demise.

    This trend has already gripped Japan, and there are early indications it is happening in this country as well.

    La Raza, the Mormans, the Muslims, and other minorities will survive. But the whites? Only if Christians turn to their Lord and reject the idolatry of feminism will pockets survive.

  61. JDG says:

    Why I even know women with long hair and retiring natures who depend on sex toys, with or without their husbands in the room.

    How is it that these women (or is it their husbands) share this information with you? Have they no understanding of shame?

  62. JDG says:

    Better yet, once they start yapping and nagging, you can switch them off with just the flip of a button. The best of both worlds.

    Just make sure you get the coding right.

    or you could end up with this:

  63. JDG says:

    That didn’t work out for Harcourt Fenton Mudd.

    Somebody tampered with the original code.

  64. FAL Phil says:

    Personally, I think all of you guys are missing the point. In 50 years, we will have perfected artificial wombs. With lifelike sex robots, what do we need real women for? We can procreate using artificial means, and our sex lives can be whatever we want them to be.

  65. Gunner Q says:

    Matt @ 2:24 pm:
    “Why is it automatically assumed that men are going to be the only consumers of sexbots?”

    Because women are consumers of gov’t. That’s their artificial, ideal man: an all-powerful, obscenely wealthy, frequently violent and emotionally dead control freak.

    The link between feminism and Communism is Dark Triad Gov’t.

    feeriker @ 4:45 pm:
    “This prompts a question: has any major Christian figure ever preached on the subject of “sexual aids” from a Scriptural perspective?”

    The discussions I’ve heard over the years were that it’s adultery: finding sex outside of marriage. That’s a theologically sound way of looking at it but no church took the next step of encouraging sex within marriage.

    Those discussions eventually ceased because they were letting the feminist cats out of the bag. “Porn is bad bad bad!” “Okay, can I marry you daughter instead?” So, if sexbots become a thing then I predict the Churchy Church will disavow all knowledge of them.

  66. MarcusD says:

    Are robots the future of sex?: Jincey Lumpkin Esq. at TEDxSiliconAlley

    Apparently rape of robots is possible (since they can’t say ‘no’).

  67. Kate Minter says:

    If the robot provides “emotional labor,” does it cost extra?

  68. “there’s no reason to worry about “objectifying” something that very literally is an object made for nothing more than a man’s enjoyment”

    That is the rational position, but it is not the position feministrs will take. They are already whining about the “objectification” of video game characters (see Anita Sarkeesian for the most egregious example).

  69. JDG says:

    Apparently rape of robots is possible (since they can’t say ‘no’).

    Hence the clash of feminist ideology with biblical instruction. In the Bible wives are instructed to NOT say no to their husbands (as are husbands to their wives – but that won’t count in a gynocentric forum). Hence according to elite feminists, all intimate relations by Christians are rape. I haven’t figured out if such relations are RAPE rape though. Someone will have to ask Whoopi about that one.

  70. The Other Jim says:

    @Concerned Citizen

    “Dalrock, what do you think about the idea of setting up villages and townships away from the insanity and building defensive walls and such? Is that an ethically acceptable Christian response to all this? It is going to get to cannibalism and utter chaos pretty fast at this rate.”

    It’s hard not to see various neo-Luddite movements springing up due to sexbots & vr. I’ll probably end up joining one of these movements. Sure, they’ll be different depending upon culture and place, but all of them will reject technology on various levels. All of this will be at the same time people go mad en masse from future-shock as technology outpaces mankind’s ability to comprehend it, not to mention blurring reality. It’s also now hard to see how mankind avoids one several dystopian futures dreamt up by many sci-fi writers over the years(Huxley, Dick, Nolan & Johnson(Logan’s Run), Bradbury, Burgess, et al.). Like the rise of monasteries across Europe during the Dark Ages, there will be these peculiar isolated societies preserving traditional Western culture. Perhaps a thousand years from now, there might be some ‘renaissance’…

    The entire sexbot/vr sex leaves me cold and unimpressed. At the end of the day, you’re still fucking a washing machine.

  71. greyghost says:

    Just commenting based on the article only. I think a guy with gandarusa and artificial womb and a sexbot is the smartest guy in the room. A blood test of that guy at any time will show he has the least amount of stress hormones or what ever in his body.

  72. greyghost says:

    JDG

    That didn’t work out for Harcourt Fenton Mudd.

    Somebody tampered with the original code.

    He was being punished of course. Imagine that, being left with your loving wife is a form of punishment. MGTOW

  73. Tom C says:

    I’ll pass on having sex with one unless maybe it’s that one with the remote-controlled inflatable boobs from the Stepford Wives. But if they ever came out with a Rosie the Robot Maid from the Jetsons that would clean my place and cook me dinner? Sign me up!

  74. @Ras Al Ghul
    @Mark

    Polygamy will be legalized.

    Polygyny is already lawful but not recognized by the State, because in most states a legal marriage is defined as a licensed marriage and marriage everywhere is defined as a union of two. In the US no man can get prosecuted for living with multiple women but he could get taken to the cleaners so it needs to be done correctly. All it takes is a written contract of marriage with no license and you’re married without having to worry about a charge of bigamy. The idea that polygyny will be “legalized” is that the state would become involved and issue licenses for such marriages.

    If polygamy is legalized, the divorce rate will drop too. Simple math if a man has four wives, she’s looking at only 20% of the assets, not 50% and the likelihood the children will stay with the father and their other mothers will be high based on the court systems weird logic about caregiving and support systems.

    Incentives matter. Keep in mind that child support is a large factor in divorce. If one wife did decide to bail and got custody of her children, her child support would only be based solely on the husband’s income and couldn’t be based on the other wives income. However, separating siblings is very much frowned upon, so a guy with kids by every wife will very likely see the kids stay with him in the event one woman wants to leave. That means she pays child support. Ouch! After that, it’s pretty much guaranteed he will get custody of the children if anyone else wants to leave because he already has custody of their children’s siblings. This is a huge incentive for the women to stay in the marriage.

    Feminists see monogamous marriage in its current iteration for what it properly is: a legal device that empowers women to shift power and assets from men to women. To this end the legal system has been changed to give women all the power. Legalize polygyny and polygamy and there go the bigamy statutes. In addition, all the current divorce rules would have to be changed and the women would lose ground.

    Polygyny establishes patriarchal marriage and destroys of feminism. It is also (in today’s legal climate) a much more durable form of marriage with the incentives arranged to preserve the marriage rather than destroy it. The structure gives the wives their Personal Alpha™ and gives the husband a lot more safety and all the sex he wants. Feminists would automatically oppose this because polygyny benefits men and strengthens the family.

    Feminism encourages women to become more like men and compete with men. Polygyny flips the script and requires they become more submissive and feminine in order to compete with the other wives for their husband’s attention. It has dread game built in and robs the women of their sexual power within the marriage. Women will stab each other in the back in a heartbeat. Want to guess the probability of a wife calling 911 to lie about abuse knowing there’s a strong probability the other wives will say she’s lying and no abuse took place? Can anyone imagine feminists supporting such a thing?

    In a patriarchal (polygynous) marriage the wives’ hypergamy, competitive instinct and desire for attention works against them because what women really want is attention. The structure requires pleasing their husband because the incentives are arranged to stay in the marriage and his attention is the prize they have to compete for. To do that they have to give him what he wants. What does he want? Attractive, sweet, submissive and sexually available wives. Interestingly, their competition holds their behavior in check both in public and in private and reinforces their loyalty in public. Yes, they will even compete to see who can look the best. So, the guy with 3 sweet and attractive wives publicly submitting to and respecting their husband will be such a contrast to the feminist women in monogamous marriage that there will be conflict. The women in monogamous marriages will rightly see this as a serious threat and oppose such marriages.

    The whole gay-as-normal and gay marriage issue have multiple loud and well-financed organizations pushing for it as well as all of Hollywood. Pushing back in large part were Christians, churchians, conservatives and cuckservatives. The result was the creation of the God’s Best™ brand, which claims as doctrine that marriage is defined as one man and one woman. Even though nothing in Scripture forbids polygyny and there is significant textual support for it, they’ve already invested so much in the God’s Best™ brand that they’d automatically oppose such unions amid much whispering about what might result from the “sleeping arrangements” in such marriages.

    The only people who would lobby for “legalizing” polygyny would be unhappy women already in such a marriage and women who had previously been in such a marriage and left, because they’d be the only ones to gain from it. That’s a small and very unorganized group. They would be opposed by feminists, monogamists, ignorant Christians, churchians and cuckservatives. Fear on the part of the women and envy and jealousy on the part of men… I just don’t see state-approved polygyny happening. Not enough supporters and way too many enemies and problems.

  75. iamadamalan says:

    Most likely result of this? Calhoun mice/grass eater scenario where both sexes reject physical contact for virtual sex.

    And that leaves the continent to La Raza, the Mormon empire, Muslims and various other assorted ethnic enclaves unless a remnant of American Christians can reject feminism and turn back to God.

  76. greyghost says:

    Tom C
    What will sell the “sexbot” won’t be sex at all. It will most likely be a female companion and will be physically attractive and animated with expressive body language and facial expressions that have the effect of positive emotional and endearing character to them.
    Some guy will have one driving golf cart on a golf course some where and guys will come and check her/it out. She will be pleasant and look good and will kind and considerate to all “guest” of her owner. The men will go beyond seeing her as a sex toy and see her as some one to love and be kind to. That shit will sell especially if priced up to 100k. Sex less maybe but not will out a symbolism of concern for the man’s well being. No woman today can compete with that. That is where the robot sales will come.
    VR is where the sex is. . I also think something like a G-suit will be used for the enhanced physical sensation to mirror the virtual world.
    Show a woman that cares for and concerns herself with the physical and emotional well being of a man and that is a woman hated by all women today including the state.

  77. On the surface it seems that sex robots in the future are kind of absurd. In 50 years around 1/5th of the population will be over 65 years of age; you would think the robots would be more programmed to wipe wrinkly old asses in warehouses full of elderly or serve as military drones fending off Islamic hordes moving out from Africa establishing caliphates in Europe.

    Then you realize the under 18 portion of the populace will shrink to the same percentage. Imagine it everyone, the greater share of women will be post-wall entitled career feminists. Young women actually become a scarce commodity whose entitlement and is off the charts on a ‘Children of Men’ level.

    I think Sex Robots will become more likely for men of all ages; because there is no longer an abundance of attractive young fertile women. The percentage of marriageable men will decrease due to economic decline that goes along with an aging population and gender quotas; thus increasing the demand for sex robots.

    Feminists will finally demand the government outlaw sex robots, but it won’t happen, because of unwise Free Trade agreements the United States signed with Asian oligarchies and communists 50 years earlier. The feminist “Boxer Rebellion” will be suppressed by multinational corporations who will make sure the sex bots will flow to America, Japan, and Europe who will begin to shed populace.

    It sounds rather depressing to be alive in 50 years be honest.

  78. Concerning Jincey Lumkin:

    Withholding consent to the feminist is clearly not the ability to say “NO” to men having sex with them, it’s the ability to say “NO” to men having sex at all.

    For all of their thrashing about men wanting to control women sexually it’s clear that they are driven to control men sexually. Classic projection (once again).

  79. Aservant says:

    You never know, but I don’t think this is happening. I think people have watched too many movies. Well, maybe it could happen if people become so animalistic that sex is just reduced to putting “it” somewhere wet and warm and then achieving friction until orgasm, but trends in the growing perversion that is being mainstreamed today will show that society is going the other way. Instead of less stimulation, people are needing more to get aroused. So I just don’t believe that we will get to a stage where a human like machine, with all of its warmth and complexity, will be able to spontaneously respond like a human and simulate the act of sex…….kissing, caressing, verbal cues, perspiration, the whole bit. The human body and spirit is way too complex for man to achieve this. Man is a very arrogant creature, so he believes he will achieve it though. And besides, even if it were possible one day, as advanced as our technology is becoming, we are still very, very far from making a robot passable as a living, breathing human. It will take a much longer time, were it possible, than 50 years, and if society keeps on the trajectory it is now, the same one that would strive for these types of robots, it will have collapsed way before these machines will be realized.

  80. >if we could program robotic women to give Christian men the wakeup call and thereby force them to submit to their robo wives, I strongly suspect the lack of reciprocation would no longer be a concern.

    Don’t give them any ideas, Dalrock.

    I wonder what a virtual shit test would look like and whether it would be easier to ignore? Probably every screen in the house would be programmed to follow you around to continue shit testing. Imagine the AI- even at the gym you would be detected and the female shit test could be broadcast to your screen. Women could finally achieve the penultimate goal of the nonstop, unending, unrelenting shit test which would be impossible to pass. The only solution for Betas would be total capitulation while all the Alphas will be in jail for malicious destruction of property from all the smashed screens. They will probably have special halfway houses with plenty of extra bedrooms where women can go to line up and screw the Alphas.

    As @Novaseeker outlined above, many people are missing how simple this technology really is. The sexbots don’t need to be full people. Just a set of goggles and something very much like a mechanical fleshlight would do the trick and wait until they get the pheromone packages- just shove a tiny bead up your nose right before you put on the goggles…

    I suspect this technology will decrease productivity to such an extent that it will be heavily regulated in the future. If a guy has to put in a full 8 hours of work before the VR tech robot will fuck you it would be a level of social control that would make Orwell’s dystopian 1984 look like a Jeffersonian democracy.

