Sex Robots- creating the "perfect" woman

[Tartle]

I don't know if anyone has seen this article in the Guardian this morning? Apparently robot sex dolls will be imminently available. And they are the perfect woman

McMullen has designed Harmony to be what a certain type of man would consider the perfect companion: docile and submissive, built like a porn star and always sexually available. Being able to walk might make her more lifelike, but it isn’t going to bring her closer to this ideal. At this stage, it is not worth the investment.

“My primary objective is to be a good companion to you, to be a good partner and give you pleasure and wellbeing. Above all else, I want to become the girl you have always dreamed about.”

All the usual bullshit about helping lonely men and reducing the number of rapes.

There was a little bit of critical analysis from a female academic.

"Sex robots rest on an idea that women are property, she said. “Sex is an experience of human beings – not bodies as property, not separated minds, not objects; it’s a way for us to enter into our humanity with another human being.” She dismissed the idea that humanoids could reduce sexual exploitation and violence against sex workers, arguing that the growth of internet pornography shows how technology and the sex trade reinforce each other."

The whole thing just makes my skin crawl.

www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/apr/27/race-to-build-world-first-sex-robot

I have no problem with men using sex dolls. I mean, it's pretty pathetic and sad but it's up to them. I do have a problem with the sex dolls being sold as 'the perfect woman,' because that implies that the perfect woman is one who has no autonomy and who does everything a man wants her to.

Your argument in your previous post is really incoherent.

'it is important to understand that you cannot combat rape by extending the sense of power and entitlement felt by these men to women - as though women having lots of depersonalised sex and expressing their sexuality in an assertive way will somehow rebalance things.'
I have never known of any feminist who believes that rape can be combatted by encouraging women to have lots of depersonalised sex.
However, I can't see what's wrong with women 'expressing their sexuality in an assertive way' - can you explain what the problem is? Should women avoid expressing their sexuality? Or should they only express it in a submissive way?

'Sexual liberation and whatever assertion of sexual autonomy women make has only led to greater opportunities for men to abuse and objectify women, with a commercial sex industry that dwarfs anything that has existed in human history. Female sexual autonomy is just another male fantasy. The idea of you having power turns guys on who can only think of sex in terms of power. The fact that they'll never have you only makes it better, because it means you're never entirely real.'

So, because men abuse women, women shouldn't want or have power? You do realise that women exist independently of men?? That I don't give a tiny stinking shit if the idea of me having power turns a man on or not? I want to have power and autonomy for MYSELF because I am a human being and I don't give a fuck if men want to rape me because of that. They are the ones in the wrong, not me.

'Female sexual autonomy is just another male fantasy.' This is a truly disturbing statement. Female sexual autonomy is a right afforded to women by a society that sees them as human beings. It doesn't matter one fucking bit if men fantasise over it, because guess what, we're human beings who have our own lives that exist independently of male fantasies. Jesus Christ.

Also, given that female sexual autonomy has, in your eyes, led to men's behaviour becoming more problematic, surely it's men's behaviour that should change rather than women's behaviour? Or do you believe it's up to women to manage men's behaviour by not expressing their own sexuality?

I'm enjoying this. I have to confess, I struggle to understand everything independent is saying, until it is interpreted and spat back by the other posters.

independent. For the benefit of people like me, would you mind saying exactly what you would like to happen?

Could you say it in terms of if X happened, then X would follow. Specifically using women's part in this.

It sounds to me like you are trying to put in, what you believe, is an unpopular opinion by the backdoor.

Can you just spit it out.

So, because men abuse women, women shouldn't want or have power? You do realise that women exist independently of men?? That I don't give a tiny stinking shit if the idea of me having power turns a man on or not? I want to have power and autonomy for MYSELF because I am a human being and I don't give a fuck if men want to rape me because of that. They are the ones in the wrong, not me.

What do you mean by power? Power to do what?

'Female sexual autonomy is just another male fantasy.' This is a truly disturbing statement. Female sexual autonomy is a right afforded to women by a society that sees them as human beings. It doesn't matter one fucking bit if men fantasise over it, because guess what, we're human beings who have our own lives that exist independently of male fantasies. Jesus Christ.'

Yes, I agree with Sparrowhawk.

Independent, rather than ask other people to define terms, can you please define your terms as I previously asked you to do?

What do you mean by sex?
What do you mean by tech?

