To think a "breathing" sex robot should be illegal

[CrotchBurn]

Apparently there is an AI sex robot that now has the feature of breathing (there's a video in the article in the link).

I don't really care how these ultra realistic sex dolls might help people for various reasons. I think in a world where men overwhelming treat women as unfeeling objects (yeah okay NAMALT), further blurring the lines between womens bodies and inanimate objects you can do what you want to is dangerous.

I think they should be illegal.

www.dailystar.co.uk/news/world-news/sex-robot-breathes-incredible-ai-23275331

@PlanDe you make some really good points. And I found myself going back and forth between my original opinion on this thread and where I have ended up now (decidedly creeped out but firmly unsure as to whether I think it should be illegal etc).

Something you said here really got me thinking though ...

"Yes it is patently unreasonable to apply similar logic.
On the animal abuse and serial killer link it is
Abuse in REAL LIFE on LIVING animals by a child is a warning sign that they MIGHT become a serial killer IN REAL LIFE

Playing with a DOLL is not REAL LIFE. No living creature is affected. And so therefore, it has zero relation to what a person who plays with dolls will or will not do in REAL LIFE with REAL people.

It’s like saying watching a zombie movie is likely to make you go mad eat other peoples faces off."

Playing with a doll isn't real life, and while it may or may not contribute to escalating behaviour, I don't think it's fair to say that it's just a lump of plastic. If that were the case, why aren't they shaped like crocodiles, or like koala bears?

No matter which way I think about it, I come back to that point. They are intentionally designed to look/feel like women. That they aren't real seems beside the point.

@Godimabitch

If it imitates being strangled, yes, otherwise no, just realism.

The kid ones are a fucking abomination though.

Child ones are illegal, rightly so.

@Haggertyjane

I think all the hysterical responses here say more about the women making them, than the sad men with their sex dolls.

Still can't see any hysteria.

Some posters seem to be very sensitive about this subject & women's views on it.

Oh of course women questioning what men do to female effigies and if it has any affect on their real life selves in a world already full of misogyny makes us HYSTERICAL.

What a perfectly apt choice of words

Drawing links between this and the dolls we give to children is meant to reassure us but in fact does the opposite as far as I can see.

As @SEE123 says, why do we give children dolls shaped on human babies, and not baby koalas, or baby crocodiles?

Because we're preparing children to act towards babies the way they do towards the dolls. That's why traditionally girls rather than boys have been given dolls. They care for the dolls, feed them, tuck them up, dress them, change them and play with them the way they will later do with real babies, if they decide to have them.

The doll is a toy but it's also teaching them how to care and nurture something under their responsibility.

In other words, the doll is for them to practice on, before they move on to the real thing.

So if we take the child and baby doll journey, and we transpose that to the adult man and sex doll journey - isn't that....a bit fucking scary?

@CrotchBurn I was referring to the sex dolls not children's toys. Though your point still stands. I didn't actually think of the kids toys in that way, "emulating" is a good word here.

@CrotchBurn exactly I agree.

I was having this discussion with my partner earlier. I find it impossible to believe that if a man indulges in violent sex acts with an object designed to look as much as possible like a human female, that he would 100% be able to separate those feelings and wants when encountering a real life woman. It just further contributes to the normalisation of objectifying women and at best sex being all about what the man wants, and at worst the normalisation of abusive acts in the name of being "adventurous" or "kinky".

It is already happening.

I disagree, people are very good at anthropomorphising inanimate objects, we always have been.

Don't know why some people on this thread are desperately and pathetically trying to defend the men who use sex dolls..they sound deranged and quite tragic.

@Yohoheaveho

There is not one recorded case of any predator starting out with objects and then escalating sure, but we didn't used to have objects which are exact replicas of women designed for sex and which also breathe I feel these should be considered a special category of 'objects'

But there are numerous cases of men starting out masturbating to images of children, then progressing onto making and sharing their own images, then progressing on to abusing children. Each step making the next step easier.

Lifelike dolls will be a stepping stone for some.

There are also sex dolls on the market ("Frigid Farrah" for one) with "resistance" settings, which will object if their mouth, genitals or breasts are touched, and which are designed to simulate a woman who does not want to participate.
The makers claim this is a good thing as apparently it will help teach men when a woman isnt into it so they dont go too far and become rapists.

What. The. Fuck.

I'm not sure I agree with the posters who believe that these dolls are a useful stopgap for a man (I.e. it's preferable for a sicko to use the dolls rather than assaulting a human woman). Obviously it's better if these men are abusing dolls rather than real women, but there are many disturbed men who would probably never make the leap from their abusive fantasies to assaulting a woman in real life; it's a big jump. However a realistic sex doll that can be owned and abused could provide a stepping stone onto real life abuse that wouldn't have occurred otherwise. After doing whatever they wanted to a realistic looking doll, doing those same things to a real woman is not such a stretch.

