Planned Obsolescence

ex-machina

The mainstream loves a salacious story about the sexual misconducts of men. With the recent Ashley Madison data leak the narrative was one of blaming and shaming the overwhelming majority of men who signed up for an account to cheat in their spouses. This has resulted in more than one suicide. A topic of the Man in Demand Q&A session I fielded was how the Red Pill lens isn’t limited to just scoffing at the Blue Pill in popular media, but that it also gives men a sensitivity and awareness to better understand the motivations for social narratives like this.

Red Pill aware men understand that if there is an opportunity to cast blame or doubt on a man over his sexual impulse, or the consequences for allowing it to lead to behavior that conflicts with a feminine-primary social order, shaming will always be the go-to, socially acceptable strategy. Sex will always be a clichéd thumbscrew to gauge men’s personal resolve, and this is a built-in failsafe of control for the Blue Pill’s conditioning of men.

Red Pill men understand the motivating incentives for this “cheating” and that in a westernizing culture, 50%+ of marriages are clinically and practically sexless, it’s not hard to understand the want for a man to find some temporary sexual release in infidelity, porn or delusions of emotional infidelity. It’s also easy to understand how the paradox of commitment would drive such men to suicide.

This is simply one data point of many in a larger Red Pill awareness that indicates some very uncomfortable truths women need to confront; whether single or married, men will actively seek a practical solution to their sexlessness. And it is just this sexual problem solving that will ultimately challenge women’s unilateral, social and personal power over their own Hypergamy. On a limbic level women and the imperative are aware of this challenge. Thus, it’s controlled for by investing in conditioning men to feel guilt or shaming for ever embracing their masculine sexual nature. It’s a threat.

Keep this fact in mind as I explore today’s topic. Women and feminine-primary culture have done an amazing job at commodifying women’s singular, primary agency with men – their physicality and sexual availability. It’s de rigueur in the manosphere to write articles about women reducing themselves to being next to valueless to men beyond their sexual attributes. I’ve written in the past about women’s commodifying love and sex, however recently women are being forced to face the realities of making their sexuality a commodity.

What women, both prominent and insignificant, are coming to realize is that the ultimate plan of feminism (destroying the evolved, complementary family structure of parenting) is really a planned obsolescence for womankind. As I was coming to this realization I found it rather ironic that only 5 years ago we had the likes of Hannah Rosin profiting from the idea that men were (or were becoming) obsolete. Five years later it appears the fear now is that it’s women who will become obsolete in the most literal, commodified sense. That fear is beginning to show.

In the Future Sexbots will Drink Feminist Tears

If you follow me on twitter or you’re even peripherally aware of MSM gender sensationalism in a Red Pill context you’ll know that the topic du jour this week is the coming, realistic, availability of robotic sex partners and the efforts being made to legislate against their development by ‘concerned’ women. Heartiste and many other manosphere writers naturally picked up on this. I particularly enjoyed Milo Yiannopoulos’ piece Sexbots: Why Women Should Worry.

But male sexual appetites are easily satisfied, despite what women will tell you. Blow jobs really aren’t that difficult, and in any case most blokes are fine with a pizza and a wank. For many men, sex is a nice bonus, but it’s not essential. When you introduce a low-cost alternative to women that comes without all the nagging, insecurity and expense, frankly men are going to leap in headfirst.

One of the primary and evolved differences in men and women’s neural firmware is that men are natural and intrinsic problem solvers. I’ve pointed it out in many an essay; men are wired to solve problems with a rudimentary, deductive logic process. It’s one of the reasons we get ourselves into such horribly misled predicaments with women; we expect a binary, A to B to C level of reason with women (reinforced by equalist ideology) and deductively try to solve a sex and intimacy problem with them.

Improvisation and innovation are what we do to live better; one reason men naturally view women as sex objects is literally due to wiring in our brains that predispose us to using tools. So it’s really not much of a stretch to see how men will use this inventiveness to solve a need for sex. And in an intersexual social environment that’s predicated on the commodification of sex, well, you can see how the advancement of sexual substitutes and virtual sexual experiences would be driven by supply and demand.

It’s science fiction at this stage, but the ball is rolling and this is causing the Feminine Imperative to confront uncomfortable possibilities with just the proposition of having a sexual monopoly disrupted be the innovations of men.

Do Robots Dream of Electric Sin?

As might be expected, Dalrock took a shot at this story from a Christian moralistic angle – would sex with a convincing facsimile of a woman qualify as sinning?

InnocentBystanderBoston had a good comment in that thread:

Aside from the purely moral question, there is another risk regarding sexbots. Our economy is built on the expectation that men will be motivated by marriage to produce in excess of their own needs. As we continue to degrade marriage, sexbots will be there to fill the gaps.

…with unilateral divorce law and the accompanying cash and prizes awarded to the female courtesy of judges immersed in the feminist imperative, I think s-xbots pretty much end marriage. If marriage isn’t completely destroyed forever with version 2.0, the s-xbot will most certainly destroy it. And why? The s-xbot will always give you s-x on demand. It will stay at home, faithful to you. It will not spend your money and ruin your credit rating. It will not get a judge to sign a restraining order against you. It can’t divorce you and take cash and prizes. It will never age maintaining its peak SMV forever (if you believe in Rollo’s charts.) So that will pretty much be it for feminism. Without the surplus wealth created by men to subsidize the parasitic nature of feminist centric Marriage 2.0, there can be no feminism. Women are net wealth consumers. Without husbands, there lives will ONLY be in decline. The feminist imperative can NOT allow these s-xbots to be made.

On a rudimentary level feminism has always recognized that women’s only real agency with men is sex. We can see this in the feminine-centric commodification of sex, and we can see this truth in (third wave) feminism’s embrace of sex positivity – but again, only within the confines of a feminine-centric and unilaterally feminine controlled context for that sex to happen in.

The increasingly more accepted Yes Means Yes legalistic checklist that underwrites sexual relations (for what feminists know will always be defined by ambiguous circumstances) is a glaring example of this litigious overreach in an effort to lock down unilateral control of Hypergamy for women. This is the degree of paranoia that the doubt of Hypergamous insecurity inspires in those women less capable of intrasexual competition with their sisters to secure it.

When granted the social facilities to do so, women will always base their personal choices, their personal ideologies, their social order and their legislative doctrines around relieving themselves of Hypergamous doubt and insecurities. In truth, women’s evolved socio-sexual filtering ensures that there is no practical relief from this. There is no 100% assuredness of Hypergamous choice; Hypergamy doubts optimization even after the best of choices, but if given the power, women will build a social order around an attempt to mutually allay that doubt, allay that sexual competition anxiety, and all at men’s expense and disempowerment.

Becoming Obsolete

If you ever need an example of the duplicity with which the Feminine Imperative really aligns itself with equalism, look no further than how that “equality” is expressed with preferring pro-feminine solutions to social problems.

There is a fundamental fear women experience in just the prospect of not having 100% control over their sexual selection, sexual strategy and ultimately optimization of their Hypergamy. Anything that challenges women’s unilateral control of their Hypergamous power – such as prostitution, male hormonal birth control, female viagra, DNA testing for paternity and now sexbots – must be ruthlessly and preemptively legislated against if feminine social primacy is to be maintained. Even the idea of sexbots destroying women’s monopoly on sex, however fantastical, must be eliminated before it becomes a threat.

Kathleen Richardson, a professor at De Montfort University in England, serves as an excellent example of this axiom:

“Sex robots seem to be a growing focus in the robotics industry and the models that they draw on — how they will look, what roles they would play — are very disturbing indeed,” she told the BBC.

She believes that they reinforce traditional stereotypes of women and the view that a relationship need be nothing more than physical.

“We think that the creation of such robots will contribute to detrimental relationships between men and women, adults and children, men and men and women and women,” she said.

I would agree that it is detrimental in these terms, but the fear of losing feminine primacy is evident in just the prospect of sexbots.