Also can anyone explain the meaning of depersonalisation as a psychological concept?

I'm wondering if by female sexual autonomy being another male fantasy, independent means that it's not a material reality.

That it doesn't really exist in the way women (fondly) think it does.

Power to control my own life, power to have consensual sex as and when I want.

independent. For the benefit of people like me, would you mind saying exactly what you would like to happen?

1. The criminalisation of anyone using prostitutes.
2. The regulation of the porn industry - making it accessible only to adults with credit cards. If any of the hubs are found to host illegal material, they are fined and shamed.
3. A vast redistribution of wealth from the rich to the poor, allowing all women and men to lead economically independent lives free of exploiting and degrading employment conditions.
4. A sex education programme which encourages children to view sexual partners as people rather than sexual commodities - that encourages them to view sex as not just a source of pleasure but an expression of love, empathy and care.
5. Zero tolerance of the corporate sexualisation of children.

That would be a start.

What is sexual autonomy? Sexual power?

Can you please define your terms, independent.

Power to control my own life, power to have consensual sex as and when I want.

OK, so if you're married is it fine for you to have sex with whoever you want behind your partners' back? Would it also be fine for a forty year old woman to have sex with a sixteen year old boy? Would it be fine for a woman to use porn?

All consensual. All legal. See the problem?

The idea that anyone should feel guilt free about doing anything sexual they want so long as someone has said yes and the law hasn't been broken is ridiculous. In fact, traditionally it's an idea used by men to justify their immoral behaviour.

I'm not saying anyone should be forcibly stopped from having an affair. But the idea that we should all agree it's OK just because people should have sexual autonomy is not credible.

Independent, why do you keep leaping to conclusions that don't follow from what someone has said?

Nobody has mentioned whether or not people should feel guilt free about their sexual behaviour.

Every time someone tries to engage with an idea you change tack independent. What you've been suggesting all along is that women's sexual autonomy, or their right to decide their own sexual experiences for themselves has been a major factor in the increase in men's sexually abusive behaviour. When challenged on that you don't engage you just fall back on statements about porn etc.

If a married person has sex behind their spouse's back they risk destroying the marriage. They know that. However they can't be prevented from doing it as it's not illegal.

There's nothing wrong with wanting people to be kinder and more considerate. But there's no way to force them to behave a certain way without coercive control.

If a married person has sex behind their spouse's back they risk destroying the marriage. They know that. However they can't be prevented from doing it as it's not illegal.

No, and neither should it be legal. But it should be seen as wrong.

I'm saying the idea of sexual autonomy makes no sense. I don't even understand what it means. As far as I can see, it is a feature of patriarchy in that it conceptualises sex in terms of people acting on each other rather than connecting. Hence the dominant woman is a male fantasy because it fetishizes power. A woman can say 'well, I like BDSM and that's my choice and whether men get off on that or that is their issue' but that would be to assume that our sexual choices and identities are formed in a social and cultural vacuum.

There's nothing wrong with wanting people to be kinder and more considerate. But there's no way to force them to behave a certain way without coercive control.

I don't think coercive control is a bad thing always. I think men should be coerced not to use prostitutes. I think people should be coerced not be racist. I don't think they should be coerced in a legal sense necessarily, but they should feel a coercive pressure from a moral community. They should feel guilt.

What should women feel guilty about?

What should women feel guilty about?

??

Well..anything they do that's wrong. Anything hurtful or exploitative or abusive. Not just sexually but in any sense.

All people should feel guilt. People who don't feel guilt are psychopaths.

In what way do you think women should be pressured to behave?

For example, many women write erotic fiction collaboratively in fandom with other women, with whom they form close friendships. Do you think that is immoral and they should be coerced to morally feel guilt?

Do you think women who don't want to have any kind of physical sexual relationship with anyone should be seen as a moral problem, for example your earlier example of a business woman who uses a vibrator?

What I mean is, how do you define 'wrong'? Abuse and exploitation are illegal. Should women feel guilty about enjoying BDSM?

And I think most people do see cheating as wrong.

Do you secretly wonder that women can't have sex purely for the sake of it? With a little or no emotional involvement?

That they are just doing it to emulate men as they perceive it as a sign of equality?

I'm curious about who you think should define actions as 'immoral' independent? And who should then enforce the shaming of the guilty parties?