  81. Moses says:

    Sex robots will never happen.

    Flesh and blood fembots will pass laws to ensure they keep their sex monopoly over men.

  82. Dragonfly says:

    lol Rollo! That was hilarious and so enlightening unfortunately at the same time.

  83. There is absolutely no market for women buying robos-x, absolutely none. Men have a much higher s-x drive than women do, men marry for s-x, women marry for financial resources. She’s not buying a robot (not unless he is going to go out and earn her a paycheck.)

    The man WILL buy a s-xbot IF (and only if) it simulates the flesh. She doesn’t have to speak. She doesn’t have to cook. She doesn’t have to clean. She doesn’t have to work. She doesn’t have to do anything other than progromatically perfect the actual s-x act. It has to feel like a real woman. So in that sense, Blade Runner or AI or Cherry 2000, She can’t be latex. Latex will not sell. It must feel like the flesh. She must lubricate. She must have motorized/moving parts inside her ‘gina, it must feel real. ONLY THAT WILL SELL. And it will sell well. And it will be a game changer (forever) for marriage. And why?

    Because if you can fully and completely automate the entire s-x act for men and do so in a manner that the man gets full and complete gratification, then many men will simply see no reason at all to interect with real flesh and blood women. Why risk marriage, risk losing all your hard earned wealth to another flesh and blood human being if the s-x she could perform is no better (and is perhaps worse) than what he can purchase (free of any divorce or restraining order risk) and have forever? She will never say no. She will always perform perfectly. She will never age. There will be entire subsections of men who will get up in the morning, go to work, get their work done, and race home to be with their s-xbot. They would have no reason to socialize, no reason to leave their homes in the evening. Dating and marriage, gonzo. That would pretty much be the end of feminism as we know it.

    That said, this robot that simulates the flesh, that is not 5 years away gentlemen. We will NEVER SEE IT in our lifetimes. They will not be able to build it, not before we are all dead. So in that sense, it doesn’t really matter.

  84. GeminiXcX says:

    Possible new porn evolutions:

    1) Black man cuckolds my VR wife.
    2) VR black man cuckolds my VR wife.

    Not sure what will be more devastating for future dudes. . .
    1) “My VR wife left me for another man!”
    2) “My VR wife left me for a VR man!”
    3) “My VR wife just decided she was gay, and left me for a (VR) woman!”

    The possibilities are endless.😀

    -GXcX

  85. GeminiXcX says:

    Possible new porn evolutions, part II:

    1) Black man cuckolds my sexbot wife.
    2) Black sexbot cuckolds my sexbot wife.

    Not sure what will be more devastating for future dudes. . .
    1) “My sexbot left me for another man!”
    2) “My sexbot left me for a sexbot”
    3) “My sexbot just decided she was gay, and left me for a (sexbot) woman!”

    The possibilities are endless.😀

    Okay, I’ll stop now. Goodnight gentlemen, and ladies.

    -GXcX

  86. They Call Me Tom says:

    @ron
    …the thing is, society is already dead in many ways…call it necritic(sp?) tissue if you like, or atrophied muscles (if you don’t mind body metaphors…) there will still be the healthy parts, eventually the unhealthy parts will fall away. The good women, and the things they believe in and stand for, and the men who marry and preserve them… their culture will pass down through the generations. But for the base and feral women, and the men caught by them, there’s only a dead end for their culture.

    If that doesn’t comfort you, then consider something else, technology is a fragile thing, if it truly causes a rapid reduction in the world’s overall thinking capacity, there will be no one to keep building and repairing the technology in the end… so it can’t be a death sentence for society in the end, just a detour.

    Then again, I’m probably full of it… and none of this has happened yet, who knows how it will actually work out. I’m not a global climate scientist in pursuit of a government grant, so I won’t pretend that I can imagine all the variables involved.

  87. Spike says:

    Christian men are already given wake up calls by their fembot wives, Dalrock. Not robolovers.
    I imagine Pastors will be all over this one, complaining long and loud from the pulpits about how immoral it is for a Christian man to get his rocks off with a sexbot rather than manning up and getting a real woman.
    Trouble is, the same pastor won’t be complaining long and loud about how young Christian women aren’t making marriage with a Christian man a priority in their lives, preferring “mission work” in foreign countries (newsflash: mission is a man’s job, baby), career and implicit casual sex with exciting men, who will of course love her and leave her, so she will have a past that needs forgiveness by Christ and acceptance by the Christian man…
    Seriously, what is a man to do? Should young men, or indeed man of all ages get sexbots, who can blame them?

  88. TFH,

    But that level of perfection is not necessary.

    It it necessary if you want to sell it. It must be a much better experience (a near life like experience) if you want to sell it. That is because the price of on-line pron and your own hand is… zero. Its free. So if you are going to pay for something that you are already getting for free, it better be (basically) the real thing.

    It does not have to outcompete a 10. It only has to outcompete 7s and below, who are 98% of all adult women (remember that older women age 35+ have to be in the denominator too)..

    A s-xbot does not compete with a 10 or even a 7. She first must compete with a 2. That means the experience must feel like that of the flesh. I can not over-emphisize that, not if you are serious about selling it. And if there is no market (and there wasn’t a very big one for Real Dolls for just “flesh” reason) then won’t build it. And don’t mention fleshlights to strengthen your argument. These s-xbots would cost in the tens of thousands of dollars, not $39.95. It better feel like…. a woman.

  89. MarcusD says:

    Marrying a woman who is Catholic, but not practising.
    http://forums.catholic.com/showthread.php?t=972593

    Single Mom – What is my moral obligation to my daughter?
    http://forums.catholic.com/showthread.php?t=972646

    Staying Married after Infidelity by Wife
    http://forums.catholic.com/showthread.php?t=972624

  90. TFH,

    Why are you talking about sexbots? I am talking about VR Sex, as in what Oculus-rift-type technologies will be like in 2020 (i.e. 4 years of progress beyond their 2020 versions)…

    That is pretty close to what they had in the movie Brainstorm. There is a scene in that movie where someone pre-recorded an actual s-x act and wrote it to tape, and someone else played that tape right into their brain. I would guess that would be close to the Oculus-rift experience. But still, if there is a dollar figure that people will spend on that, it isn’t that high.

  91. Spike,

    I imagine Pastors will be all over this one, complaining long and loud from the pulpits about how immoral it is for a Christian man to get his rocks off with a sexbot rather than manning up and getting a real woman.

    I just don’t understand why single men (who don’t have a wife that forces him to attend a church with an annoying pastor out of threatpoint fear) don’t just get up, and walk right out of the building as soon as that pastor starts screaming like this. If anyone had gone full Driscoll on me in my single days, I would have told the guy right there in front of his congregation to go f-himself.

  92. PuffyJacket says:

    Countries with better-looking women will see only 40-50% of women truly pressured, but countries with less-attractive women will see 80-90% of them in trouble.

    In other words, Anglo- American chicks are screwed.

    The average American woman you wouldn’t even be able to trade for a goat in most countries. And yet you have millions of American men in indentured servitude to these creatures.

  93. PuffyJacket says:

    While this may be a game changer for individual men, I really don’t think virtual or robotic sex will ever go mainstream.

    It’s interesting how many women have made comments along this line on the subject of sexbots. This is their solipsism speaking; they truly believe they are “special” snowflakes that cannot be replaced. Such women are in for a rude awakening.

    It’s not that women can’t compete with porn star sex, it’s because they’re not inspired to

    The widespread availability of VR sex may very well provide the necessary “inspiration”. But realistically, most women won’t be able to compete on these terms. A positive side-effect will be the need for women to improve the more intangible aspects of what they bring to the table. “Sexist” advice (as per the Cosmo article) may suddenly become mainstream.

    Part of the reason why VR sex will be so disruptive is that modern women have become utterly useless in all aspects of their life not involving their vagina. That, plus there are always absurd legal risks and obligations lurking around the corner if you engage one sexually. This means a virtual woman that brings literally nothing else to the table is sufficient to displace 70-80% of the female population, simply due to reduced legal risk.

  94. PuffyJacket says:

    Correct!…..As someone that rents call girls for business associates that arrive in Toronto.I can assure you that when the “married men” ask me to get them a girlfriend for their visit here,they want the “g/f experience”.

    As an added bonus, the price of an escort/call girl should come down 25 to 40 percent, allowing you get to keep more of your hard-earned cash to reinvest in your business. That, or you could splurge on the 2 for 1 deal.

  95. Hells Hound says:

    Wouldn’t it just be better if manned up and put the wlmen back in their goddamn
    place?

    Screw that. If they want that place as preferable to their current place, let them return to it themselves.

  96. Johnycomelately says:

    Robo, porno, sex dolls, VR, masturbatory aids and prostitution phobia is a ruse, plausible deniability.

    Sex substitution is an effect not a cause, 25% of men in Western Europe aged 40-44 are childless (natural infertility rate is about 7%).

    Blaming the bottom rung men for hitting the pornz allows women to revel in their own hedonism sans the judgement, it’s a Machiavellian blame game.

    “Women are by far the largest consumer of mechanical sexual aids today.”

    What about women?

    Attention – Social media – check
    Getting off – Chadthundercock, Dildos – check
    Provisioning – Government, child support, affirmative action – check

    Now who’s really playing the dystopia game on level 5, men or women?

    If I were the president of FI Inc. I’d be pushing for VR porn post haste, keeps those pesky icky betas busy.

  97. Looking Glass says:

    A few years ago I caused a hilarious response at Sunshine’s old place with a simple line “the sexbots are coming”. It wasn’t a joke. The tech is there and the hopelessly Beta/beaten down Japanese coders will figure out exactly what they want to do with the technology over the next few years.

    Considering the compromises most Men already have to make to get sex, getting it through VR, a sexbot or some interesting combination of the two is well worth the $1000USD it’ll probably set you back in the early going. But the costs will rapidly come down.

    This is simply the result of, in mass, Women reducing themselves to their marginal utility. This is what has happened in much of the economy, which is why automation has already started to replace *Chinese* manufacturing jobs. It’s going to be a strange world very soon.

  98. Don Quixote says:

    Someone had to post this:

  99. Sad for men (women don’t care) that the desired, real-world drive of average women (who would be acceptable and thrilling for the average man to make a life with) is for men that aren’t interested in a life, only a pump and dump. Sad for women who long for a man, but can never be satisfied with an average man close to their own SMV, that said women wind up alone in the world, childless and wondering why.

    The leaders of all this, feminism, Jezabel, all the outlets that created this environment who led us all down this road and now 99% of the population winds up dissatisfied and alone. The leaders within each category that brought us this mess, this hatred between men and women (and women against women with their cutthroat competition for the top-10 percent of men, frankly), their nests are feathered, they have comfortable lives with THIER companions (hypergamy exists in men, too, even the ugliest, nastiest feminists at the top of media have THIER men) rub their hands together with glee. Lindy West with her big fat wedding is a case in point. Valenti is another. The very few women at the top earn their livings keeping this going, entrenching it all and the masses wonder what the hell is happening to their little world.

    Feminism is entrenched, the men in the bottom 60-80 percent SMV are coping with their socially-reduced desirability by opting out. Robots, fleshlights, porn are their outlets and coming soon to a PC or Smartphone to you, VR companions. These men would happily settle in with and have families with the SMV 6 and-below women. But between these ladies’ complete lack of respect and desire for “average men” that would want them, the divorce laws, the cuckoldry, men are opting out and the 6-and-below SMV women are alone because the men THEY desire are NOT going to make a family with the. And the majority of everyone in the SMV of 6 and below is alone now, or will be from their 30’s onward.

    Is this REALLY what we wanted? Doesn’t matter I guess. Women have their toys, men will have their robots and when the hoards come calling, no one will argue because this is not a culture anyone is going to fight for, as did the Great Generation in WW2, a generation long gone and forgotten and will never be allowed to return because the yoke of modern feminism, with all it’s passive-aggressive tyranny, will never be thrown off. Highlighting their tyranny, having made the situation untenable, unfriendly and deadly for men, they begrudge men their outlets, their robots, their VR and demand that men man up, as if feminism would even allow it. Terrible situation, one that’s defined but for which there is no answer.

  100. Spike says:

    innocentbystanderboston says: August 5, 2015 at 12:52 am

    Thanks for your reply IBB.

    The problem, i think, is a recurrent theme in this blog: the feminisation of church, especially Protestant Evangelical churches.
    In a recent church sermon, the pastor asked the congregation, “What 2 words do men fear the most”?
    All of the men in the congregation didn’t know how to answer it.
    He answered for them. The words were “I do”.

    I saw the pastor afterward and told him that he should watch a couple of episodes of “Bridezillas”, and then get back to his congregation about whether men – including his own 2 sons – should be reluctant to say “I do”.

    I was the only one, to my knowledge, to call him out on that. The rest of the men in the congregation just simply ignored it, or decided not to confront it.