The squid ink here is the concern for reinforcing “traditional stereotypes” of women for the almost unanimously male demographic who’d buy a sexual substitute (notice there is no call for creating morbidly obese variants of sexbots). The real fear is that men prefer that stereotype and it would force women to confront the truth that if they don’t accommodate men’s physical and psychological preferences (conventional femininity) they will progressively devalue women’s sexual agency over them by opting for the sexbot.

And that is a very pressing threat to women’s control over Hypergamy.

What were witnessing here is the acknowledgement that shaming men for their inventiveness in resolving their sexual needs isn’t working. Thus the social and legislative power the Feminine Imperative wields has to be invoked. Naturally there will be “think of the children” appeals and the admonishments of dehumanization on the part of men, but the binary truth is that women’s prime commodity (sex) could be reduced to making women obsolete.

The following is an exchange between Vitriol and YaReally from the last post.

“However, the biggest secret they all want to hide is that using money, whether doing something like you described or paying for pussy outright, is the most efficient way to get laid. If your main goal is to get laid as much as possible, does it matter whether you followed some arbitrary rules that some guy posted on the internet along the way? ”

lol brb taking a helicopter to the top of Mount Everest because it’s more efficient than those dumbasses who actually CLIMB it. It DOES matter to men who’s goal isn’t “to get laid as much as possible” but is “to get laid by girls who are legitimately into me, as much as possible”. To each their own.

If we accept the Pareto Principle as a rough guideline, 80% of men are Betas who simply don’t care to, or accept that they don’t have the capacity to, concern themselves with learning how to “get laid with girls who are genuinely into them.” They’ll create every manner of rationale to convince themselves that the girl who solves his sexual thirst is genuinely into him, or he’ll opt for the most available, most feasible, means to resolve that sexual deprivation. The ubiquitousness of free, easily accessible, streaming hi-def pornography is a testament to this dynamic.

Whether the reality of convincing sexbots is ever achieved isn’t really relevant in this equation, the fear of losing primary control of Hypergamy is what’s at stake. We see this fear manifested in criminalizing prostitution and the shame of men seeking sexual release via pornography and Ashley Madison accounts.

Recently I was asked about my take on the legal pushback on the part of women to regulate or outright ban the FDA approval of the female form of Viagra. From the socially acceptable perspective the fear is that the drug might be used as another (more effective) date rape drug. From a Red Pill perspective the fear is, once again, rooted in women’s fear of men circumventing women’s sexual strategy by chemically influencing their arousal process.

It’s one thing to forcibly rape a woman and thereby take control of her Hypergamous choice, but it quite another to prompt her into engaging in sex she is influenced to by some extrinsic means. As such, women’s sexual selection and Hypergamous optimization is effectively mitigated if not removed from the sexual equation by an invention of men. So once again we see the nervous efforts of the Feminine Imperative to ban any prospective attempts by men to exercise even a marginal control over Hypergamy.

Women have access to safe and legal abortion (a Hypergamous control), but a drug that might influence their libido and thus lead them to sexual choices they might no otherwise control and make, even the idea of that innovation needs regulation. Remove women from the sexual selection and arousal process and you make their only value – the value westernized women have systematically established for themselves – effectively obsolete.

That’s not a judgement call. Women tend to conflate their personal, intrinsic value with their sexual market value. However, in the SMP that is predicated upon women’s only value to men being sexual (not as life mates, mothers, or personal worth), the monopoly of sexual leverage becomes toothless.

654 comments

  1. Thanks for the citation. I think we’re actually on the same page about the issues of men finding the most efficient way to get sex because we’re logical, rational problem solvers.

    That quote from Milo’s article is great:
    “But male sexual appetites are easily satisfied, despite what women will tell you. Blow jobs really aren’t that difficult, and in any case most blokes are fine with a pizza and a wank. For many men, sex is a nice bonus, but it’s not essential. When you introduce a low-cost alternative to women that comes without all the nagging, insecurity and expense, frankly men are going to leap in headfirst.”

    With the ubiquity of pornography and other easy outlets, fewer and fewer men are going to be willing to invest in serious relationships or marriage. Thus we’re seeing the total commodification of sex you’re describing in the article because relationships previously functioned as a means to that end from a man’s perspective.

  2. In all seriousness though, it is ironic that the FI is responsible for the comoditization of sex. Anything comoditified is always reduced in value. Where did they think it would lead?

  3. Count me in the contrarian camp re: sexbots. Sure , they’ll be available and offer men everything a woman can without the financial and emotional overhead.

    It won’t matter.

    Why?Because the Feminine Imperative is now Society’s Imperative. The default social code men are raised to obey is the FI full stop. Whether a male child is raised in a Emasculated Dad/ Empowered Mom family or a single mom household he is taught to obey the FI on pain of almost his own life. These are the ” 90%” of today; males ignorant of their own SMV and their own options because they were never taught them to start with. You cannot exercise options you don’t know you have.

    The FI has entrenched its way with alarming speed into maledom. A man who doesn’t pay for a date is actually shamed for it by his peers. Comments which even slightly displease women are labeled ‘misogyny’. Husbands and boyfriends who don’t let their women steamroll them are considered moderately “abusive ” by society. Sexbots won’t change the dynamic much against women and the FI, because most males born into it won’t even know its an option. It’ll be like prostitution, public statements of men plate spinning or flying overseas for sex. Sexbots will be another social taboo the Bluepill 90% joke about whilst waiting in the store checkout line to buy their OneItis a set of tampons.The Hypergamy Hustle Will Go On.

    As to the notion that sexbots will reduce marriage, we should recall that marriage today is strictly an asset transfer agreement between men and women that is enforced by the government. If marriage becomes an unsuitable social vehicle to transfer money from males to females, it will be substituted by naked brute force from the state. Forget divorce courts ,romance and wedding rings; should marriage rates fall fast enough due to sexbot use, porn, and financial disenfranchisement for males women will just up the legal ante via the ballot box. An extreme example; dating a woman more then twice in a 60 day period will be considered a “common law relationship” and thus grounds for 50% of your assets being seized by court order. In many areas cohabitation up to a certain date automatically confers property and legal entitlement to women as if they got full monte married.

    As such, its my humble opinion we aware men should actually preserve marriage wherever possible. If we tear it down , it it likely whatever social female subsidization scheme replaces it will be a LOT worse for us .

  4. It is a fascinating subject and too much is at stake for this to be allowed to happen. The impact on society (sexually, economically and culturally) will be absolutely profound. At first, men who use sexbots will be shamed mercilessly in the media. But that won’t work – after all, we live in a society where porn consumption is the norm. Everyone’s a wanker these days. So I expect, thanks to some bogus rationale, sexbots will be made illegal. Maybe sexbot manufacturers will be accused of making child versions, thus encouraging paedophilia. Ultimately, though, technology will win, as it always does.

  5. @ SD:
    If that happens what you are describing, then we men doesn’t deserve better !!

    Even though we all know how the matrix works, i still don’t understand ( refuse to understand) how such “powerful” creatures like full grown men, can behave so pathetic, disorganized and weak.
    It’s really a miracle to me.

    I hope that sexbots will be on markets soon.
    Not because i like to fuck a robot pussy, but because i hope that a huge amount of “beta” men aren’t available any longer then.
    Especially these words follwing are very important:

    ” It will not spend your money and ruin your credit rating. It will not get a judge to sign a restraining order against you. It can’t divorce you and take cash and prizes. It will never age maintaining its peak SMV forever (if you believe in Rollo’s charts.) So that will pretty much be it for feminism. Without the surplus wealth created by men to subsidize the parasitic nature of feminist centric Marriage 2.0, there can be no feminism. Women are net wealth consumers. Without husbands, there lives will ONLY be in decline. The feminist imperative can NOT allow these s-xbots to be made. ”

    I can’t wait to witness such days !!!

  6. @ Vitriol

    “Thanks for the citation. I think we’re actually on the same page about the issues of men finding the most efficient way to get sex because we’re logical, rational problem solvers.”

