Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

To think a "breathing" sex robot should be illegal

464 replies

CrotchBurn · 14/01/2021 18:30

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

OP posts:
LouJ85 · 17/01/2021 10:58

I don't know if the research has been done but I know what I can see around me, and what I read in the papers and what other women that I know have gone through when giving evidence at their trial, and it is widely reported that fewer and fewer complaints even lead to court, much less to a conviction.

You're right that rape convictions are generally more difficult to secure than conscious for other types of offending. But I don't think this has a great deal to do with pornography consumption having normalised sexual aggression (indeed, no evidence supports this).

What I believe is hugely relevant here is the tricky great area of consent; since the only difference between consensual sex and rape is the victim having given or not given their consent, at any point either before or during the act. This becomes even more tricky in cases where women are raped by their own partners. Since these couples may be also engaged in regular consensual sex, physical evidence of rape (ie the presence of the man's semen inside the woman) becomes less reliable in court. Yet there may well have been an occasion in which the woman had firmly said "no, stop", part way through, which her partner chose to ignore. If he's ignored her pleas to stop, he has most definitely in legal terms committed a rape against her. But the issues and difficulties with securing a conviction in these cases, if the woman wished to, is that it is so incredibly difficult to prove or disprove consent (or otherwise) during the legal process. You often just have one person's word that they said "no" and the other person's word that they didn't hear this, or that it wasn't said. There are unlikely to be any independent witnesses to corroborate either person's version (for obvious reasons because it's an offence that usually takes place behind closed doors). This throws up massive complexities for the criminal justice system. They have to prove that the victim definitely did not consent - which is a challenge. It's in contrast to a physical assault, for example, where there will often be bruising and injuries that serve as evidence, which can be taken into account to help secure convictions. Additionally, there is no "consensual" version of hitting someone. Hitting someone is assault (at least in the eyes of the law), end of discussion. But having sex with someone can be both a consensual and legal act, and an illegal act, depending on whether consent was given or not. That's where the huge challenges lies for securing rape convictions.

And it is a huge problem, without a doubt. I don't know what the answer is. But I'm almost certain that widespread pornography consumption has little to do with reduced rape conviction rates; and far more to do with the complexities and difficulties of proving or disproving consent.

LouJ85 · 17/01/2021 10:59

*convictions, not conscious! Typo!

LouJ85 · 17/01/2021 10:59

*grey area of consent, not great area! Typos galore! Blush

LouJ85 · 17/01/2021 11:23

www.cps.gov.uk/publication/cps-policy-prosecuting-cases-rape

See above link from the CPS.gov website in further support of the point about consent and why rape cases are so difficult to convict (quote below from this website).

"Proving the absence of consent is usually the most difficult part of a rape prosecution, and is the most common reason for a rape case to fail. Prosecutors will look for evidence such as injury, struggle, or immediate distress to help them prove that the victim did not consent, but frequently there may be no such corroborating evidence. This does not mean that these cases can never be successfully prosecuted, but it does mean that they are more difficult. In the absence of any other evidence to help prove the victim did not consent, there is the possibility that some cases may fail to meet the evidential stage of the Code for Crown Prosecutors"

PoppinTheCorn · 17/01/2021 11:48

@caraDuneRedux
Nope.

TheBuffster · 17/01/2021 12:21

@PoppinTheCorn

Let's assume for a moment that all women everywhere don't earn a wage.

My fil and mil for example. Fil enjoys quite gleefully that mil enjoys spending his money. What he needed pointing out to him that as his wife was a sahm she has done unpaid labour for him throughout their marriage in the form of housework and childcare.

I mean you are obviously so far gone there's no engaging you, but just wanted to save @CaraDuneRedux from having to engage. I won't be replying so do have fun shouting into the void.

This thread is bizarre to say the least.

CaraDuneRedux · 17/01/2021 12:29

I wasn't going to bother, Buffster. Grin There are times on t'interweb where the adage "you can't argue with stupid" really comes into its own. And I trust to the intelligence of the lurkers to make their own judgement calls.

TheBuffster · 17/01/2021 12:36

@CaraDuneRedux indeedy Grin

CaraDuneRedux · 17/01/2021 12:46

Plus the lurkers will bring their own experiences to this. Some will be in marriages where they are actually the higher earner. Some will be single women supporting themselves with their own incomes. Some will be in financially abusive marriages where the husband doles out 60 quid a week for them to spend on food and the kids' clothes while spending huge amounts on his own hobbies.

I think intelligent women who actually talk to other women and follow the news are really rather acutely aware that this is no longer the 1950s. And that this is on the whole a bloody good thing.

PoppinTheCorn · 17/01/2021 12:49

@TheBuffster That is still spending his money is it not?
Irrespective of what she does with her life.

PoppinTheCorn · 17/01/2021 12:53

@caraDuneRedux Yes and most will still want their share of the blokes money.
Double standards

CaraDuneRedux · 17/01/2021 13:04

You're right Buffster - this is one of the most bizarre derails I've ever seen. How we got from "sex dolls faked to breathe are fucking creepy as shit" to "You money grabbing hussies, wanting to spend your husband's money" is utterly baffling.

Unless of course the latter (unfounded) belief is being put forward as a rationale for wanting a sex doll. In which case I take back my earlier comments about the dolls being creepy as fuck: mate, get yourself a doll asap and spare the women of the world your company and your attitudes.

PoppinTheCorn · 17/01/2021 13:32

No doll needed here. Cheers.

SirChing · 17/01/2021 20:32

[quote PoppinTheCorn]**@SirChing* and @CaraDuneRedux* so I suppose your husband/partner keeps every penny of his earnings to himself and you pay for everything yourself
So yes, spending his money.
Regardless of decade.
As I say, good enough for that aren't they.[/quote]
Not married so totally independent here. When I was married, all bills were split equally so no financial sponging went on. I think the 1950s called and want you back!

New posts on this thread. Refresh page
Swipe left for the next trending thread