    Get out and tell him to go f- himself? It is the right and manly thing to do. But in a Church where apologetics aren’t taught, where hymns aren’t battle cries but rather religious versions of secular love songs, generations of men have been indoctrinated to think that this is proper worship. Thus, Christian culture – that gave us the best most stable and technologically advanced civilisation ever – crumbles.

  101. @Jim Christian
    “Sad for men (women don’t care) that the desired, real-world drive of average women (who would be acceptable and thrilling for the average man to make a life with) is for men that aren’t interested in a life, only a pump and dump. Sad for women who long for a man, but can never be satisfied with an average man close to their own SMV, that said women wind up alone in the world, childless and wondering why. ”

    It is indeed very sad. You can thank Hollywood for that one! (Among others, I’m sure…)

  102. Jane Dough says:

    “It’s interesting how many women have made comments along this line on the subject of sexbots. This is their solipsism speaking; they truly believe they are “special” snowflakes that cannot be replaced. Such women are in for a rude awakening.”

    It isn’t about being “replaced”. I think that the ridicule will come primarily from other men. Yes, women will snicker, but it will be male comics, late show hosts, movie writers, who will drive society to look down on these things. They will be ruthless. Of course the majority of men will use VR porn (as will women I’m sure), but trying to replace a partner with it or a sexbot will never be seen in a neutral light and those are the people who will be ostracized.

    And I don’t deny the problems porn has caused. But the number of men who have sworn off all sexual contact with women in favor of porn are far outnumbered by the men who want both.

  103. Keith Young says:

    This bring the cult movie CHERRY 2000 to mind.

  104. Badpainter says:

    So when Jim Christian say this:

    “Sad for men (women don’t care) that the desired, real-world drive of average women (who would be acceptable and thrilling for the average man to make a life with) is for men that aren’t interested in a life, only a pump and dump. Sad for women who long for a man, but can never be satisfied with an average man close to their own SMV, that said women wind up alone in the world, childless and wondering why.”

    I wonder if anyone else sees the irony. The irony being that the West as an evolved, modern, progressive and socialist civilization/society is actually far more cut throat, hostile and adversarial than it was a hundred years ago. All we lack today is the bloodshed and starvation otherwise we’ve got a Hobbesian state of nature. It’s truly everyman for himself.

  105. feeriker says:

    It is indeed very sad. You can thank Hollywood for that one! (Among others, I’m sure…)

    Yes, those “others” (government, academia, and big business, to name just three) are in fact primarily to blame. Hollywood is not a primary creator of the foulness, just the means by which these other primary sources of the problem transmit it to the masses.

  106. Regular Guy says:

    Completely OT but too good not to share:

    I attended an Off-road Adventure Motorcycle Training Camp and a tour of the Rocky Mountains over the past 2 weeks. I met all kinds of interesting people, many of which who are eager travel the world by motorcycle but wanted to instruction to hone their bike handling skills. It was an experience of a lifetime.

    One of the students was a contentious, liberal, feminist, woman from Denver. I overheard her having a conversation with another woman complaining about a time she broke down on the side of the road on her bike. She had all of her gear and tools strewn about and staring at her bike without a clue of what to do. Having no mechanical skills by her admission, she complained to other woman that she was a helpless, stranded woman and no one (meaining men) on the highway were attempting to stop and help! Can you believe it?

    Eager to burst her bubble, I butted into her conversation by pumping my fist in the air and said smiling sarcastically, “Go Go strong, independent woman!”. She was not amused.

  107. Anonymous says:

    Blow-up dolls were for losers, now they beat real women due to hypergamy. Dude, things are getting messed-up.

  108. Regular Guy says:

    (sp) …meaning men…

  109. Gunner Q says:

    Badpainter @ 8:47 am:
    “I wonder if anyone else sees the irony. The irony being that the West as an evolved, modern, progressive and socialist civilization/society is actually far more cut throat, hostile and adversarial than it was a hundred years ago.”

    No irony. Christians built the modern world, then the thugs and pagans grabbed the reins of power from us. This is the sort of thing Christianity has been talking about since the beginning of recorded history, the Creator God and the rebellious usurper.

  110. feeriker says:

    The problem, i think, is a recurrent theme in this blog: the feminisation of church, especially Protestant Evangelical churches.
    In a recent church sermon, the pastor asked the congregation, “What 2 words do men fear the most”?
    All of the men in the congregation didn’t know how to answer it.
    He answered for them. The words were “I do”.

    I saw the pastor afterward and told him that he should watch a couple of episodes of “Bridezillas”, and then get back to his congregation about whether men – including his own 2 sons – should be reluctant to say “I do”.

    This brings to mind a message that one of the junior pastors in my church delivered two weeks ago near the end of the service. I nearly fainted in shock AND leapt out of my chair in ecstasy at the same time.

    This evangelical church is a Hispanic church, located about 50 miles from the U.S.-Mexican border (I’m one of only a tiny handful of “gringos” in the congregation), so the atmosphere of worship reflects parts of that culture. One might think that this would include a very “macho” edge, but one would be mistaken. Although there isn’t the overt feminization/pedestalization prevalent in “gringo” churches of the same denomination, there is definitely no overt effort to extol and encourage masculine headship either (for all I know this could be a subconscious effort to compensate for machismo).

    At any rate, at the end of the main service in Spanish, in conclusion of a message focused on trusting in God and following his plans for one’s life, family, and future, this young pastor, after issuing a word of guidance to husbands and fathers to stay the course in prayer and faith, said the following:

    “Ladies, as wives and mothers, do not create unnecessary obstacles or problems for your husbands. They are commanded by the Lord to lead you, and it’s God’s will that you trust them and be their help and a source of strength in doing the Lord’s work.”

    I wish I had had my cell phone with me to record that. A gem of that type deserves preservation. How sad that I’ll most likely never hear that said in English in any church.

  111. My big question for Ms. Jincey is this: can a “sex aid” consent?

  112. @ Jane Dough, what? You mean more “Man Up” speeches and shaming language from the likes of Mark Driscoll? Oh noes. This subculture already exists and they are already used to being called basement dwelling neckbeards and being ridiculed for every element of their lives. Tumblr feminists are an even more abnormal subculture and besides never having children to replenish their numbers they seem to be doing okay.

  113. Opus says:

    I long ago came to the view that TEDx talks were probably junk science for the masses, and I would be instantly doubtful of any whiney-voiced female parading her body on stage as does Miss Jincey a woman who professes an equal ability in Law and Sex, but what today gets me is that she has added the word Esquire to her name.

    Perhaps I need to come up to speed but the use of the term Esquire (like the word Squire) is now rather archaic, but in any event where I am is and has only ever been applicable to a man. I suppose the feminists have stolen that too – or is it as I discovered when I was State-side that Lawyers and only they use it amongst themselves, but even so its use does to me seem to be both pretentious and stolen. Are unmarried Trans-sexuals now describing themselves as Spinsters?

  114. Red Pill Latecomer says:

    People here have referred to the 1988 film, Cherry 2000. That’s one of my favorite post-apocalypse sci-fi thriller:

    However, the message of the film was that REAL MEN want REAL WOMAN. In the film, a man has a “perfect” sex robot, a Cherry 2000. She’s sweet, kind, nurturing, affectionate, loyal, beautiful, and give sex whenever he wants it.

    Then Cherry 2000 breaks down. So the man must find a replacement part out in the desert. He hires a FEMALE MERCENARY to act as his guide on this dangerous mission. She’s a “smart, strong, independent woman.”

    In the end, the man finally finds his robot part and fixes Cherry. Then he realizes how vapid she is. That what he really wants is a REAL woman, warts and all. A woman who’s tough, strong, smart, independent, etc., etc.

  115. Red Pill Latecomer says:

    Sorry, the 1987 film.

  116. DrTorch says:

    thugs and pagans grabbed the reins of power from us.

    No, Christian leaders gave them away, b/c “agape”.

  117. feeriker says:

    thugs and pagans grabbed the reins of power from us.

    No, Christian leaders gave them away, b/c “agape”.

    Yup. Practically gift-wrapped.

  118. Andrew says:

    I want to get off of this ride…

  119. Red Pill Latecomer says:

    The more I think about Cherry 2000 with my new Red Pill mind, the more I realize how silly a film it is. One levels I never realized when I first saw it over 20 years ago.

    The Female Mercenary falls in love with her Male Client, because he’s such a sensitive Nice Guy. Seems men have always shunned her, because she’s always been a tomboy, grease monkey, and men are so shallow. Men prefer barbie dolls to a real woman.

    At the film’s end, only two can escape in a plane. The Female Mercenary quickly decides that it should be her Male Client and his Cherry 2000 sexbot — although staying behind means almost certain death for the Female Mercenary, as enemies are closing in.

    Why does the Female Mercenary make this sacrifice?

    1. She loves her Male Client, and if he prefers a sexbot over her, a real woman — so be it. As we know, women often sacrifice their own happiness for a man, suffering and loving in silence.

    2. Also, it’s part of her mercenary code of honor. She was hired to do a job — get the client in and out, with his sexbot. As we know, the world is full of women warriors happily dying for a code of honor.

    Yup. A very “realistic” film. Tough, strong, hyper-macho, kick-ass Women Warriors are always falling in love with sensitive Nice Guys, for whom they will sacrifice their very lives.

    But in the end, the Male Client suddenly realizes he prefers the Female Mercenary to his Cherry 2000, and dumps the sexbot, making room in the plane for the mercenary. They then fly off into the sunset and a life of romance.

  120. Jane Dough says:

    “@ Jane Dough, what? You mean more “Man Up” speeches and shaming language from the likes of Mark Driscoll? Oh noes. This subculture already exists and they are already used to being called basement dwelling neckbeards and being ridiculed for every element of their lives. Tumblr feminists are an even more abnormal subculture and besides never having children to replenish their numbers they seem to be doing okay.”

    I confess, I’ve never used Tumblr. I’ve heard many opinions on it, and none of them make it sound good.

    Yes, there are subcultures for both men and women made up of people who are ostracized and depressed. Yes, something like this could definitely push those people even more to the fringes and/or make them even more firm in their resolve to disconnect from society. Some of the people here see this as a good thing, and others see it as sad. I definitely believe the latter, but I understand why some would be happy. You can kind of see this divide on the manosphere. Some people view themselves as regular guys with a more clear and accurate view of the world than “blue pillers”, and others view themselves as part of a larger subculture or movement.

    But outside of those subcultures, I just don’t think robo or virtual sex will take off as a full lifestyle or replacement for human relationships. A hobby? Absolutely. But men still pride themselves on being able to “get” a woman and judge others on their ability to do the same. A pretty, pleasant woman is still a huge status boost to her man. Men still judge other men on their families. And, finally, forming human relationships and families is just a basic human instinct and desire. Making virtual sex the new norm would be an uphill battle against both human nature and our social climate.

    What should worry us is what this will do to the people who do use it to disconnect. The amount of time even “normal” people spend interacting digitally instead of face to face already concerns social scientists and mental health professionals. The more we use “social” media, the less real socializing we do, the fewer strong bonds we form, and the more depressed we are. Porn can cause vulnerable people a lot of problems. The intensity and full sensory experience of VR sex will be a million times worse.

  121. It wont be sexbots that start the next sexual revolution – it will be an ubiquitous and unilaterally male-controlled form of birth control. The Feminine Imperative will fight tooth and bloody nail to ban or restrict men from reliable male birth control because it puts men in primary control of women’s Hypergamous sexual selection.

    Imagine a social order where women are the gatekeepers of sex (and commitment), but men are the unilateral gatekeepers of which woman will bear children and which will not. Now imagine that social order wherein even the most Beta of men is viscerally aware of women’s Hypergamous sexual strategy after having women’s open embrace of, and proudly flaunting it, for decades.

    Sure, there’ll always be Beta chumps who believe that their being magnanimous and ‘giving a woman a child’ will endear her to him for life and will reciprocate with feral sexual appetite, but the social undercurrent will be a reverse of women’s unilateral control of birth today – men will be the primary influence of, and controllers of women’s Hypergamy.

  122. M3 says:

    Give’r a few years for this to pass.

    Without sounding like a racist.. i don’t think this will fly very well in the black community.. but i dare say white guys (like myself) will be lining up around the block for a 1 shot / 10 year safety net against ‘oopsie’ babies.

    http://www.parsemusfoundation.org/vasalgel-home/

    Women’s timeframe for choosing conception is evaporating. They won’t like it. One writer for a brit rag already copped to not wanting men to have the ability to decide when women have babies… that’s just sooooooooooo wrong.
    😛

  123. jbro1922 says:

    Re: male birth control

    Lately I’ve been hearing the question “why is it only the woman’s responsibility to prevent pregnancy?” from women, especially with all this Planned Parenthood stuff blowing around. On the surface it sounds like they want men to have a hand in preventing pregnancy, but how much of a hand I have yet to determine. I hear this question in discussions about abortion and it just sounds to me like women don’t want to take their birth control. They always point out that birth control isn’t 100% effective as an argument for abortion. It just sounds like an evasion of responsibility. Confusing argument.

  124. Red Pill Latecomer says:

    Rollo: The Feminine Imperative will fight tooth and bloody nail to ban or restrict men from reliable male birth control because it puts men in primary control of women’s Hypergamous sexual selection.