    I don’t mean to rain on your parade Vitriol, but I will anyway. I’m not comprehending who (esp. not Rollo) is on the same page about buying/negotiating desire as a personal sexual strategy.

    You brought that up in the last thread/essay, and admittedly it is not what the point of this original post/essay is about. But don’t you see that some men do want women for their value as life mates, mothers (who nurture his children to be their best), and personal feminine worth in addition to their value for his sexual strategy? And that the FI sexual strategy is to claim that women’s value as life mates (in the anachronistic marriage contract), as genuinely good mothers, and dedication to feminine self-improvement is irrelevant to what men should deem valuable?

  7. For all its being overblown, I really doubt this will significantly change things, will this really be that much better than a silicon sleeve ? Maybe the guys who use realdolls will go for it, but its just a toaster at the end of the day. A toaster with Cortana like abilities to talk ?

    Wierd.

    The thing that I really wonder about is japans herbivores, if its going to go big anywhere it will be among this population, will they even eschew sex with droids?

  8. @SJF

    “I don’t mean to rain on your parade Vitriol, but I will anyway. I’m not comprehending who (esp. not Rollo) is on the same page about buying/negotiating desire as a personal sexual strategy.”

    I never said he agreed with me about that. I was only agreeing with the fact that something like sexbots are an example of men using their rational brains to take much of the bullshit and randomness out of getting sex.

    “But don’t you see that some men do want women for their value as life mates, mothers (who nurture his children to be their best), and personal feminine worth in addition to their value for his sexual strategy? ”

    I understand not everyone has as much ice in their veins as I do, but I would argue that isn’t too realistic of a goal in today’s world. This site is filled with stories of guys who attempted to do that and failed. Eventually you get a point where you stop caring about whether women “are genuinely into you” or whether they would make good mothers or anything like that because it seems like a recipe for failure.

    Not everyone needs to become as cynical as I am, but this is where my life experience and learning has brought me.

  9. @SD, I agree with you that the FI will keep on keeping on. That being said, the more fearful the FI becomes, the more they will attempt to implement levels of control over men’s sexual agency. As this occurs, men will begin to wake up in groves and considering the manosphere is already in existence and growing day by day, all men will have a safe haven to come to and learn about the issues that concern us in our modern society. As this happens, more men will find ways to drop out of relations with women and find alternatives. They will have VR to turn to in the near future. And sometime after that, sex bots.

  10. @The Judge

    Hang on a minute there! If sexbots cause men to show less interest in real women, then why would a minor sexbot encourage men to seek out real minors (though I have absolutely no idea how one could realistically satisfy that desire outside of Incest) – surely it would satisfy any desire in that direction (which in any event is merely an extention of the normal male desire for youth and fertility).

  11. @Opus.

    Absolutely. But that could be the twisted logic used to ban sexbots. The greatest taboo in modern society is paedophilia. Sexbots becoming mainstream would be seen as a disaster. Therefore the ultimate slur/scare tactic would be employed to stop them.

  12. The thing that would concern me about the sexbots is their ability to wreck our economy. Imagine the market systems revolving around them(like gamer culture). Men are biologically driven to produce resources for wives, children, ect…
    The future will be men working & investing in new cybernetic upgrades for their sexbots. This will be the gamer culture on steroids, but it’s effects could be worse because gamers still date or get married and have families. It could create a drastic macro-economic shift to the likes of which we have never seen before. Men like a lot of Beta gamers won’t be going out and spending money to negotiate attraction with women(& we all know that doesn’t work), but it still affects your local restaurants, bars, clubs, ect…
    A lot of our economy is Beta driven. When you go out as a single man who is very Red Pill aware, you can see the Betas wooing their dates when you scan the scene. If sexbots exist, then you can kiss that shit goodbye!!!
    On the positive end, it would force women to start acting feminine, learn to cook & clean, and it would destroy a lot of their bitchy egos. I agree with you Rollo, the feminists must destroy the sexbots. You can kiss control goodbye. The only reason women are so unhinged now is every social convention swings their way.

  13. Rollo, On a rudimentary level feminism has always recognized that women’s only real agency with men is sex

    Important point, this. Traditional women never have accepted this narrative and provide:

    1) care for the sick and elderly
    2) childcare
    3) cooking from scratch
    4) housekeeping
    5) sewing/mending/washing clothes
    6) beautifying the home
    7) and yes, sex and companionship

    Men should rethink modernity (and children or marriage within it). It’s a bad deal.

  14. @Is This Thing On?
    >So where can I get one of these robots? 🙂

    Soon you’ll be able to buy em over the internet, just like Lars- LOL

    In the US the RealDoll people have a project underway.

    and the Japanese AI geeks have got prototypes with way better AI and features animation- but they don’t haven’t added the sex functions RealDoll is so good for.

    They’re coming boys …

    Then look for Jennifer Lopez to produce a movie on how pathetic & mentally disturbed sexbot using males are …

  15. The suicide thing of men not killing the Beta before it kills you is disturbing. I had a friend blow his brains out with a 12 gauge when his wife left him. His identity was destroyed and the divorce rape that followed was brutal. I had another friend who drank himself to death with the help of some pills. I literally found him in the floor passed out & had to give him CPR until the paramedics arrived. Oh, and his son found him, called me for help, and it was a complete nightmare. It’s sad how men go into the woman’s frame and just get absolutely destroyed by it. Never step into her frame.

  16. Rollo wrote: “” If we accept the Pareto Principle as a rough guideline, 80% of men are Betas who simply don’t care to, or accept that they don’t have the capacity to, concern themselves with learning how to “get laid with girls who are genuinely into them.” They’ll create every manner of rationale to convince themselves that the girl who solves his sexual thirst is genuinely into him, or he’ll opt for the most available, most feasible, means to resolve that sexual deprivation. The ubiquitousness of free, easily accessible, streaming hi-def pornography is a testament to this dynamic.””

    This for me is the “Aha-moment” of the whole piece. In a time of Tinder, instant gratification and the disposable nature of all products and services…learning game is critical. Learning game is critical not to “get laid” but to be able to be more in control of your own destiny as a man…to be the one who choses and decides.

    I had an interesting conversation with a friend of mine. He’s totally beta and was telling me about the girls he’s “Chatting” with on Tinder. He chats with them for “weeks” before meeting up. Then he takes them on “dates” and was lamenting how predatory these girls were.

    I told him i’d banged 9 girls this year, half I met online. He was asking what my “Secret line” was. It wasn’t a “line” it was a way of thinking. “So you’re just a jerk to them?” he asked fascinated and somewhat judgmental. He just didn’t get it. We were at a party and there was a girl he said he’d met on Tinder there that was “trouble”. He later introduced me and I immediately started running game on her. Her body language changed. She started giggling and her eyes locked into me. She wasn’t “Trouble” at all. He was just clueless on how to navigate her flakiness and shit-tests.

    Rollo once wrote something to the effect: “Don’t wish it were easier, make yourself better”….Game is that path to making yourself better.

  17. @Tom

    I agree. Hollywood will be putting out the shaming propaganda, and as always, it will coordinated with the Government indoctrination of the youth. Yeah boys marry these washed up women “Man up” don’t do the robots Jimmy. Throw the hot dog down the hallway Jimmy and live a nice cuckolded life with the girls

  18. @walawala

    I couldn’t agree more with you. Game is more of a way of getting the best out of life’s options. Since I’ve improved myself, the hook ups are easier, and the times I’ve been in relationships, I’ve gotten the most out of the women.
    I personally feel that game helps more in LTRs. Especially if you wish to be married and have a healthy environment for your health & the health of the kids.

  19. Notice that the media focused on how many men and how few women were on AshleyMadison, but ignored the opposite ratio of men/women which were on the other hacked site EstablishedGentlemen, which is designed to hook women up with rich guys.

  20. “I’ve pointed it out in many an essay; men are wired to solve problems with a rudimentary, deductive logic process.”

    This and the recent solipsism talk reminded me of a really old post from early Tyler (pre The Game).