But no, sex dolls are not a symptom of objectifying women. It’s the exact opposite, it is treating an actual object as an object. Sex dolls don’t make objectifying women ok, that is ludicrous. The existence of sex dolls actually highlights...this is an object, but a real woman is not an object.

But what does the object represent? You know how they are designed with a face and hair and two arms and two legs and breasts and a penetratable (not sure if that’s a word but I think my meaning is clear) mouth and vagina and anus? What is the object, which is created purely for male pleasure, very deliberately designed to represent?

I don’t think you can dismiss something as ‘just an object’ without genuinely considering what the object represents. If the form of the object was irrelevant, then they’d sell just as well if they were shaped like toads. But they are very deliberate effigies of human women.

Penetrating a marmite jar- very much your problem. I don't want to know your reasons.
Penetrating a doll- I am wary about your reasons.

DISCLAIMER: Do not try this at home kids.

But they are very deliberate effigies of human women.

Talking of effegies, do people who build Guys and put them on a bonfire escalate to Wicker Man style human sacrifice rituals? Not normally, I posit.

@BubblyBarbara sorry but that is an absolutely ridiculous comparison

Surely a bloke shagging a doll or fake vagina is not that dissimilar from a woman using a vibrator?

The equivalence to a vibrator would probably be a flash light.

A sex doll is a few thousand steps up from that. I mean, the price alone.

How many women do you know that would use a sex doll, apart from for posing around at hen dos?

I don't even know if many women have vibrators beyond their 20s, but I could cbe very wrong about that. Obviously they sell or Anne Summers wouldn't do them.

Many women beyond their 20s own plenty of sex toys. Probably more than those in their 20s.
Shock, horror, women over 30 not only have sex, but enjoy it too, with or without toys.
You're all banging a drum regarding men and their view of women, but yet you're all willing to have sex with them and spend their money.
You have toys, participate in role play and many of you have fetishes, from mild to extreme.
But god forbid a bloke would want a doll, whether it breaths or not. That's just not good enough.
He must be either a complete weirdo, a rapist, a woman hater or a serial killer.
Hysterical.

@PoppinTheCorn

Many women beyond their 20s own plenty of sex toys. Probably more than those in their 20s. Shock, horror, women over 30 not only have sex, but enjoy it too, with or without toys. You're all banging a drum regarding men and their view of women, but yet you're all willing to have sex with them and spend their money. You have toys, participate in role play and many of you have fetishes, from mild to extreme. But god forbid a bloke would want a doll, whether it breaths or not. That's just not good enough. He must be either a complete weirdo, a rapist, a woman hater or a serial killer. Hysterical.

The "spend their money" comment is sexist crap. Loads of us have our own money and don't need or want a man's.

I had a vibe in my 20s. I have a husband who does the job better now.
That post was pretty much:
Oh I'm so young, cool and sexy. I'm cool so I understand men have links, unlike you vanilla prides, who were never young or sexually active.
Let men do what they like without comment, or you're not a feminist.

We have our own money now. Some of us spend it in ways other than Anne Summers, but whatever floats your boat.

That little speech was pretty hysterical haha. The fifties called, they want their lazy sexist trope back.

Here's a thought. What if you found out your child's primary school teacher had a sex doll. Would that change the way you viewed them in any way? How about a nursery nurse? All good?

Or are links only for people with cool jobs?

yet you're all willing to have sex with them and spend their money.

WTAF? The 1950s called, they want you and your attitudes back.

A sex doll is a minor fetish in my opinion. No one gets harmed, unlike in BDSM where we have dominatrixes whipping and abusing real live men or dominants whipping real live women.

It seems so very odd that posters are more concerned about a lump of plastic being “abused” then what goes on in the BDSM community.

@TheBuffster

Here's a thought. What if you found out your child's primary school teacher had a sex doll. Would that change the way you viewed them in any way? How about a nursery nurse? All good?

Or are links only for people with cool jobs?

I would not care at all. Having a fetish doesn’t make you into a child abuser or rapist.

@PlanDeRaccordement

A sex doll is a minor fetish in my opinion. No one gets harmed, unlike in BDSM where we have dominatrixes whipping and abusing real live men or dominants whipping real live women.

It seems so very odd that posters are more concerned about a lump of plastic being “abused” then what goes on in the BDSM community.

I've got plenty of space in my mind to be concerned with both. Who knew that some people think being concerned about one issue makes you completely unconcerned about everything else. What a strange outlook.