    I agree that male birth control will greatly benefit to men.

    But so far, feminists have been whining that there is no male birth control. That the burden is placed on women.

    Feminists are stupid. Complaining about whatever is, is so knee-jerk to them. They won’t realize until it’s too late that male birth control will disempower women.

  125. Dave says:

    I’m curious what Matt Groening thinks of this subject. His 2001 Futurama episode “I Dated a Robot” seems to be against human-robot sex (including this hilarious 29th-century educational film: https://vimeo.com/12915013 ), but the 2010 episode “Project Infinity” seems to be for it. Maybe because the human was male in the first case and female in the second? No one seems to mind when women use machines to reach the Big O.

  126. Exfernal says:

    Rollo, where is the ‘trigger warning’? I was exposed to this ’empowering’ photo because of your link :Body Confident, Plus-Size Women Pose Topless For Empowering Photos

    I demand recompense for mental injury.🙂

  127. DeNihilist says:

    Funny, thought we already had male contraceptive. It is called a vasectomy.

  128. srsly says:

    Can’t believe you haven’t reported on Kermit and Miss Piggy

  129. Dave says:

    It wont be sexbots that start the next sexual revolution – it will be an ubiquitous and unilaterally male-controlled form of birth control.

    We already have it. It’s called the condom. For those who are more extreme, vasectomy is still widely available. A snip takes but a few minutes. But if you are referring to a pill that will become a universally available male-controlled form of birth control, I hate to tell you, it will not revolutionize anything as such. Men won’t use it for the same reason they hate to use a condom, because that pill will not come without its undesirable side effects. There is no birth control in existence–or that will be in existence–that will not be accompanied by some discomfort.

  130. BuenaVista says:

    DFly: “^I think a lot of women genuinely resent knowing that they need to give him “generous amazing sex.” Why I’m not sure… maybe their mothers never taught them that sex is wonderful and enjoyable, maybe they just have a sexual hangups, or maybe they married men they really aren’t that attracted to…”

    As these women why they married their husbands. Note how the answer never is “because of love, intimacy, and mind-blowing sex.”

    It will be “he’s a great guy”, “money — he-he!”, “it was just time … [wall issues]”, “I just felt it was God’s will”, baby rabies, and on and on. But it won’t be, “Because he’s my dreamboat and we go sailing places in the sack I didn’t know existed.”

    Women love opportunistically, pragmatically. That has nothing to do with sensuality; sensuality is never “pragmatic” except in the professional or gold-digger framework.

  131. @Dave

    The problem with the vasectomy is the permanence of it. I think the real issue of male birth control such as vasagel is it can be considered in a calm state of mind without any undue influence. It cannot be defeated or bypassed. (such as holes in the condom or the girl jumping the morning wood without a condom or just talking the guy out of using it- “I’m allergic to latex”). The decision to stop using it can likewise be calm and rational.

    The ubiquitous availability of such male birth control in conjunction with widespread understanding by men of just how much the system is stacked against them and how much they have to lose is going to change things.

    I read the article M3 linked, but noticed she didn’t cover the real hot-button reason women don’t want to see it. If the guy has pretty much foolproof male birth control such as a vasectomy or vasagel, it puts serious restrictions on her ability to cheat on him. If he can’t get her pregnant she shouldn’t have to take BC pills or have an IUD or whatever. If she was, knowing he was shooting blanks, she’d have to hide it. And while those aren’t foolproof, without the male contraceptive the assumption would be it was his kid. After all, they aren’t perfect and she’d *never* step out on him.

    With an undefeatable male contraceptive, the assumption should automatically be that she cheated and the kid is gonna get tested if she denies it. That changes the entire dynamic, so what’s a girl to do?

    RAPE!

  132. Red Pill Latecomer says:

    DeNihilist: Funny, thought we already had male contraceptive. It is called a vasectomy.

    You thought wrong.

    Calling a vasectomy a “male contraceptive” is like calling a tubal ligation a “female contraceptive.”

  133. BuenaVista says:

    Regular Guy: “She had all of her gear and tools strewn about and staring at her bike without a clue of what to do. Having no mechanical skills by her admission, she complained to other woman that she was a helpless, stranded woman and no one (meaining men) on the highway were attempting to stop and help!”

    She was a fish without a motorcycle.

  134. Red Pill Latecomer says:

    Artisanal Toad: without the male contraceptive the assumption would be it was his kid. … With an undefeatable male contraceptive, the assumption should automatically be that she cheated and the kid is gonna get tested if she denies it.

    Unfortunately, it might not matter so much legally as we men would like. Some courts have ruled that if a man was married to, or was just living with, a woman who gets pregnant — the child is his. Even if DNA tests prove otherwise.

  135. Tam the Bam says:

    Concerntroll beams set to stun so soon, Jane? Surely you know us better than that?
    “Porn can cause vulnerable people a lot of problems.”
    Almost anything can cause vulnerable people a lot of problems. Evil social constructs, like .. like .. beer! Or pizza, fancy shoes or bingo. Electricity’s pretty bad all round, come to that.
    That’s why they’re vulnerable, Your Tautologicalness. You can’t legislate the world safe for cripples and idiots. Concentrate on fixing them, not hamstringing the rest of humanity.

  136. Cadders says:

    I think widely available, inexpensive, effective and most importantly – in-detectable – male birth control will have a huge impact on the balance of power between the sexes.

    All this talk of men being unwilling to use it, tales of side effects etc are irrelevant. Just it’s availability is a game changer. Because for women it raises the cost of babies. Babies are something that the majority of women end up craving, sooner or later. And babies are the gateway to provisioning – either by a man or big daddy government. Women will no longer have certainty that any man they have sex with is functionally fertile or not.

    If a woman sleeps around and becomes pregnant, identifying a man as the father becomes more difficult when he can claim he was on birth control. And if the resolution to that is to test his fertility with enforceable consequences – the man is on the hook if he is the father and walks away if not – then why not make DNA testing of children legally acceptable tests of paternity with enforceable consequences – the man is on the hook if he is the father and walks away if not?

    If a woman is monogamous or even married, she will need her partner’s active consent in order get pregnant. She will need to behave more in line with her man’s expectations in order to seal the deal. It would also be impossible to deny that each party were 50% responsible for the pregnancy. If both partners had to take conscious action to produce the baby then how can the ‘my body – my choice’ abortion rationale stand?

    I’m sure male birth control will have hosts of other unintended consequences but I suspect that they will all have one thing in common – it will force a change in the way women behave, compelling them, as a group, to be more considerate of men, as a group.

  137. Jane Dough says:

    “Almost anything can cause vulnerable people a lot of problems. Evil social constructs, like .. like .. beer! Or pizza, fancy shoes or bingo. Electricity’s pretty bad all round, come to that.
    That’s why they’re vulnerable, Your Tautologicalness. You can’t legislate the world safe for cripples and idiots. Concentrate on fixing them, not hamstringing the rest of humanity.”

    Woah! Who said anything about legislating? Or banning?

    I’m not anti porn, anti sexbots, or anti virtual reality, and even if I were, I wouldn’t believe they should be illegal, or even regulated by the government. What you quoted from was an explanation of why I don’t think they will widely take off as substitute partners, and why I think that trying to replace real people with technology would only be damaging to the individual doing it. Removing yourself from human romantic and sexual relationships in favor “love” with a machine to get back at those feminists is cutting off your nose to spite your face.

    Temporary male birth control will be a game changer though. I don’t think it will take all sexual power from women, but it will go a long way to resorting some semblance of balance. It’s been a long time coming. The only questions I have are how long it will take for men to widely trust and use it, and how low the birthrate will drop.

  138. Tam the Bam says:

    Opus “.. its use does to me seem to be both pretentious and stolen. “ Nod’s as good as wink to a blind ‘orse, know wot I mean squire? You ain’t seen me, right?

  139. Boxer says:

    With an undefeatable male contraceptive, the assumption should automatically be that she cheated and the kid is gonna get tested if she denies it. That changes the entire dynamic, so what’s a girl to do? RAPE!

    Yup. Be careful out there bros.

  140. Mark says:

    @Regular Guy
    “”Having no mechanical skills by her admission, she complained to other woman that she was a helpless, stranded woman and no one (meaining men) on the highway were attempting to stop and help! Can you believe it?””

    This same scenario happened to myself a few years back.Took my bike out for a ride one Sunday afternoon.I was sitting off the highway having a Tim Horton’s coffee and enjoying a Backwoods Cigar.A woman(37 I guess,nice looking broad) pulls in with a flat tire.She just stood there and looked at it(not having a friggin clue).She got the jack & tire iron out(not having a friggin clue).She looked over at me and said..”are you just going to sit there?…or are you going to help me”?….My response…”you don’t need a man’s help…you are a strong independent woman…..YOU GO GRRL”!!……I sat and watched the useless tool,looking at her jack & iron,spare tire….talk on her cell phone etc. I put on my helmet,jumped on my bike,looked at her(shook my head)….and rode away! The moral of the story?….How many feminazis does it take to change a car tire?….Answer:There are never any feminazi present when a car tire needs changing!

  141. Mark says:

    @Jane Duhhh

    “”Porn can cause vulnerable people a lot of problems. The intensity and full sensory experience of VR sex will be a million times worse.””

    You are correct!……………….Now go feed your cats!

  142. Boxer says:

    Dear Mark:

    Roosh V. is going to be in t-dot in just a few days. If you’re free I hope you can go down and see him. I’m sorry he wasn’t in town in June-July, when I was there. I’d have totally hung with the man, and would have bought you a drink also.

    A woman(37 I guess,nice looking broad) pulls in with a flat tire.She just stood there and looked at it(not having a friggin clue).She got the jack & tire iron out(not having a friggin clue).She looked over at me and said..”are you just going to sit there?…or are you going to help me”?….My response…”you don’t need a man’s help…you are a strong independent woman…..YOU GO GRRL”!!

    You did the right thing, and this scenario is actually quite dangerous. When I lived in B.C. years ago, it was a well-established scam to have a woman off on the side of the road someplace. The man who pulled off to help the poor damsel was then set upon by her armed thug boyfriend who was hiding in the bushes. Most of the victims of this hoax just lost their wallets, but some were brutally assaulted.

    Chivalry is hazardous to your health. Just don’t do it.

    Boxer

  143. greyghost says:

    Dave
    A male birth control pill is huge. In fact a male birth control pill ends feminism. This whole drill on vetting women and finding the right girl VR sex, sexbots all of it pales to a male birth control pill. men will decide who will be mothers and will control the lies. No man will ever need to trust a woman and no woman will know what a man is up to. The lies are his to tell.
    Right now Gandarusa is available in Indonesia All is needed is a sperm test kit and I’m a gandarusa dealer. Male pill and game, it is on. Absolutely no reason at all to bother with trust just get the pussy and good behavior.
    The Japanese will make the artificial womb to work around the low birth rate. Check this out http://www.affordablesurrogacy.com/1pro/egg84.htm Just buy an egg and no need to sweat some bitch and divorce. Man can live a whole life complete will children and never have to bother with women at all for anything of real meaning and influence on his life. Maybe sex at best.

  144. Dalrock says:

    @Mark

    She just stood there and looked at it(not having a friggin clue).She got the jack & tire iron out(not having a friggin clue).She looked over at me and said..”are you just going to sit there?…or are you going to help me”?

    The sense of entitlement here is really quite astounding, and I don’t think it is uncommon. She was offended that she had to ask you for help. A less obvious marker of the sense of entitlement (at least at first glance) is the statement most women will make if you pull over to help them. They intend it as praise for a man who knows his place:

    You won’t believe how many other people drove right on by without stopping to help before you pulled up!

    I’ve never had a man say the same thing. They aren’t outraged that others didn’t swoop in to their rescue; they are grateful that I am offering to help.

    Another angle to the same thing is something a (feminist) woman recounted to my wife. This woman has a 4×4 truck and has learned how to hook up a chain, change a tire, etc. However, she finally stopped pulling over to assist stranded women because of the great offense this causes. The damsels in distress had an expectation of being assisted by a man; a woman pulling over to help them was offensive. She still stops to help men, safety permitting, because they aren’t offended by her offer to help.

  145. rugby11ljh says:

    Love without really seeming going on is all to familiar.

  146. Mark says:

    @Jane Duhhh

    “”Removing yourself from human romantic and sexual relationships in favor “love” with a machine to get back at those feminists is cutting off your nose to spite your face.””

    It is called “self-preservation”………………..Now go feed your cats!

  147. feeriker says:

    Dalrock stole my thunder in response to Mark.

    The entitlement attitude is simply breathtaking. And nauseating.

    The only time I would even consider helping a woman under such conditions is if she was elderly (in which case she probably shouldn’t be driving anyway).

  148. Mark says:

    @Dalrock

    “”The sense of entitlement here is really quite astounding, and I don’t think it is uncommon. She was offended that she had to ask you for help””

    I agree!….but,let me make something clear.She was approximately 37(nice looking broad).If she was my mother’s age?….or your mother’s age Dalrock?…..I would have gone over and helped her out in a heart beat! Some things you just “DO” because you know in your heart & mind that it is “the right thing to do”.But,the “modern wimminz”????…….””that tire is not going to change itself””!!!!!…..YOU GO GRRRL!!!!