    From Page 49 of the Tyler Digest: http://www.scribd.com/doc/276760/Tyler-Durden-The-Tyler-Digest#scribd

    “QUICK REVIEW (this stuff is to the best of my recollection, and its been a longtime since I read ‘The Sexual Key’.. this is the main USEFUL part of it):

    As explained in “The Sexual Key”, men like LINEAR progress, women like INTERNAL progress.

    MEN: Goal -> Goal -> Accomplishment

    “I got the scholarship.” -> “I don’t have to work this summer.” -> “I havemore time to pick up chicks.”

    THE PAYOFF IS THE RESULT (“more time” in this case)

    WOMEN:

    —->—-goal–>———>——-\
    ……………………………………… |
    .. /——->—-goal—->—–….. V
    …^…………………………….. \…. |
    …|……………………………… |…. |
    …^….. accomplishment—-/ …V
    …|…………………………………… |
    .. \—–goal—–<–goal—- “That validated my choices.” -> “That showed me that I truly do have academic potential.” -> “That made me feel incredible because it showed me more about myself.”

    THE PAYOFF IS THE EMOTION, THAT RESULTED FROM A DEEPERUNDERSTANDING OFHERSELF, AND DISCOVERING HER *UNKNOWN/HIDDEN POTENTIALS*. (in this case, her academic abilities)

    Too bad my ONION DIAGRAM in the Chick’s inwards-looking thought process doesn’t seem to have translated properly..It looks like a LOOP, going in.. like water draining into a bathtub..

    Chicks thought process is not LINEAR, but goes from the outer surface, to the DEEPER IMPLICATIONS..This is why E.S.P., and PALM-READING is fucking CRACK for chicks.. its a FANTASY, that they can get DEEPER into their emotions, through something MYSTICALLY AUTHORITATIVE..

    It’s like for GUYS, having a MILLION DOLLARS land on their laps, for NOREASON…For chicks, having emotional depths UNCOVERED for NO REASON – that’s the same thing.. The female EQUIVALENT to winning the lottery.

    Except that unknown emotional potentials can be FAKED, unlike a million dollars which is MATERIAL.. its emotions being manipulated by the promise of NEW emotions.. its so EASY. Thus women’s fascination with cold-reading and other bullshit variants..”

    I realize upon re-reading this that in our modern terminology he’s describing solipsism lol Women look internally at “but how does this affect ME and my EMOTIONS, how does it make me FEEL?” That emotional state IS the “accomplishment” of something to them and each step she takes when she’s viewing whether an action was good or bad starts from the external (“that was a bad thing”) and loops deeper and deeper internal (“I don’t like that person because they made me feel bad feelings”).

    It’s funny because this didn’t make full sense to me back then, but now that Rollo’s broken solipsism down so clearly, the reason stuff like palm-reading and horoscopes and shit is like crack to them (and retarded to us) makes more sense.

    Just found that funny, didn’t think of it this page he wrote till now when I read that “male logic VS female logic” stuff.

    On sex-bots I skimmed the article quick: I’ve met a LOT of very socially awkward (LIFE-awkward, in all categories) guys who will definitely get a sex robot. They’re at home spanking it to porn all the time anyway with tons of money saved up because they don’t DO anything outside of their house, and they have a madonna/whore complex combined with a disney complex where they won’t go to a hooker because it’s a real woman but she will be faking her feelings for them and that doesn’t feel “right” it feels dirty and sleazy, but a sex doll is real enough to pretend but not SO REAL that it enters the hooker sleazy zone for them psychologically.

    Personally I think the biggest hurdle of sex dolls catching on will be shipping and storage. ie – can the guy trust that it’ll be shipped anonymously and can it store away easily/fast hidden in the back of their closet so no one will ever find out and judge them for having it VS having a big clunky mannequin sitting in their bedroom or slid under the couch where someone might stumble across it.

    I also think women will max out the shaming tactics on the whole thing and even attempt to rally up white knight hackers to pull an Ashley Madison on shipping records so they can publicly name and shame guys who order these things to discourage other guys from taking the chance on buying one. ’cause with a hooker you’ll run out of money eventually, or get caught, or be scared to get caught, or meet a crazy bitch, etc. But a sex doll would be infinite sex for one relatively small lump sum, so theoretically a sex doll is a greater threat to getting these guys providing for women and contributing to society than hookers.

    I think they’re still a ways off, but you combine like a sex robot’s motions with synchronized occulus rift video (you wouldn’t even need the whole realistic looking mannequin, or maybe using Augmented Reality tech to put a realistic face on the mannequin), make it all under $5000 and make it easy to store/hide with minimal cleaning/effort and I think it will impact society on a notable level.

    I think it’ll also help instigate my YaReally Reversion Theory 😉 lol:

    http://yareallyarchive.com/2015/2/#comment-rationalmale-87187

    http://yareallyarchive.com/2015/2/#comment-heartiste-650345

    2050 will voluntarily-on-women’s-part be the new 1950. lol I fully expect to have a better selection of women bringing more to the table in 2025, that’s why I’m not even remotely planning to settle down before that (late-40s for me).

  21. Also scroll down in that sexbots article to the comment section and read the “Missie Anthrogynyvous” comments for an epic hamster in a blender spin. I bet Rollo could write a dozen articles on all the solipsism (trying to shame men saying the bot will be just a sex object which stings for her but doesn’t bother us at all because she can’t relate to how men think and projects that we must be bothered by the same “he’d be my servant and I’d just turn him off as soon as he yapped too much” thing that she’s clearly bothered) and shaming tactics (men who want a woman to like them are narcissists etc) and everything (even the dropping that she has a husband, just so we know she’s “attractive” and her opinion should carry weight because vagina lol).

    It’s just interesting to see how much she’s trying to use what bothers HER against men and completely doesn’t understand that we read her comments and think “lol so what? is this supposed to bother me?”

    And from a red pill perspective it’s far easier to duplicate what men want from women during sex and outside the bedroom than what women need from men in both situations.

    “Of course, women will swarm like bees to honey when the first Malebots become commercially available.”

    Like she doesn’t get that that doesn’t bother the men who will buy these because those men don’t have ACCESS to those women anyway. They’re not losing anything. But those women have access to pretty much all men if they want/need it (if not as AF then at least as BB while they have AF on the side), so a large movement of men removing her access to them is a significant loss.

    This will be fascinating to watch play out…what happens when the majority of men refuse to commit and learn enough game to have fuckbuddies only, and the men who don’t do that all have sexbots to take care of their sexual needs, and ALL OF THOSE MEN have access to something like http://www.parsemusfoundation.org/vasalgel-home/ ?

    We live in interesting times, I’ll make us some popcorn.

  22. “It’s sad how men go into the woman’s frame and just get absolutely destroyed by it. Never step into her frame.”

    Well, sure. The problem is the nice deputy will help you step into her frame. And if you don’t, he’s going to stop being nice.

  23. My first thought was great! Less competition for pussy. But maybe that would not be the case since most men don’t play the game anyway?

    Would there still be as many beta orbiters?

    Would there be more lesbians?

    More male prostitutes?

    Bachelor tax?

    High prices on sperm? More artificial insemination?

    Sexbots in public? Dudes taking them on dates?

    Strange times.

  24. @blurkel

    What we are up against isn’t marriage, divorce, or any one institution. Those institutions are merely tools for legislated Hypergamy.That is the real enemy.

    Marrige no longer viable? The FI motivated government will cut straight to the point.Dont want to get married young man? That’s OK. You’ll be paying 60% income taxes until you man up and get a wife. Send check or proof of marriage license to 1 IRS Way, Washington DC…….

    As commenter “None” points out, if you decide to dodge your social obligation to support women and the FI accordingly a nice deputy will encourage you to do so under penalty of law. The reason we aren’t at that point yet is because enough women are getting married to not whine about it en masse.

    While I advise aware men to avoid marriage, I’d also encourage bluepill guys already been inclined to do so to take the plunge.Its selfish, but frankly most guys are so attached to the FI that they’ve adopted it as their core life philosophy.

    In modern times your worth as a man is defined by how well you help the FI .You’re married? OK. Have kids? Level up. Married a single mom with kids already? What a noble gentleman! We don’t encounter this dynamic as unplugged men ….but that is the social message everyone else around us preaches.Women encourage it, and men are the enforcers. If you’re reading this you really are a member of the 1% who are willing and able to step outside the groupthink. It’s so powerful I’d bet most of us would either be fired or heavily readlined in our work careers if our personal attitudes here were public knowledge.

    If a man cannot support a woman hes considered a member of the New Underclass, a social Ronin . If the title of Feudal Samurai is being a willing Beta servant to a woman and a brood of kids, being demoted to Ronin is getting divorced or dumped by a female.

    Hence the suicides. If someone believes they can no longer fulfill their purpose in life , theyre a lot more likely to give a Glock a blowjob.

  25. Wouldn’t the feminine-primary social order go deliriously ape shit if there was an honest dislike button? And woe betide a man would use it.

  26. @Minesweeper

    For all its being overblown, I really doubt this will significantly change things, will this really be that much better than a silicon sleeve?

    Rollo mentioned (and much of the ‘sphere has gone to great pains to point out) that third wave feminism’s “sex positivity” took women’s sexual agency and made it their only appeal to men. No cooking, no cleaning, no supporting, no staying home with the kids, no being a good homemaker; those activities are all looked down on and shamed between women. While they will argue to the contrary, modern women who come with none of those additional benefits are only good to men as a wet hole. If that wet hole also has a shitty attitude, and an AI wet hole feels the same but lacks the shitty attitude, what’s the functional difference between the two?

    The price. Even if it costs as much as a new car, the sexbot will be a much cheaper lay in the long run.

    Women have chosen to define themselves as “nothin but a series of holes” as Patrice O’Neal puts it. Sexbots put them out of that game.

    As for the Christian morality of it, it’s onanism plain and simple. It might fail to catch on openly among Christians, but behind closed doors… well…

  27. >>>>> A lot of our economy is Beta driven. When you go out as a single man who is very Red Pill aware, you can see the Betas wooing their dates when you scan the scene. If sexbots exist, then you can kiss that shit goodbye!!!

    so, what exactly is the loss….. New versions of Windows come out much less frequently? Less start-up businesses for “artisanal” cookies and pastries?? Lesser numbers of Kardashians?

    Which portions of your nearest super-mega-mall are you scared will disappear, and why do you think that such, will hurt you?

  28. I am willing to bet that should the technology advance far enough for female “sex” robots to be produced and be affordable for most men that there will be a concerted effort on behalf of the societal Feminine Imperative to have these robots banned/made illegal.
    In a future remake of Bladerunner, the Deckard character will be hunting sexbots.

  29. Please, all of you, buy sexbots so that we can finally relax and just have a couple of drinks at the bar with our girlfriends without fending off a hundred desperate pick up negs. Maybe some day you’ll be able to program them to love and admire you unconditionally like you’re mom did and then you’ll actually piss off.

  30. @Sun Wukong, no what I meant was is a sexhotbot really that better for a guy right now than a fleshlight or whatever ? The silicon sleeves are available, and fulfil a need, can a sexbot be better than that ? The sexbot will obviously have silicon washable bits, but can a machine really give a better experience than yourself or another female who can understand all the nuances etc ?

    A sexbot is just a silicon doll+AI?+the silicon sleeve. I just cannot connect with that at all being better than what is on the market now. Maybe you need to try a bot 1st.

    Its abit like when VR was 1st touted 25 years ago – WILL CHANGE EVERYTHING – and we will live our lives inside the machine etc… I feel this is abit like that. But ive been wrong before, many times.

    I dont even think VR porn is that great an idea.

    “As for the Christian morality of it, it’s onanism plain and simple.”

    Don’t forget onanism in the bible is getting slain by the Lord for NOT ejaculating inside your sister-in-law after having sex with her. So remember, IF your rutting away with your sister-in-law, remember to drop your baby batter before withdrawing. then your good.
    (caveat: this only applies after your brother is dead and she needs children from his bloodline)(if he is still alive there is a severe risk of death – from said brother)

    Jerkin off isnt mentioned anywhere in the bible, no matter how much certain christian churches would have you believe so.

  31. I think sex bots will likely be in the 21st century what the flying car was in the 20th.

    That aside, if sex bots ever become viable for the average man I see little but upside. Imagine if the average schlub can buy ongoing, private, legal access to sex on demand. Imagine the timed freed to pursue passions not related to women. Imagine the reduction in stress. Imagine the great mass of men going about their lives surrounded by women, and not distracted by them because they don’t need women to fulfill their one particular, universal need.

    Oh, some will say what about female companionship? What about love? What about intimacy? Three things as understood in the popular culture as mostly for the benefit of women, and might as well not exist for most men. Sex bots are the perfect solution.

    Men would still enjoy female companionship, but free of sexual tension and frustration. Men would freed of ridiculous material expectations. Freed of the emotional maintenance costs, and time demands that come with trying to combine companionship, and sex.

    Of course for the top 20% they continue to get whatever they want. So no change there. As for woman, they might suffer a bit in the adjustments, but they’ll finally have their freedom, and independence.

  32. For those of you who think it will be a one time payment…just think again…you rent the operating system and it degrades over time…..a great fucking bot turns sour and dry but you can re-up her OS for a price so she ‘loves’ you again. Why would we do it any other way? This is the genius of capitalism.

    So glad I’m an old fucker. The women who fall within my target range are mostly running on the old set of books. I’ll die before they are all gone.

    @Rollo; love the issues brought up here. I’ve been behaving like a redpiller all my life but never understood the way it works under the hood. You rock!

    fun old guy

  33. @Minesweeper

    I think you and I are picturing a different thing. You’re picturing a silicon sleeve attached to a series of joints and motors you can tell are joints and motors. I’m picturing what’s essentially a cyborg body with AI instead of a human brain, so it moves, looks, talks, and is for all intents and purposes a physical replacement of a human female. It just lacks the shitty attitude and the hypergamy. It’s a ways off, but it’s in the realm of reality. The first few generations will not be much different from what we have now (I’d argue real dolls were just the first generation of the idea), but the continued evolution and demand will lead for something that could convince you it were a real woman if it would just bitch about “the patriarchy” and steal half your shit.

    And since modern Christianity is all about interpretation, I’m sticking with the (widely held, like basically every churchian I’ve talked to) interpretation that Onanism is God’s take on masturbation as well. The whole story came from the belief that men only had a limited amount of semen anyway, so leaders needed to tell their people to use it to produce more followers instead of wasting it. Ancient ignorance no matter how you look at it.

  34. @bp

    I think sex bots will likely be in the 21st century what the flying car was in the 20th.

    I don’t. It’s probably a couple generations off, but the simple fact is that all the prerequisite technologies (robotics, AI, materials, biotech) are advancing at incredible rates regardless. Honestly all that has to happen is for there to be demand for the product. Seeing as “sex” is pretty much a universal demand among men, and with the sexless marriage epidemic and disenfranchisement affects the vast majority of them, I can only see demand for it climbing with the population.

    Flying cars are impractical for a number of reasons and will remain so for the foreseeable future. Sex bots? Not so much.

  35. “The long triangular grooves on the car had been formed within the death of an unknown creature, its vanished identity abstracted in terms of the geometry of this vehicle. How much more mysterious would be our own deaths, and those of the famous and powerful?”
    ― J.G. Ballard, Crash

    @Badpainter
    “Men would still enjoy female companionship, but free of sexual tension and frustration. Men would freed of ridiculous material expectations. Freed of the emotional maintenance costs, and time demands that come with trying to combine companionship, and sex.”