    @Boxer

    “”Roosh V. is going to be in t-dot in just a few days””

    Nice……..let me check that out.Thanks!

  149. Razorwire says:

    The sooner the better on this robolove stuff.

    Perhaps more equity in this arena will incentivize women to alter their behavior and choices but more likely we will see a tripling-down within the multitude of legal & social mechanisms available to ensure feminine primacy remains in-place, combined with a spike in women opting-in to the virtual/tech as well.

    With all of women’s protestations of porn, I see women embracing porn-like behaviors and signaling far more often these days, e.g. sending unsolicited naked pics in texts, Instagram pics that are overtly sexual, working porn into conversations, etc. And I won’t sully this site with some of the aggressive requests that women make during “courtship” that are certainly not torn from “The Joy of Sex”.

    Back when I was in an LTR I was ashamed of my occasional internet porn browsing, that is until I was looking for something in the night-stand and found a giant deep purple synthetic mechanized dong that was held in secret. Red flags aplenty, but still, she acquired this at a party with other single women – specifically to sell these things like some twisted Tupperwear.

    Perhaps they are responding to hookup culture and the prevailing (and effective) strategy of sexualizing soon and often, but I sense there is more to this than merely playing to a market trend. They are natural consumers. Sexuality is their currency. The convergence of this will dovetail nicely with technological progression – further fueled by increasing numbers of non-alpha men opting-out of “Dating.”

    How modern culture and the SMP operate regarding sexuality is already so dehumanizing that this kind of technology is just a natural progression. One that might just allow us to finally hit bottom and then circle back into humanity in some positive way. (I’m admittedly stretching a single here.)

    The various consumable outcomes of robolove will do little to erode the power structure that has been amassing over the years, IMO, but only because I think we will need a more comprehensive collapse and reset for that to happen, so the response will more likely follow: fight it, shame it, regulate it, figure out how to control it to further the cause, and then embrace it.

    As I see it, we are just playing catch up in terms of male sexual access and control.

    Male birth control. What, 60+ years after the Pill? Even with male BC, men will still only have “my body my choice” in terms of prevention probability; there will still be no ownership of genetic material or “choice” post-coitus. The control part is still hers.

    Virtual Reality. Chick-lit porn has been around for ages. Responding to male visually-oriented sexual response is way behind the response to female-centric emo-porn. 50 shades was not about an accountant that made sensible automobile choices and stayed reasonably fit by biking to work.

    Sexbots/Toys. My last GF needed 7 minutes with her toy to get it done. I was the one who had to “compete” with a sonic-blasting-twisting-vibratronadong. The artificial appendage has been around forever – if you count natural objects. Lean against the spin cycle? I haven’t been in one of those shops to see but from what women openly talk about, e.g. which countries the peace corps serves will confiscate them, there are more options than can reasonably be consumed.

    A couple of other things come to mind. Porn use by men must in part be due to the restraint of sexual variety inherent in commitment and marriage. There is a woman for every like, every variety. Responding to the biological drive for this variety – if even just visually, is a behavior that may look a lot like addiction but is more likely an outlet for this drive. After all, it would be silly to think women use their toys only with their partners or read their stories and watch their films and only think of their (current) partner.

    Second, all of the advancements to-date still do not mitigate the burden of sexual performance, but rather, increase this due to the ubiquitous use of toys and enhancements by women. The “competition” aspect women seen to attach to goes both ways. No man can “compete” with a vibrator or a phallus like something Dr. Seuss might sketch after a few chalices of rye.

    And this is addition to the cultural enforcement of female sexual strategies that favor her variety phase during her peak and then consolidate this once a maternal and/or provisional drive supplants this experiential drive for variety (ideally via short-term liaisons with apex men.)

    IOW, women “competing” with porn is somehow more real and worrisome than the very real notion that men confront when marrying at the beta bux stage, e.g. ghost-c*cks, “you will not marry your ‘best'”, the dopamine rush of those ONS “mistakes” vs Saturday Night Sex with hubby, and of course the natural delta between raw attraction to the beta bux husband vs the body of experience previously accumulated. But that’s just shameful insecurity, right?

  150. Mark says:

    @feeriker

    “”Dalrock stole my thunder in response to Mark.””

    L*……..That is why he is Mister”D”!………L*……..OK! office hours are done…dinner time…..BBL!

  151. greyghost says:

    Male birth control. What, 60+ years after the Pill? Even with male BC, men will still only have “my body my choice” in terms of prevention probability; there will still be no ownership of genetic material or “choice” post-coitus. The control part is still hers.

    With a male pill a man calls his own shots. Yeah her body her choice good I don’t want to be responsible for that bitch anyway. Cheer up big guy.

  152. @Red Pill Latecomer

    Unfortunately, it might not matter so much legally as we men would like. Some courts have ruled that if a man was married to, or was just living with, a woman who gets pregnant — the child is his. Even if DNA tests prove otherwise.

    In the US, family law is probably the most dynamic area of jurisprudence. I would expect that in cases of a provably infertile man with a pregnant wife, a case could be brought to court before the birth of the child contesting the paternity. Or, the husband could simply divorce her before the child was born and ensure the filings contained a claim of non-paternity of the child, which establishes a contested issue of fact. With the entry of new and provable technology I expect the issues related to paternity and responsibility to change.

    What I do not expect to change (at least not at first) is women’s behavior. Sluts are gonna slut, but the odds of them getting caught holding the bag just went up.

    This is why I expect the go-to solution for a woman who knows she’s pregnant and knows her husband could not have fathered the child will be to claim rape. “It took me a while to be able to come forward, the trauma was just too much.” Funny how that delay caused by the trauma will be the amount of time it takes to find out she’s pregnant, but she won’t think to take the test until weeks after she “comes forward.”

    That’s the set-up for the husband. How can he divorce his wife, now that she’s been raped and is pregnant with her rapists kid? Only a monster would do that! White knights would be all over that. If she plays the good Christian wife who can’t get an abortion because of his faith, he’s screwed unless he can prove she cheated. He will be under tremendous pressure to be the child’s father from his Christian community even if he knows in his heart that she wasn’t raped. It isn’t so much legal in this situation as social pressure.

    But what about the guy that fathered the kid? He’s looking at a false rape charge that will probably ruin his life.

    He has three proactive forms of defense:

    1. Get on birth control. Even if he beats the rape charge, if the kid is his and his name can be put on the birth certificate, he’s gonna pay. Better not to get her pregnant.

    2. Always, always, always make a digital video recording of the event so as to prove the sex is consensual. Especially if the woman is married or in a LTR with another guy. If it’s an ongoing thing, having multiple recordings of consensual sex (the wilder the better) destroys a claim of rape. “I made video’s every time we had sex and I put together a compilation of some of the best scenes. If you don’t drop the charges, that video is going up on the internet with your full name on it and an email notification to your husband/boyfriend.”

    3. In cases like a weekend in Vegas or some other “two ships passing in the night” situation, anonymity is gold, with a backup DVR to show it was consensual if he is somehow identified. If she doesn’t know who he was and can’t identify him, he won’t pay child support.

    Until the tide turns on false rape accusations, I don’t expect women’s behavior to change, but an effective and undefeatable male contraceptive should be a game changer in the courts.

  153. @Razorwire

    Second, all of the advancements to-date still do not mitigate the burden of sexual performance, but rather, increase this due to the ubiquitous use of toys and enhancements by women. The “competition” aspect women seen to attach to goes both ways. No man can “compete” with a vibrator or a phallus like something Dr. Seuss might sketch after a few chalices of rye.

    I have to dispute this claim, it’s incorrect.

    Women aren’t giving up on men in favor of their toys, they still want sex with men. They want to be able to talk about them, brag about them or mock them with other women. Yes, they’ll use their toys and dream about their college nights with Chadthundercock, and they’ll put up with having starfish sex with their husband or boyfriend, but what they really want is to find another Chad. The toys simply reinforce that desire.

    That means the competition isn’t between men and toys, it’s between men. In many ways it’s a continuation of bodybuilding. The last thirty years has seen a change in aesthetics in terms of what’s considered attractive in men. Nowadays men lose points for not being buff whereas they’d have gained points earlier for being buff. Buff is the new standard because of the competition between men.

    That competition has now gone below the belt. Hydromax claims they’ve sold over a million of these things, the Bathmate.

    A quick google will get you reviews, discussion boards, before and after pics, etc. However, there’s an easier way to prove they work: Look at this nipple extension product for women with inverted or flat nipples that would be difficult for a baby to latch onto. The tissue is similar and the process is basically the same.

    I think men could give up women for robots/VR, but not women. Women will always want men, especially if it’s Chad.

  154. Dave says:

    and why I think that trying to replace real people with technology would only be damaging to the individual doing it.

    Feminism has replaced real women with the poor excuses of human beings that we have today. Machines will definitely be better than any woman with feminism-infested brains.

  155. Bob says:

    @Jane Dough

    “But outside of those subcultures, I just don’t think robo or virtual sex will take off as a full lifestyle or replacement for human relationships.”

    A REPLACEMENT? Do I need to remind you that 80% of all men are completely invisible to women? 80% of all men is not a subculture – it is in fact the majority. These men, mostly betas, omegas, whatever greek letter you want to call them, are completely alone. Some are miserable, some have made their peace. Some desperately want a family and will fall straight for a beta-bucks divorce bait wife. The fact is these guys aren’t replacing a woman-dating relationship with VR stuff, they are replacing nothing. There is nothing to lose and potentially a lot to gain, for 80% of the gender that statistically makes significant earnings – how do you not see this taking off?

  156. DeNihilist says:

    80%? not the world I live in.

  157. Since I mentioned the bathmate, I thought I should point out that the same technology exists for women… except that the women have it even better in terms of their own enjoyment.

    Any American woman that wanted to could lose weight, dress well and buy a KegelMaster vaginal exerciser but not many will. Their sense of entitlement actually backfires on them in this case. Read the first review at that link… this is an excerpt:

    In my entire KM journey, I have only engaged in intercourse once and realize the strengthening of my PC muscle the KM gives will provide you with far more pleasure than you received before. Because of how strong I am now, the pleasure I felt has intensified tenfold, orgasms included. The KM will also tighten you greatly. Even if you feel you are already tight, it doesn’t compare to the strength the KM gives you.

    But anyway, it feels good knowing you are strong down there. I don’t think you have to have any issues to use this device, use it if you want to fix an issue or use it purely out of your own free will as I did. The benefits are wonderful and definitely worth it.

    *It will undoubtedly strengthen you down there by tenfold. Regular unassisted kegels simply do not compare!
    *It will also sensitize you greatly down there!
    *Your new found strength will be highly appreciated by your partner, hehe! =D But be careful, as my experience shows, that can be a blessing and a curse!
    *You will have an iron bladder!
    *You definitely won’t have to worry about anything like vaginal prolapse!
    *Your PC muscles will grow and bulk up considerably. This is no joke, your muscles will bulk up considerably and that is not a bad thing at all.
    *Your own built-in Chinese finger trap, haha!

    And what would happen if suddenly sex with her beta husband was 10x better and he was giving her mind-blowing orgasms?

    Total cognitive dissonance followed by epiphany: If it feels this good with her average-sized beta husband, she can have fantastic sex with any average-sized guy. So, what she needs to do is

    A. Be thankful she found out about this thing and enjoy the fact her husband finally satisfies her. She likes him, she’s already married to him, he’s a good provider and a good father to their kids. Stick to the devil you know and all that. Life gets better. Possibly somebody feeds hubby the red pill and things get better still. She develops a desire to have more children and they have a few more because they’re going at it like crazed weasels every night. They raise their children together, enjoy their grandchildren and grow closer as they get older. They die surrounded by family and loved ones.

    B. Lose weight, convince hubby to get her a boob job and a little nip and tuck, dress better and become a gold-digging whore. Divorce him, take half of everything but let him have the kids and start looking for a much richer beta to marry. Rinse and repeat as often as possible. Later in life gets taken in by a scam artist who steals all her money, she dies alone, a lonely old cat woman with children who refuse to speak to her. Her partially consumed body is found after the smell is reported.

    Choose either one and I still say there is a God of justice. As to which is more likely, figure the odds. Narrow is the gate that leads to life and few find it, but broad is the way that leads to destruction.

  158. Mark says:

    @Razorwire

    “”I was looking for something in the night-stand and found a giant deep purple synthetic mechanized dong that was held in secret. Red flags aplenty, but still, she acquired this at a party with other single women – specifically to sell these things like some twisted Tupperwear.””

    Of all the single women that I know I would be more surprised if they did not own at least one.They all have them.Don’t kid yourself.Those “dong parties” that you speak of are all the rage around here.I have known several women that have attended them and knew a woman that hosted them.Women do not have a problem with this whatsoever.It is when men have an option like “robodolls” that give them a problem.It removes the prime motivator for pursuing women and they cannot handle that.The same thing happens when a women asks a man for a date,and the man rejects her.Women cannot handle rejection.I get asked out by women all the time.9 times out of 10 I will say “NO”….and I love it! Seeing the look of rejection on their faces is almost better than sex! If I do accept?…..it is only for sex.I refuse to get involved with them under Canadian Law!