    @Rollo Tommasi
    “If we accept the Pareto Principle as a rough guideline, 80% of men are Betas who simply don’t care to, or accept that they don’t have the capacity to, concern themselves with learning how to “get laid with girls who are genuinely into them.” They’ll create every manner of rationale to convince themselves that the girl who solves his sexual thirst is genuinely into him, or he’ll opt for the most available, most feasible, means to resolve that sexual deprivation. The ubiquitousness of free, easily accessible, streaming hi-def pornography is a testament to this dynamic.’

    Immensely true

    “When the explorer Ernest Shackleton sailed in 1914 to the Antarctic, his goal was to cross the Antarctic continent with a small group of men. This dangerous feat, if accomplished, would bring tremendous honor to him and his country.

    Unfortunately, the boat Shackleton and his crew of twenty-seven sailed on, the Endurance, became trapped in thick ice that eventually splintered and sunk it. They were only eighty miles from the place where they were to begin crossing the frozen continent on skis, and with dogs hauling equipment and supplies. The development forced a radical change in plans.

    Suddenly Shackleton’s goal shifted from exploration to the men’s safety. They were stranded for twenty months under some of the harshest conditions earth can bring to bear on human flesh. Winds could blow up to 200 miles an hour and temperatures could drop as low as -100° F. The men had inadequate food, clothing, and shelter. Yet despite the seemingly unbearable trials they faced, they survived.

    Shackleton’s genius for leadership is said to have saved the men. He possessed important qualities that guided the men’s ingenuity, their cooperative spirit, and their ability to withstand the physical demands.

    Here are the qualities Shackleton demonstrated. Match each quality with the example that best illustrates the quality.

    Leadership Qualities
    Playful
    Nurturing
    Courageous
    Democratic
    Attentive
    Strong
    Resourceful
    Good judge of character
    Optimistic

    Examples of Leadership Qualities

    The “Boss”, as Shackleton was called, divided the dogs into six groups, and appointed a man to take care of each group. This led to dog racing competitions, which everyone enjoyed. Further, the plan enabled the men to systematically exercise the dogs. (Resourcefulness)

    When deciding whom to take with him on a rescue mission, Shackleton chose men who may have caused trouble if left with the larger group. (Good judge of character)

    When sailing on small, open boats in search of dry land in which to establish a camp, the men encountered stormy seas and bitter cold. They were caked with salt and ice, frostbitten, dehydrated, without sleep, and seasick. Shackleton stood up in his boat, despite his exhaustion and the danger of the rocking boat, so that the men could see him and keep the faith. (Courage)

    Shackleton joined the men in shaving their heads. (Playful)

    When the men were wet, drained, and exhausted, Shackleton kept his hands on the pulses of two particularly spent men. Whenever he noted a decline, he made hot milk and fed it to them. (nurturing)

    Three men, including Shackleton, had to scale icy peaks in an attempt to get help for the rest of the stranded men on Elephant Island. All of three of the men were wet, had only tattered clothes, and very little food. Shackleton knew that if they stopped hiking, they were in danger of being killed in a blizzard. They climbed for thirty-six hours straight without rest. (Strength)

    Despite the rigid class system that existed at that time, Shackleton treated each man as an individual. He discussed books with the sailors, considered the lowest class aboard the Endurance, and insisted that all men-including the scientists and officers-share the work equally. (democratic)

    When something went wrong, Shackleton explained the problem and announced his well-considered plan for moving forward. (optimism)’

    Alpha is a mindset

    Artificial AI Connections… Computers into women,,, Tinkerbell and Pan

  36. @ Sun Wukong

    The problem I see with sex bots are power supply/cost, and material durability. The second one especially. Silicone, and most elastic polymers break down over time, become stiff, brittle, and crack. They stain easily, and are sensitive to solvents and cleaning agents like bleach. Exposure to UV is bad, dyes break down with exposure to lightand change color, repeated contact with other polymers can cause damage. A fleshlight doesn’t suffer the same wear and tear as a animatronic robot which has particular problems where the soft materials are subject to repeated stresses at the joints and so forth. Combine the need for near perfect realism and it’s a helluva an engineering problem.

  37. @Badpainter

    I didn’t they wouldn’t have maintenance, but also keep in mind materials research is part of what I mentioned. Additionally, human skin isn’t all that durable. In fact, it dies and replaces itself on a very regular basis, each cell living only a few years before it becomes part of the dust in your house. It wouldn’t be impossible for someone to devise a nano machine system (already a similar idea proposed for human blood cells and immune systems) that routinely performs maintenance during *ahem* “downtime” to the skin as well.

    I really think they’re all very solvable problems that their respective fields will tackle before too long. It’ll just be a case of being aware of all the options and integrating it together in to a final product. The main thing I always point to is that we exist, so such an automaton is ultimately possible. It’s only a matter of when, not if.

  38. Porn is sexbot 1.0. That has already shifted the war of the sexes greatly. How many men aren’t chasing women, because they’ve already been satiated? I suspect the satiation is onesided, because women can’t get that same sexual gratification..they need the relationship or at least game to get them excited.
    I feel like I’ve been blessed with timing for being born, women seem to be sluttier than ever and at the same time more willing to date older men. Younger men beaten into submission by popular culture..leaves few of us men to give women the tingles. I went to my high school reunion and one of the former popular girls, who had worked for a while as a model in LA wanted to go back home with me(I was a nerd in HS). I wasn’t even close to interested in that lay up. To younger men I say, do things that scare you, and learn patience, and the world will be your oyster.

  39. Of course, the other possibility is a human clone with the necessary telemere regeneration systems (to negate aging) and a computerized AI brain instead of a human one in the head. That would be even further down the road and ethically dubious to some, but not an unrealistic idea within the next century I wager.

  40. Pardon me, skin cells have a lifetime that can be measured in weeks. Even worse than I recalled. SJF would probably be horrified by that mistake, hehe…

  41. @Bo jingles
    “Younger men beaten into submission by popular culture..leaves few of us men to give women the tingles. ”

    Not so much anymore least with the redpill.

  42. Imho VR will be a more readily available option before sexbots become a reality. You can combine VR with a “basic” sexbot to create a fully immersive experience. Yes, even VR is still in the developing stage, but it’s already quite good. I’d expect it to become more realistic & immersive within the next 10-20 years (given the incredibly fast development of computers, smartphones etc. I don’t think that’s an all too optimistic guess). I suppose I belong to the 80% of beta males. I’ve swallowed the red pill, but I don’t see why I should increase my SMV to attract females. Instead, I’ve gone MGTOW. I renounce male-female friendship and I do not seek STRs, LTRs or marriage/kids. I occasionally enjoy some pay 4 play and I wouldn’t say no to a low effort/low energy investment kind of ONS, but as that happens way to infrequently I see VR/Sexbots as a good way to channel that (for me!) useless sex drive. That being said, for the moment, porn still delivers quite well.

  43. Guys will go one of two ways with this sexbot stuff, just as they have with porn. Some will get their thrills virtually and rarely if ever avail themselves of the real thing. Others will enjoy the new virtual thrills for a while, but it will lose its novelty and they will eventually come back around to seeking real live women. The latter group of guys will come to the conclusion that nothing can really take the place of the real thing.

    Change of subject: I think the Red Pill is gradually becoming more second nature to me. I’m looking to change jobs. Had a brief phone interview with a place, they’re interested in talking to me in person, seems like a good place overall. But I’m thinking about backing out, as I’m 48 and my boss would be a chick young enough to be my daughter (estimated age 28, based on LinkedIn profile). Giving more thought to self-employment now instead.

  44. Poor women. They’re not going to be seen as sex objects anymore because we’ll have robots for that. Wait, why are they upset? Perhaps they actually LIKE the fact that men are sexual creatures.

  45. @Karl

    It will shift a lot of the economy because men would use more resources on the robots, so they will not be spending money on the service end of the economy. Women who would normally marry a Beta & have kids will either be single or have IVF with a bastard in a bjorn. Imagine everywhere is a ghetto image. No man around, & reproduction without fathers present creates a lot of trashy hethens roaming the streets. It would slowly turn us into the hood. The removal of fathers whether they are Alphas or Betas, is very destructive economically. The sons & daughters statistically don’t produce for an economy. They usually are lazy living off the government or turn into criminals. The economy would be losing future producers for the economic growth.

  46. Here’s a picture of Dr Kathleen Robinson:

    http://cafe-neu-romance.com/program/cnr-2015-lectures/cnr-2015-lectures-kathleen-richardson-(gbr)-an-attachment-crisis-gender-intimate-relationship-and-companion-robots

    Chalk this up as another example of the ugly feminist. And if you haven’t yet been completely convinced of the sheer utter wankery of feminist academia, these choice examples from the blurb of her presentation at an upcoming Robot Performance Festival (yes) in Prague coming up:

    “This paper will bring together two fields of research, the rise of companion robots with a gendered theory of attachment.” (WTF – these are specific fields of research?)

    This piece of academic masturbation gets to the heart of it:

    “I want to propose that the rise in companion robots is underscored by a particular vision of affect and intimate relationship that is an extension of market realm, and outside the affective relations typically expressed by women (and males) in caring roles. By bringing affect into the technological realm, robotic scientists participate in the redefinition of intimate relationship, reducing its elements to signals and scripts.”

    I am thankful I studied economics, not least because of a natural interest in it, but because it allows you to understand the fundamental principles underpinning all human interaction: value, perception of value, supply and demand, willingness to pay, operation of free markets, regulated markets, search and transaction costs, outsourcing etc. All are applicable in this example.

    If the advent of sex robots that effectively replace the modern functions of modern women doesn’t wake up the blue pill man, nothing will.

  47. This post reveals one very interesting fact, that male sexual behaviour is in general (alphas exempted) reactive to female hypergamic designs.

    Sexbots aren’t a victorious male thrust, it is an imposed defeated retreat, a retreat from sexual validity, pride and self esteem.

    A 1/4 of men don’t reproduce anyway, so no one will miss ‘creepers’ voluntarily removing themselves from the sexual marketplace.

    One shouldn’t underestimate the capacity of remarrying men to monopolise the marriage market and skew sex ratios. A man remarrying a single woman effectively means one man knocks out two women from the marketplace (unless of course marrying single mothers is your thing).

    Sexbots won’t amount to a hill of beans.

  48. Agreed that feminism will fear and fight sexbots.
    Agreed that sexbots will hurt the feminine agenda by decreasing the opportunity to consolidate on beta bucks.

    But it’s just check, not checkmate.

    I still think the feminist counter move to sexbots is the guaranteed wage, i.e. federal unemployment benefits, sans time limit, large enough for a single mom to afford a mcmansion, a car payment and a(nother) boob job. It will probably be written to cater to single moms, in deniable ways that can still be spun as equalist.

    Clearly sexbots empower betas to withhold the gravy train from epiphany girls past their freshness date. “The Voters” will see to it that the gravy train keeps flowing, but this time she won’t have to pretend to have a headache every damn night. A preemptive alimony benefit. A slew of new feminist social conventions (and Disney movies) will need to be deployed, but who’s going to fight that, the pre-whipped western boys? Maybe in the vein of Frozen, where the love of a man isn’t enough to save the princess.

    Sexbots will outrage and disgust them. So they will be quite smug when they gain the power to turn their own backs on marriage and leave those losers to their battery operated girlfriends. What happens to the dual mating strategy when uncle sam secures the provisioning side for her, without her having to pay her dues to the divorce-industrial complex? That’s a serious question Rollo, what happens?

    Will this delay the epiphany phase till early 40’s? Will she even need an epiphany phase? Who would she have to act pure for? Not the alphas who have been defiling her for years. Rich betas maybe?

    She won’t need to hop off the carousel voluntarily. She can ride it straight into the wall.

  49. My mind has been going non-stop thinking of ways one could market these damn things in the USA.

    At first, discretion would be key. Anonymous forums, reviews, websites, shipping. Discrete seminars in vegas…lol.

    Customization, or pre-made packages. Race, size, eye color, hair color.

    Want a blond asian with big tits?

    What about fetishes? Huge bubble asses? Non-human? Zombie chicks? Aliens? Two vaginas?

    A slew of accessories. Youtube videos on how to do makeup and hair. Clothing. Lingerie. Shoes. Leather. Cleaners. Maintenance kits. Perfume. Tattoos.

    Pussy scented lube? Matching classic sex toys, like dildos?

    Could they be marketed as a marital aid? To lesbians? To the less fortunate (disabled)? As mental health companions? Do studies and prove they improve lives of the lonely, and then get a doctor’s prescription?

    Health insurance forced to cover it? (there is the marketing ticket right there, “improves the lives of the lonely”)

    “Birth” certificates? Limited runs on certain styles? Signed and endorsed porn star editions? Signed and endorsed celebrity editions?

    Secondary markets? Trade-ins? Sexbot ebay?

  50. I have visions of marketing videos showing, in a classy fashion, how a man can have a real woman in his life and never have to face rejection or judgment.

    Believe me, it will be a beta that gets wealthy off of these things. A beta will know how to market them to other betas.

    Acceptance…validation…willingness…

    …yes, even you can find love.

    “You only live once, no need to spend that limited time alone”

    “Don’t live in regret”

    “You deserve a love of your own”

  51. The trick for marketing will be to consider them real and never back down from that view.

    They aren’t “bots” or “toys” or anything else that diminishes their value to the man that NEEDS it.

    Proper pronouns. She, her, them. NEVER “it” Even call them by a real name if possible.

    You NEED her, you DESERVE her, and SHE is REAL.

    I might have to seriously consider this market.

  52. @yaReally. I love your reversion theory. I completely agree. BTW, with your help my understanding of Game has EXPLODED this weekend. Watching those RSD guys just makes it so clear…

    All game is internal. A woman’s forebrain does not control her actions. Her limbic system does. You don’t to the face, you talk to the hindbrain. And you only need to say three things to her limbic system.

    1. I want you.
    2. I know I can have you.
    3. I don’t give a shit if you deny me because I’ll just fuck the next chick.

    Seriously. They might as well have a fucking sex button on their forehead! That easy. I have been doing the same thing to my wife when I want to fuck her for years without really understanding it. When Owen Cook puts his hand out to a chick he’s basically saying. “I want to fuck you. And when they take his hand her limbic system is saying “Ok”. I mean seriously. Mind Blown.

    And then it just gets better. Owen and Julian don’t stop once they know they could fuck a girl. Then they just start fucking her with their words. Keep hitting that reward center in their brain. You start negging her and her limbic system and her forebrain start spinning into a frenzy. “OMG this guy insulted me to my face but I still want him to fuck me. Why, what is going on? OMG, I hope he fucks me.” And then you pull back a bit and plant the seed of doubt in her brain that you may not want to fuck her for whatever reason. And then her forebrain and hindbrain are both like. “Oh God, Oh God… I want him to fuck me so bad… He’s changing his MIND! Evasive maneuvering!!!” Lol. I literally couldn’t sleep last night because of the implications!!!

    You can train them like a fucking dog!!! They are hard wired to do what we say! Women have literally evolved with a fucking override switch in their brain. Hypergamy is incredibly easy to control.

    It really gives new meaning to this quote from this article:

    There is a fundamental fear women experience in just the prospect of not having 100% control over their sexual selection, sexual strategy and ultimately optimization of their Hypergamy.

  53. Screw the feminists. I will just hire a womb and buy some eggs and hire a nanny to raise my kids. I don’t need a wife for reproduction or sex.

  54. In cities where young men outnumber young women, changes are needed. Unbalanced couples are everywhere: fit, good-looking, well-paid young men with short, chubby female trolls. It’s very disturbing.

  55. Does this mean we Will eventually see sexbot 2.0 for sale “as is” sitting atop a used tire at some yard sale as we drive by?

  56. “Does this mean we Will eventually see sexbot 2.0 for sale “as is” sitting atop a used tire at some yard sale as we drive by?”

    lol

    Depends on how much they are worth new. $5000+? Then yeah, people will buy used. Cheaper than that? Maybe not.