  159. Hippopotamusdrome says:

    “I don’t want anyone to think we’re robosexuals, so if anyone asks, just tell them you’re my debugger.”

    Bender

  160. Mark says:

    Here is one for you guys:

    http://www.duffelblog.com/2012/04/fleshlights-issued-to-male-soldiers-in-bid-to-decrease-combat-zone-pregnancies/#comments

    “each female that gets pregnant on deployment costs the Army over $100,000 — in training, transport, and health care costs.”
    “approximately $27,000,000 has been lost in the past year alone.”

    It seems to me that wimminz have a tendency to be more of a liability than an asset in the combat zone.What the hell women are doing in a combat zone to begin with is beyond me.Oh I forgot!……..they are feminists!……..YOU GO GRRRLLLZZ!

  161. @Mark

    How much was spent on shutting down all the skivie houses? Fleshlights? Seriously? All they have to do is set up a system to regulate the whores (disease control) and let them earn their money. End of problem, because the men KNOW the system will require some dude’s name on the kid’s birth certificate and that means 18-24 years of payment. The feminist move here was to restrict access to women only from the west, where the men could be bound and gagged, put on the payment plan for decades to come with the women in complete control. Bring back the whores!

  162. feeriker says:

    It seems to me that wimminz have a tendency to be more of a liability than an asset in the combat zone.What the hell women are doing in a combat zone to begin with is beyond me.Oh I forgot!……..they are feminists!……..YOU GO GRRRLLLZZ!

    They’re liabilities and burdens even in rear echelon billets.

  163. MarcusD says:

    @Mark

    Duffel Blog is a parody site:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duffel_Blog

    I recall reading an article last year that stated that female soldiers frequently get pregnant in order to be sent home. That is, it’s not accidental in most cases.

  164. greyghost says:

    Looks like the Army is almost there. Next step is Gandarusa for deploying troops.

  165. BuenaVista says:

    Reflecting further on Jane Dough’s chin-scratching, sage concerns about robo/VR’s effects on vulnerable men and society: Women have already virtualized sex. How many times have you met or read a woman who understands how deleterious this is? (Camille Paglia is the only one I can think who remarks on feminist contempt for true intimacy with and respect for a man.) “Empowering” for thee, but not for me, I think.

    We’ve already discussed how it is women who are the consumers of mechanical sex aids. As with the other guys, I don’t know any women who don’t have toys, and I know some who use them (“I just have to …”) in conjunction with their human sex partner.

    It is women who have isolated the male sexual function from his relationship utility value. It is women who follow Rollo’s Open Hypergamy model, explicitly an alfa fux/beta bux life trajectory. (I would say it’s more AF/BB/AF-Redux, but perhaps that’s just my anecdotal experience.) It is women who are the primary consumers of plastic surgery, to virtualize their own sexual careers. It is women who band together for those Rad Vacations in Cool Places, which are sex tours for the upper middle class female.

    For a good 20 years, then, it is women who have unbolted sexuality from relationships, and compartmentalized the sexual impulse. They have completely internalized the notion that they are entitled to sexual fulfillment with anything or anyone, subject to their own material risk profile. This means that the men in their lives are utterly objectified as one of three types: Marriage, sex or bug off and die material. Just as a single guy in the deep end of the dating pool (professional, generally feminist women as dating cohort), I notice real confusion (if not panic and much screeching) when a woman initiates what she thinks is a compartmentalized sexual relationship, and discovers relationship intimacy.

    So, naturally, vitriolic projection ensues. Men are at fault for objectifying women, compartmentalizing their sexual impulses, and refusing to man up! and satisfy a female’s relationship caprices. But I’m not sure we started this. Know any men who hang with their buds and go on sex tours to Jamaica or Bali? I don’t either.

  166. BuenaVista says:

    Know any men who suggest to their women that what their relationship needs is “another man.” (Other than this cuck: http://nymag.com/thecut/2015/07/what-open-marriage-taught-one-man-about-feminism.html )

    Men who go the porn/VR/robosex route are isolating their sexual impulse, and consuming services that satisfy it. Excuse me, but the AF/BB model has already made this practice foundational to society. (Sheryl Sandberg says so!) Men have already been reduced by society to their component, not systems value: Men are sexual fun, men are sperm donors, men are providers, men are state-compelled income streams and asset-gifters, men are scary criminal Penis Monsters.

    Those of us who’ve experienced divorce probably found it particularly challenging, because we *thought* we were a complex of attributes valued simultaneously. We *thought* we inhabited an imperfect but comprehensive union. We did *not* think we were single attributes to be utilized sequentially. This is the sea change introduced by feminism and instantiated in the law and the culture. Men didn’t invent sex-pozzie feminism, and remove intimate sex from the notion of a complete relationship; men didn’t invite their own objectification as sex toy, drafthorse, or criminal creeper deadbeat loser ex-. Men don’t prattle on about “mismatched libidos” or “I married him for security, I was never turned on by him” or “I could do better!”. Men don’t describe women as “the total package” or “a great catch.” An irony of male idealism in this area is we understand that all women are imperfect and incomplete; in fact, over a long relationship, we might love someone’s imperfections more than her optimal qualities.

    As a footnote, if you want to experience crazy, get involved with a woman on the AF/BB plan who decides she wants AF again. That’s an epic meltdown to witness, as she realizes that happiness is not placing a man in one or another (objectified) behavioral box.

  167. Pingback: Real Colored Jazz: Pretension, Robosexuals, and Homosexuals | Things that We have Heard and Known

  168. DeNihilist says:

    BV, got to disagree with this – “. It is women who band together for those Rad Vacations in Cool Places, which are sex tours for the upper middle class female. ”

    I know a hell of a lot of guys that go to Thailand every year for sex and golf. Or is it golf and sex?
    whichever. Some are now branching out to Vietnam or the Philippines, or other Asian centres of sex tourism.

  169. Red Pill Latecomer says:

    “each female that gets pregnant on deployment costs the Army over $100,000 — in training, transport, and health care costs.”
    “approximately $27,000,000 has been lost in the past year alone.”

    Feminists will say that if a woman’s pregnancy is a problem, it is entirely and exclusively the fault and problem of men. Why blame the womyn just because men can’t keep their pants zipped up!

    Nothing is every the fault or responsibility of wommin.

  170. BuenaVista says:

    DeNehilisit: understood. I don’t.

    But do the guys post their vacations pics on their online profiles? If not, perhaps they’re operating with a touch more reserve, if not shame. The chicks WANT you to know what they do on vacation. Sex tours are a form of social climbing for the empowered modern woman.

  171. dvdivx says:

    I’m curious about the men here if they would really consider having a robot wife if she was at the level of say Rachel in Blade Runner in realism and artificial wombs were a reality or if you just had the cash for sarogate mothers. How may here would take the bait
    I know I would just to ensure I was not stuck in another sexless marriage.

  172. Red Pill Latecomer says:

    Technically, Rachel was not a robot. She was a “replicant.”

    Replicants differed from robots in that they were biologically identical to humans. It was impossible to discern who was human, who was a replicant, without a Voight-Kampff machine.

    The Voight-Kampff machines measured empathy, on the theory that humans were more empathetic to the sufferings of other creatures.

    In theory, once a replicant model had been developed to the point that they had the same levels of empathy as a human, then they truly were human.

    On of the themes of the film, Blade Runner, was the question — are humans really all that empathetic toward the sufferings of others? Are not some replicants “more human than human”?

  173. Question: if the fictional Voight-Kampff were used on a modern feminist would they “pass”?

  174. Possible question. A cisgendered heterosexual white male is being accused of rape, do you:

    A: Pick up the nearest stone.
    B: Castrate him?
    C: What is this “male” thing you speak of?

  175. Gunner Q says:

    dvdivx @ 11:13 am:
    “I’m curious about the men here if they would really consider having a robot wife if she was at the level of say Rachel in Blade Runner in realism and artificial wombs were a reality or if you just had the cash for sarogate mothers. How may here would take the bait”

    Slavery becomes an issue at that level of artificial life. On that note, we can find a parallel with slaveowners who had kids by their slaves instead of their wives. They were obviously finding (semi-)involuntary alternatives to their ice queens. It didn’t really work out.

    Also, I don’t think Christ would allow a situation in which men create full replacements for women and use science to stop breeding daughters. He designed the sexes to illustrate spiritual issues and probably to prepare us in other ways for eternity, and therefore would take the elimination of women poorly.

    Speaking for myself, fem-bots are just an iteration of porn. I’m also glad I had a (loyal) mother during my childhood. Lastly and most importantly, evil must be punished not avoided. Replicants and artificial wombs will do nothing to eliminate the freak-show tyrants ruining our society. In fact, they’ll make it worse by setting a precedent for Transhumanity.

    If anything is certain to trigger the Apocalypse, it’s humans genetically rewiring human nature away from God’s design.

  176. I don’t think any man wants to be in a sexless marriage, but since the robots aren’t here yet let’s talk about existing tech. I think Rollo Tomassi nailed when he stated “desire cannot be negotiated” but I think there is a supply side and a demand side to both attraction and desire.

    (A woman could be highly attracted to a man but have a low desire for sex, which results in not much sex. Likewise, a woman could have a high desire for sex but a low level of attraction for the man, which might result in a lot of sex, but only if her level of loyalty and commitment is high. More likely it will result in no sex for him and cheating on her part with a more attractive man. A woman with a low desire for sex and a low level of attraction probably guarantees a sexless marriage.)

    The question is, how would changing the supply and demand curves impact the relationship?

    If your wife got herself a KegelMaster and used it to the point that she had her own “built in Chinese finger trap” with 10X the sensation and orgasmic response from sex with you, what would happen? How do you think that would effect her (or most women)? Would it increase her attraction to you? I guess the real question is, if she doesn’t need porn-star sized junk to have multiple screaming O’s, would that motivate her to stay in the marriage? Or would it cause her to realize physical attributes in a man aren’t important to her so she shifts her sights and focuses on something else?

    Assume a single woman who does the same thing. She now truly enjoys sex and has genuine screaming orgasms every time, which she knows really pleases her partner. Unlike a change in conditions in an existing marriage, would the knowledge that just about any guy could rock her world alter her view of what attracts her to a man and thus affect her choice of men to marry? In other words, would she be more inclined to marry a really good beta provider or not? I guess it comes down to the importance of where sexual fulfillment falls when comparing dominance aspects (alpha behavior) with comfort aspects (beta behavior) in the relationship.

    Contrast that with men: If you were an average sized guy (5″-6″) and bought a bathmate… and after a year you were 7.5″ with a much greater girth, how would that effect you? Knowing you were doing a much better job of “taking care of business” on the home front and the wife was enjoying it, would you be more inclined to stick with the wife or more inclined to leave?

    That’s enough questions for lots of serious studies and a few PhD dissertations, if you ask me.

    Assumptions: Both man and woman closely match in terms of being HWP.

    Selection variables for multiple studies:

    Couples with median BMI that don’t exercise
    Couples who are HWP and exercise
    Couples who are overweight but not obese

    Basic protocol:

    Control group: 50 married couples.
    Group 1: Wife gets KegelMaster.
    Group 2: Wife gets KegelMaster, Husband learns Game.
    Group 3: Husband gets Bathmate.
    Group 4: Husband gets Bathmate, Husband learns Game.
    Group 5: Wife gets KegelMaster, Husband gets Bathmate.
    Group 6: Wife gets KegelMaster, Husband gets Bathmate, Husband learns Game.
    Group 7: Husband learns Game.

    Further questions:
    What about couples who were engaged, starting 6 months before the marriage?
    What about singles who expressed a definite desire to marry?

    Ethical question: If it was determined that the impact of the study on certain groups (groups 1 and 5, for example) was to cause a significant increase in divorce, should those groups be dropped from the study?

    I think a good body of decent research into these questions would significantly impact the development of robotics and VR porn, not to mention the marital counseling industry. Given the impact of being married (especially in a “happy” marriage) on health, you’d think the NIH would spring for a few million to run some studies.

  177. Exfernal says:

    @IBB

    Perhaps there won’t be any Cherry 2000 in coming 50 years’ time, but that doesn’t mean the technology won’t produce someday a passing substitute through gradual advancement:
    http://www.campaignlive.co.uk/article/1355537/pornhubs-twerking-butt-1000-robotic-ass-virtual-reality – it will be assembled eventually, one piece at a time….

  178. Exfernal says:

    Ah, I forgot. I stole the link from someone commenting at Rollo’s.

  179. BuenaVista says:

    Toad: “A woman could be highly attracted to a man but have a low desire for sex, which results in not much sex.”

    Or reery?

    This sounds like feminist FakeTalk. I’m trying to think of an example in popular culture or ordinary life, where attraction does not equal desire. Could you provide a couple?

    I know of innumerable women who say “I love him, but I’m not *in* love with him, and we have mismatched libidos. Plus he likes all this icky stuff and I’m not a porn star.”

  180. greyghost says:

    No woman is highly attracted to a man and doesn’t desire sex. The definition of female attraction is she wants to fuck him. We have an imposter in the ranks fellas passing on subversive feminist teachings

  181. Boxer says:

    I know of innumerable women who say “I love him, but I’m not *in* love with him, and we have mismatched libidos. Plus he likes all this icky stuff and I’m not a porn star.”

    I recently attended a birthday party in Toronto, a city in which I once (albeit briefly) lived. There I met the current husband of a woman I had shagged in every conceivable way, during our brief encounter. The woman herself was not in attendance. I could tell that this poor schlub wasn’t getting any. He seemed to suspect that I had known his wife in the metaphorical sense, but I didn’t admit as much.

    So many nice guys put up with “ewww, that’s gross!” from the same women who, months or years before, begged guys like me to tie them up, bang them up the rear before shoving it in her mouth, and fill them full of cum in every hole in an all night depravity session. If I had any balls (and less concern for his feelings) I would have just opened up to that brother, with the advice that all the twisted shit she had me do to her (some of which was frankly quite off-putting) better be on the table for him, at any time he wants it. Otherwise it’s a sign that she doesn’t care as much for the man who is legally obligated to pay her bills as she did for the cad she had a passing fling with, when they both were barely out of their teenage years.

    All you married bros should have this attitude with no exceptions. Of course, you don’t have to do any of the weird stuff, but if she has done it with any other man, she had better be absolutely willing and eager to do it double for you, based on your own whims and biases. This is the only reasonable position to take in a world full of libertines.

    Regards,

    Boxer

  182. Boxer says:

    A woman could be highly attracted to a man but have a low desire for sex, which results in not much sex.

    Many men have a high attraction to their women, but a low desire for changing the oil in the minivan and cutting the front lawn. Men tend to do these things anyway, cheerfully, because that’s what modern life is about.

    A woman who has a low desire for sex can break out the lube, lie back, and think of Mother England. If she’s cheerful about it, her husband will appreciate her.

  183. Boxer says:

    Mark, a sadist after my own black heart, sez:

    Women cannot handle rejection.I get asked out by women all the time.9 times out of 10 I will say “NO”….and I love it! Seeing the look of rejection on their faces is almost better than sex!

    I have done this too, and I’ll admit it is heartily entertaining. Women are entirely unused to handling a man tell them “no” and it frequently leads to some insane and hilarious antics.

    It can also be dangerous (too many women are one small step away from being the Glenn Close character in Fatal Attraction) so usually I just ghost out unless the bitch has done something specific to make tormenting her worth my while. Used sparingly, it can be hella fun times to laugh in a bitch’s face while telling her to hit the bricks.

    Regards,

    Boxer

  184. @BV

    Actually, I know a few like this. As far as media, I have never owned a TV and seldom watch movies so I have only personal experience, but it doesn’t seem to me that such a theme would sell airtime. With one couple I know it got resolved by testosterone supplements for her. That was all it took to flip the switch. Others, while I was in a position to know details (my wife) I was never in a position to offer advice because for a guy that’s in a sexless marriage it’s a *very* sensitive subject. I figured if I knew what was happening in their house they knew what was happening in mine.

    I understand what you’re saying, but our terminology should be clarified. When I say highly attracted but low desire for sex, perhaps you should read that as “I’m completely satisfied with my marriage, I love my husband and I’d never look for anyone else” on her part and “She’s a wonderful wife in every area except one- she has zero interest in sex” on his part. These are uniformly conservative Christians and the wives will give their husbands duty sex, but not very often. Call it frigid, call it “low sex drive” or whatever.

    Rural and small town living, everybody knows everybody’s business, no way she’s cheating. The SAHM’s all homeschool and most of them are reasonably HWP. I understand the whole PUA maxim that attraction = sexual desire, but I think that’s data skewed to represent only women with a normal libido. The low libido women never make the data set because they’ll never be DTF and in comparison to normal women the answer comes back as “lack of attraction.”

    Is attraction defined solely in terms of sexual attraction? I don’t think so, because to do so means a frigid woman cannot be described as being “attracted” to any man or his attributes. If “attraction” is solely defined in terms of sexual attraction then you’re right, but look at the number of memes in which normal women are attracted to a man’s power, status, money or looks and reciprocate in terms of sex because they have an active libido. Compare that to the memes in which in the beginning of a relationship the women put out to clinch the deal, but once they’ve sealed the deal the sex spigot gets turned down to a very slow drip.

    Full disclosure: the really ugly stories of sexless marriages I know of are uniformly coming from conservative Christians for whom divorce is not an option because she’s not interested in sex with *any* man.

    You might say she married a guy she wasn’t attracted to, I’d counter that she was attracted to him for what she could get out of the deal, likes the deal and remains very attracted to what she’s getting. A byproduct of this is massive shaming for porn use or incidents of adultery, but they don’t file for divorce. And yeah, the wives tell each other all kinds of stuff and even though I know my didn’t tell me half of it, you can’t believe what I did hear.

  185. @GreyGhost

    You ever been married?

  186. greyghost says:

    Yeah I’m married now. 15 years worth. And the stories I could tell on female nature.

  187. @GreyGhost

    I was married for 17 years to a woman 11 years younger than me that was practically a nympho. The wives in her circle of friends talked about *everything* and my wife couldn’t believe some of her friends simply had no interest in sex. I remember one story in which she asked another wife “but don’t you ever just get horny?” She said the woman gave her a strange look and said “you mean… like men? Of course not!” And I know she was telling me the truth because you could see it in the faces of those men compared to the ones who were getting laid on a regular basis.

    Like you, I could tell some interesting stories about human nature, but I can’t agree with your statement that “The definition of female attraction is she wants to fuck him.” Just because a woman doesn’t want to have sex doesn’t mean that she can’t be attracted to a man because of what she can get out of him. And in all of the sexless marriages I knew of they managed to get pregnant a few times. Natural Family Planning methods were used in some families so as to not get pregnant while still having maximum sex, in other families NFP was used in order to get pregnant occasionally with minimal sex.

  188. greyghost says:

    Just because she stays with you for utilitarian reasons doesn’t mean she is attracted to you. Once she has hostages she doesn’t need “you” she has the hostages (children) sex will drop off. Just how they are. As she ages out and if she ever sees how other women speak of you and look at you her sexual desire (attraction) mysteriously returns. If she isn’t fucking you it is because she is not attracted to you. And that changes with the tides If he thinks other women are attracted to you she’s attracted to you. If she gets no attention from other men she’ll stay with you as long as you don’t try and get pussy off her.
    Are family planning method is abstinence or like in the movies, pull out of there before it’s too late. Good thing she is not some huge cow, I had to toss her off one time. She got launched but you what, we are responsible parents. All of this talking dirty has me thinking I need to sex the wife up tonight. Nah, I’m gong to the gym.
    My definition of attraction from a woman is she will have sex with you. Other than that so what, get lost bitch. It isn’t like any woman today will do shit for any man other than fuck him because she wants to.

  189. embracingreality says:

    Ever think what it must be like for a sexually attractive woman in modern western society?

    Imagine if the roles and the thirst were reversed. Imagine you’re an above average attractive man in this hypothetical reversed world and because you’re hawt you’ve never had to do a damn thing in your whole life. Everywhere you go female eyes are on you, hovering over your body. Smiles everywhere you look as doors just automatically fly open in front of you. Almost no effort is required of you beyond basic hygiene and grooming. Constant attention from sickeningly nice women to the point it’s annoying. Even some attractive women approach you with offers of free dinners, drinks, nights on the town all in hopes of scoring sex with you, pleasuring you… Then there are a few attractive women, even wealthy women who have been working hard, accumulating resources, in the hopes of wooing you with a life of leisure, new cars and a great big house. All of this primarily in exchange for sex with you. It’s no wonder the sense of entitlement is a mile deep.

  190. Robert What? says:

    I find it quite humorous to read what’s going to be in fifty years, because this society ain’t gonna last no fifty years. Like the people who talk about a Mars colony one day. Ain’t gonna happen.

  191. feeriker says:

    I find it quite humorous to read what’s going to be in fifty years, because this society ain’t gonna last no fifty years.

    I doubt it will even last fifteen years.

  192. The Other Jim says:

    @GunnerQ, “If anything is certain to trigger the Apocalypse, it’s humans genetically rewiring human nature away from God’s design.”

    Thanks to the rise of the Otherkin/Therian movement we’re well on our way there. This is what I meant by society going mad with future-shock. Once technology passes a point at which mankind can comprehend it, mankind will have two reactions to it; rejection or absorption. Rejection of technology will lead to the Neo-Luddite movements I mentioned. Absorption of technology will lead to mankind completely losing itself and turning into robotic and/or genetic monstrosities. Synthetic humans/replicants will be the mildest form of this monstrous cultural madness. Oddly enough, this was dealt with in of all places a Batman Beyond cartoon;

  193. @greyghost

    Once she has hostages she doesn’t need “you” she has the hostages (children) sex will drop off. Just how they are.

    That was not my experience at all. In fact, sex got a lot better after the third child. Until I started reading in the manosphere years ago, I never knew how good I had it.

    My definition of attraction from a woman is she will have sex with you.

    There is no sexual attraction without sexual desire, but the guy will get sex without sexual attraction from her IF there’s something else about him she’s attracted to. Under your definition, the only thing the guy is good for is sex. That’s backward because today, sex is almost all a woman is good for. Consider:

    1. An alpha guy with muscles, six-pack and large willie. She gets major tingles, HAWT SEX!, his money and provisioning.

    2. A beta guy with money and status (resulting from his education and experience). She gets to share his money, status, provisioning and sex if she wants it, but no tingles.

    Masculine dominance, muscles, a large willie, money, status… these are ALL different attributes of the same man, all of which can be achieved through hard work. The woman with the normal libido will get the tingles for the first and may be attracted to the second, but the woman who doesn’t get the tingles for any man would only be attracted to the second one. If she’s smart she’ll fake it til she makes it by giving him sex in the beginning, which gets shut off soon after she gets a ring on it.

    Giving the guy sex is not a demonstration of sexual desire or sexual attraction because motive must be considered. The sex in the beginning may signal she was sexually attracted to him and experienced sexual desire which then faded away. Or, it could be she had no sexual attraction for him because she has no desire for sex and she faked it in order to get what she wanted. Either way, she started off giving him sex and later cut him off. Game/MMSL stuff might work on the first but won’t on the second.

    Pity the fool who gets suckered in by one of the second type, a good Christian virgin who refuses to have sex until he puts a ring on it. She puts out for a little while but only PIV and that’s horrible because she’s so loose it’s like sticking his willie in a glass of water. No matter how much he twists her into a pretzel it doesn’t get any tighter but that’s the ONLY place you’re allowed to put it. Then, one day she says “Honey, we need to talk about sex.”

    “The cost is abominable because I hate having sex.
    The pleasure isn’t even fleeting, for me it’s non-existent.
    And, as always, the positions are ridiculous.”

    “I’m sorry. I really love you, admire you and cherish you, but I hate sex. It isn’t you, I don’t want to have sex with anyone. We can have sex a few times every year or two so I can get pregnant, but otherwise I just can’t do this anymore and I want my own bedroom.”

    Husband looks at her and says “Well, does that mean I should plan on a girlfriend?”

    “How dare you! Don’t you ever talk about committing adultery as if this were my fault! I can’t help it, this is the way God made me! And you better not start looking at porn either.”

    It may just be her or it may be both of them because he’s spelunking in a cavern with undersized equipment. Either way, it seems to me a solution could be found by getting him bigger and her tighter and more sensitive.

    “Honey, I have to insist you use this. We don’t want to take the chance of anything happening during childbirth. The doctors all recommend kegels and the best thing for our baby would be for you to be so strong down there you could spit it her like a watermelon seed.”

    If he got bigger and she got a lot tighter, who knows. If that improved things but still didn’t make the grade maybe they could go the chemical route using PT-141 (makes her horny) and Phenibut (increases her sensitivity). Her first O might change things. Or not. Maybe she’s just plain out-and-out batshit crazy. Who knows? Maybe I’m being too mechanical, but my observation is when women really enjoy doing something (eating chocolate, for example) they find ways to do it.

    And before I hear about how this is a focus on sex, it isn’t. For the wife who is sinfully refusing to give her husband sex it’s a matter of disobedience to 1st Corinthians 7:4. Guess what? It’s a whole lot easier being obedient when you enjoy obeying.

  194. MarcusD says:

    Is infidelity ever justified? (Sunday Morning Live, 26/7/15)

  195. JDG says:

    What exactly is a “sexual scientist”? Do “sexual scientists” have to learn calculus?

  196. Mark says:

    @Boxer
    “”begged guys like me to tie them up, bang them up the rear before shoving it in her mouth, and fill them full of cum in every hole in an all night depravity session.””

    That sounds like most Toronto women that I know.

    @Toad
    “”NFP was used in order to get pregnant occasionally with minimal sex.””

    I remember reading a biography on the Kennedy Family.The old lady,Rose,only had sex with her husband Joseph for procreation purposes only.Which means he probably banged her about 20 times in his life.The old man had g/f’s on the side(just like his sons JFK & RFK) in fact,he would be the one to show them the ropes.And the old man was a man-whore(just like his sons)…But,in all seriousness……Do you blame the guy?

    @greyghost
    “”Yeah I’m married now. 15 years worth. And the stories I could tell on female nature.””

    I bet that you could!……….VOLUMES!…….Quick question for you:…..If you had the chance to go back in time?…..would you get married?…knowing what you know now?

  197. greyghost says:

    Mark
    To go back in time and marry again. That is actually a tough one. Knowing what I know now means I’m red pill and marriage is not as stressful with that knowledge and the big thing about red pill is it is all inclusive. Everything from the bible ,politics, work, and everything from watching TV and listening to music is different.
    Now IF I had my kids and still be the red pill man I am now no way I get married again. Wouldn’t need to. My kids would be born through surrogacy. Maybe have my sister or one of my nieces carry the kids. Sense we are talking time travel I would just use an artificial womb.
    Final answer NO

    Mark aside from the social standing you have you have something every young man must have as he enters and passes puberty, red pill. That alone is more valuable than all of the worlds riches. The bible is clear, It is like having those “they Live” glasses on and can see churchianship. Red pill man can easily get pussy and at the same time he doesn’t need pussy. I do know I’ll never be alpha so what, being a red pill beta is cool.
    Red pill men don’t marry, They don’t have to because logic and knowledge has filled the void of the blue pill ignorance and emotional quest for romantic love. A blue pill man can’t even be Christian. He can be churchian all day long with high standing.
    In the real world we live in today I had to marry the woman I married to be the red pill man I am today with the children have. I would choose that over blue pill ignorance every time. Far better to be starving and free than well fed in a cage.

  198. Hells Hound says:

    I think that the ridicule will come primarily from other men. Yes, women will snicker, but it will be male comics, late show hosts, movie writers, who will drive society to look down on these things. They will be ruthless. Of course the majority of men will use VR porn (as will women I’m sure), but trying to replace a partner with it or a sexbot will never be seen in a neutral light and those are the people who will be ostracized.

    That’s just obvious. The men-to-men message of Man Up has always existed and has usually been more or less successful due to deeply rooted social conditons that favored it. The difference this time is that this message is increasingly falling on deaf ears as more and more men tune out of mainstream discourse altogether. TV programs and movies themselves are increasingly tailored for female consumption. This is obvious to anyone with eyes and ears. And make no mistake, no incentives will be offered to average and below-average men to pursue women instead of 3D porn or sexbots. None whatsoever. Current social norms and political realities simply don’t allow that. What we’re more likely to see are punitive measures designed to prevent social disengagement on the part of average men.

  199. Ray Manta says:

    Jane Dough wrote:
    I think that the ridicule will come primarily from other men.

    Men aren’t nearly as susceptible to ridicule as a behavioral control mechanism as women are. Since Jane Dough is a woman, I do not expect her to understand this.

    Yes, women will snicker, but it will be male comics, late show hosts, movie writers, who will drive society to look down on these things.

    I haven’t really heard too much from those groups concerning the effects of porn. I have heard of sermonettes from pastors like Mark Driscoll and TED talks about how porn will warp your brain. VR porn consumption isn’t a very target-rich environment for social censure because its private nature.

    They will be ruthless.

    Tuning them out is as simple as flipping the channel button or hitting the back button of a browser. Big media doesn’t have the social clout it had two decades ago.

  200. Tam the Bam says:

    “What we’re more likely to see are punitive measures designed to prevent social disengagement on the part of average men.”
    Any ideas? I’m just being nosey, not a hazard for a near coffin-dodger like me, I can out-CrankyOldMan Clint in Gran Torino when required, and thoroughly enjoy it.
    Would like to be able to advise the boys though, they’re too “nice”for their own good sometimes. Emigrate, turn criminal, or go ghost?

  201. Hells Hound says:

    I have some ideas. Legislation turning cohabitation into marriage and mandating alimony payments accordingly. Various legal measures designed to make expatriation even more difficult. More punitive measures against men unable or unwilling to pay child support, i.e. bringing back debtors’ prisons and forced labor. Legislation making it impossible to receive any sort of welfare or tax relief for any reason as a single man. Laws against paternity testing carried out without the consent of the mother. Laws against so-called revenge porn and cyberbullying. All this will be passed in order to pander to various voting blocs, like single women and men with daughters.

  202. Kate Minter says:

    We started watching a new BBC Series called “Humans,” in which a lot of the complex issues of robots arise. At first the helpful and appreciated servant keeping the house in order, the robot becomes a disruption to family relationships (doing tasks traditionally assigned to moms), a disincentive for young people to further their education (robots can do everything better), and, of course, every sci-fi fan’s favorite topic: the dawn of the the singularity.

    I highly recommend it as well as the short film, “High Maintenance,” which can be found on vimeo.

  203. Gunner Q says:

    Tam the Bam @ 6:50 am:
    “Any ideas? I’m just being nosey, not a hazard for a near coffin-dodger like me, I can out-CrankyOldMan Clint in Gran Torino when required, and thoroughly enjoy it.
    Would like to be able to advise the boys though, they’re too “nice”for their own good sometimes. Emigrate, turn criminal, or go ghost?”

    The Constitution Party could use support. There’s a big election cycle coming up.

  204. Ray Manta says:

    Hells Hound, on punitive measures against male social disengagement:
    I have some ideas.

    Most, if not all of them are subject to the law of unintended consequences. That being said, I think there will be an attempt to get laws to punish men who disengage from the matrix. But technological advances will make these laws progressively more inefficient.

  205. DeNihilist says:

    JDG – “What exactly is a “sexual scientist”? Do “sexual scientists” have to learn calculus?”

    Even more important JDG, if they are female, can the make a smmich with more then peanut butter and jam??!!!!!!

  206. Boxer says:

    Dunno about Brother JDG, but learning Cauchy-Schwarz helped my sex life immensely.

  207. Hugh Mann says:

    OT – https://archive.is/vCQTM
    Vanity Fair on Tinder and the Dawn of the “Dating Apocalypse”

    The AF bit of AF/BB in full effect – some men are making hay while the sun shines.

  208. DeNihilist says:

    Hugh, what an amazing article! Funny thing though, the answer to the supposed disparity in this new mating sytem, was obvious right away, and even mouthed by one of the females in a round about way, regarding 3rd wave femnazism.

    Girls, quit giving the milk away for free! Drop this 3rd wave bullshit, become empowered as a female, not a male.

    Methinks that there will not be enough operators on suicide assist lines in the near future when these damaged chicks finally realize that their lives are worthless, and they have only themselves and their sistuh’s to blame.

    Yup, they may be flooding the uni’s, but as Mark Twain stated, he never let his schooling interfere with his education. So many girls now a days have no ability to think their way out of a wet paper bag. And trust me, more and more males are getting on this free sex train, and most of you used up girls will never get married or have kids.

    What a waste of a generation!

  209. PokeSalad says:

    Great, great article.

    Women bought the lie and gave away the one thing that mattered most, for free. They can scratch around what’s missing, they feel it, but they can’t yet say it out loud.

  210. Mark says:

    @greyghost

    A very fair answer!………..

    “”Mark aside from the social standing you have you have something every young man must have as he enters and passes puberty, red pill. That alone is more valuable than all of the worlds riches.””

    I agree! I was fortunate in my younger years.When I was around age 18-20.I socialized with great businessmen and financiers age 30 to 50.They introduced me to the “Red Pill”…..even before anyone had heard of that acronym.I was very observant of these fine gentleman.I admired their education,wealth,business acumen etc.etc. I today find myself in that same position.I know lots of younger men that look up to myself,brother and associates.We give them the advice that got us where we are today.That advise could be summed up as “MGTOW with benefits”. The one quote that I have emblazoned into my cortex,from one of those mentors is this:….”you can drink your fortune away,drugs,gamble it away…or a combination of both…but,there is one thing that can rob you faster than the speed of light…and you will not even see it coming……….”WOMMINZ”…….I have never forgot that.I am grateful everyday to that gentleman for that insightful knowledge that has saved my life!……and I pass that information on to younger men religiously!!!

  211. Dave says:

    “It’s a contest to see who cares less, and guys win a lot at caring less,” Amanda says.

    “Sex should stem from emotional intimacy, and it’s the opposite with us right now, and I think it really is kind of destroying females’ self-images,” says Fallon.

    “It’s body first, personality second,” says Stephanie.

    “Honestly, I feel like the body doesn’t even matter to them as long as you’re willing,” says Reese. “It’s that bad.”

    “But if you say any of this out loud, it’s like you’re weak, you’re not independent, you somehow missed the whole memo about third-wave feminism,” says Amanda.

  212. Speaking VR. Occulus.

  213. greyghost says:

    Speaking of robots

  214. Boxer says:

    Dear Mark:

    Here we go!….This has been in all our major dailies and on the News.

    Makes me wish I was still over in trannyville toronto. I’d ride the rocket with Roosh and pick fights with all the girlymen. Oh well… in another life, perhaps…

    Best,

    Boxer

  215. PuffyJacket says:

    @Jane

    Forming human relationships and families is just a basic human instinct and desire. Making virtual sex the new norm would be an uphill battle against both human nature and our social climate

    You have this backwards. No one has fought the “uphill battle” against human nature, meaningful relationships and family harder than Feminism. They have been so successful, in fact, that VR sex now looks like a decent substitute for what passes as a “relationship” with most modern women (if you even want to call it that). Yet you are concerned about the substitute and not the cause. VR is not a threat to marriage and family formation; it is a threat to Feminism.

    Porn can cause vulnerable people a lot of problems. The intensity and full sensory experience of VR sex will be a million times worse. What should worry us is what this will do to the people who do use it to disconnect

    What’s striking is how disingenuous your “concern” is. I’m generalizing here, but men have the following options in the SMP:

    a) Marriage, family and children, or monogamous LTR.
    b) Short-term hookups/ONS. Meaningless “relationships” lasting until boredom strikes.
    c) Drop-out (porn, video-games, sports, etc.)

    Note that everything feminists have done over the last 40-50 years has had the effect of driving men from option a) to options b) and c). In today’s environment, any half-way observant man knows that option a) is completely off the table due to the existence of disgustingly misandric laws and the rapidly declining quality of women. VR porn largely substitutes b) for c), neither of which are meaningful and both of which are practically a wash from society’s standpoint anyways.

    If you are even 10% as concerned as you imply about the trend of men “disconnecting” from society, you would regularly voice opposition to any one of the following: divorce law that incentivizes disbanding families for cash and prizes, alimony awarded on a no-fault basis, default custody of children given to the mother, child support awarded as percentage of income (without access to the child), false rape accusations and false DV claims that forcibly remove men from their own homes.

    Note that any of the above items have had 100x the impact of driving men away from meaningful relationships that you are so “concerned” about. And yet we never hear so much as peep from you on these, ever. Gee, I wonder why that is?

  216. greyghost says:

    Not a relationship video but a video with a man and a woman and a woman bringing more than a pussy hole to the table

  217. JDG says:

    DeNihilist says:
    August 7, 2015 at 12:09 pm
    JDG – “What exactly is a “sexual scientist”? Do “sexual scientists” have to learn calculus?”

    Even more important JDG, if they are female, can the make a smmich with more then peanut butter and jam??!!!!!!

    And will the lack of calculus affect her ability to distribute the correct proportions of onions in relations to the size of the slice of rib-eye being used?

  218. Luke says:

    Krul says:
    August 4, 2015 at 1:59 pm

    “Here’s an idea. Suppose people still get married, but only for economic and reproductive purposes, the latter via artificial insemination. Each spouse uses these artificial constructs for love and sex while the marriage itself becomes purely a business arrangement.”

    What possible economic motivation would a man with any significant kind of financial prospects have for getting married (e.g., the only kind of man a woman would want to marry other than jerkboy or poolboy types, and that’s if she has her own dough already)? Marriage is an economic catastrophe for men under American law. Likewise, an American man who wants to keep his children who can afford fertility clinic stuff will go the egg donor/gestational surrogate route.

    I really don’t think you’ve thought this through very deeply.

  219. Pingback: Lightning Round – 2015/08/11 | Free Northerner

  220. Renee Harris says:

    The anti-trafficking set will love this. If men can be taught how to program it, they can tailored it for their needs. No need for live women or children to be bough for sex. Sex worker is i unforeseen effect of feminism( but not like feminist care about sexual slavey as created the conclusion that let to sexual starvation of men which created the demand for girls and young woman who don’t say no)….( they can’t)
    It should be fun to see how the traffickers feel about this .

  221. Serathis says:

    What about sexbots for woman?

  222. Mickey Singh says:

    ” Sexbots will not be the solution that affects female SMV. That will be VR Sex.”

    Online porn has already done that.

    “She then ties this into our new definition of sexual morality, the existence of romantic love: Since everyone, including modern Christians, has embraced the view that romantic love is what defines sexual morality this will be an interesting discussion. ”

    Why do you think we humans seek to moralize sex?

  223. Pingback: Is it robolove or robolust? | Dalrock

  224. greyghost says:

    Very interesting video on sex dolls. The guy speaks about the many subject surrounding the idea of real dolls for sex.

Please see the comment policy linked from the top menu.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s