    How many dicks has the last chick you were with had? How would a bot be any different? Shit, you’d probably be it’s second dick at worst.

    With chicks, you’re probably their second dick today.

  57. benfromtexas – “It will shift a lot of the economy because men would use more resources on the robots, so they will not be spending money on the service end of the economy.”

    It will create an entirely new creative industry, similar to video games. The upper end impacts on material science and engineering will be enormous. Economies of scale will allow for technical applications in a wide range of other fields. Imagine CNA bots that lack the ethical problems of actual humans.

    Where funoldguy sees pernicious capitalism I see the synergy of open source development models, 3D printing/rapid prototyping, viral marketing and education generating a technical renaissance.

    Of course the first commercial prototypes will be Japanese and have tails and cat ears, but the extreme possibles will drive the industry. It’ll be a lot like how monetizing porn on the internet created the demand for online payments, streaming video, and faster, more powerful processors.

  58. I bring you another dispatch from the front line of today’s high-school social scene. My guarantee: don’t believe what I am about to say here. Check it yourself, esp. if you’re a parent of one of todayz teenz in a MC/UMC environ. Then be very afraid.

    Dating is dead. Among cis-gendered hetero teens that is.

    Remember how I reported last spring that teens now just go to dances, school functions and even prom as a group of friends? None of this “boy asks girl out” shit anymore.

    This is now true for what in olden times would be called “dating.” Instead of a boy asking a girl out and the couple doing a thing on their own, a group goes to a movie, or a local hangout, and the group sticks together. Then they go home.

    Yes means yes, anti-bullying and hyperfeelz sensitivity have won. If a boy is clumsy about asking a girl out, and it creeps her out, that’s assault and he gets detention or suspended. Just like Colgate.

    You know who does formal ask-you-out couples dating and still follows those rituals w/r/t proms and parties? Gay kids. They’re into it.

    Now is pairing off still happening? Of course. From out of a group two “special friends” could start something – but only after being part of the group first and getting that social proof from the group. And presumably the handful of alpha naturals can still do their thing, but they’re very few.

    What this means for the future Game I don’t know. My mind is still blown and I’m still processing this. One small consolation: some of this behavior can be linked to caution suggested by the seepage of RP thinking into the narrative. Modern dating/approaching is too fraught with danger and emotional peril for your sensitive, fragile soul. Best to hang in the basement with a box of tissues.

  59. Back on topic: in order to outlaw sexbots and VR software, a whole lot more has to fall into place. The bleating of a few feminist professors won’t do it. First there has to be a consensus, both on the left and the right, that personal bodily integrity – personhood if you like – should be outlawed. In the US this will require a constitutional amendment or a Supreme Court ruling abolishing the concept, something I do not see even this conservative Supreme Court doing, but who knows…

    But let’s not be too dismissive.

    The tea leaves tell me that the right likes state-controlled personhood because they can use it to outlaw birth control, outlaw gayness, prosecute fornication (esp. inter-racial), bust wankers for wanking, and force-birth more white babies. (And, most darkly, in some awful future, COMPEL abortions of “racial undesirables.” or others, as China did, for the benefit of the State). The radical left – apparently – now likes this concept too so they can chemically castrate bad hetero men (i.e., all men), tone police them to death for non-intersectionalist crime-think, and deny them the privacy to screw outside of a state-sanctioned ritual, plus jail if they wank off to porn or sex bots or VR or whatever, since the government can now regulate your bedroom again.

    But the left is not united on this. There is the sex-positive feminist wing which lobbies for the rights of pr0n actresses, strippers and sex workers (meaning those not being forcibly exploited by trafficking) to earn a living and raise their kids, and that food fight is only getting started, See Sweden and its schizoid approach to prostitution, not outlawing the offering of sex but criminalizing the purchase thereof by the man only.

    And ultimately, technology will do a work around (reach-around) no matter what wacky wanky laws get passed or proposed. Just as pr0n made possible the spread of photography, then film, then home video, then digital video, then streaming. Lust will find a way.

    All there will be left for social enforcement is the shaming should you be found out: hey Fred what was in that big long casket-shaped box from Amazon you got? Third one this month! Another shipment of guns you say? With hints of a blond wig sticking out of the packaging? And you say that “mannequin” we spotted on your bed is for first aid training? Do tell!

  60. @CaveClown

    Used? Nah. I’m thinking rentals will be all the rage. Stop by the girl shop, I’ll take that one please. Can I get her with a blonde wig? Very good sir, $75 for 24 hours, I’ll bring her out back. Can I interest you in our propriety SuperSweet(TM) personality upgrade for an extra $15?

    Actually, scratch that. Men want this to feel real. They’ll be an app for that. Like Uber. You log in, type in your specs and a time and place, then just show up and she’s standing at a street corner. ‘Hi, are you Jenny? It’s so good to meet you….’

  61. Not sure on the renting. Might cross the line on “creepiness”

    Hmmm but now that you mention it, what about buying a bunch of these things and pimping them out?

    Could open a sexbot escort service…

    Sexbot brothel…

    Sexbot brothel reality show…

  62. Doesn’t hypergamy exist, theoretically at least, for the benefit of the human race? Isn’t hypergamy an (admittedly highly flawed, fairly easily manipulated) form of natural selection?

  63. I honestly have my doubts about robotic sex partners, but you can’t ignore the want for sex and companionship. When you look at how immersive and ‘addicting’ something like World of Warcraft or Second Life become it’s just a short step to guys who relate to their dolls or Waifu as external beings.

    I’m leaning more towards the immersive Matrix like virtual reality option for men disconnecting from the world. Even still, I’m sure the feminine imperative will lobby against it or shame users for removing their interested stake in a feminine defined reality.

    I can’t help but point out that women will militantly defend legal, safe and convenient abortion, but they wont allow for the prospect of men replacing them with sex surrogates.

    I do agree with what Richardson is proposing when she says robot partners are a risk to healthy intersexual relations, but she’s right for the wrong reason.

    Men would be less motivated in seeking out artificial alternatives if an equalist social doctrine hadn’t turned women into sexual commodities. In that social environment there is simply no complementary interdependence between the sexes.

  64. “How many dicks has the last chick you were with had? How would a bot be any different? ”

    You can install a fresh vagina in the bot.

  65. Bad Painter-“I think sex bots will likely be in the 21st century what the flying car was in the 20th. “

    But oddly, it’s got some legitimately concerned like it isn’t going to be.
    I hadn’t heard about any legislation against it, so I googled it and this was the first listing.
    http://theantifeminist.com/feminists-seek-legislation-over-sex-bots/

    It mentions Jessica Valenti and has her claiming that sexbots would further objectify women. Now that’s a paradox. Something that would make men not need women, that would actually free them from the objectifying sexual attention that they want stopped, is objectifying. Didn’t think the conundrum of complaining about the sexuality of women being used in ads, but asking to have more fat models used sexually in ads could be outdone. But it did.
    The blog post also mentions the intended legislation having it illegal to use the bots in the privacy of your home (seems the best place to use them) without permission by some regulatory agency.
    Seems an obvious attempt to inject some assumed embarrassment at fitting a stereotype to dissuade men from it. More come out your parents basement type stuff.
    What if they could actually make something like it, and it reduced the trafficking that’s come back to the forefront. Every year, year and a half, news shows start doing stories on trafficking. I wonder what their response would be to sexbots would reduce human trafficking.

  66. “Doesn’t hypergamy exist, theoretically at least, for the benefit of the human race? Isn’t hypergamy an (admittedly highly flawed, fairly easily manipulated) form of natural selection?”

    In that line of thought…

    Could you argue that creating sexbots and having more lesser (beta) men check out of the procreating process cause the “cream to rise to the top” and therefore is actually a win for hypergamy?

  67. There won’t be a bachelor tax because it would disproportionately affect minorities who are less likely to marry.

  68. “There won’t be a bachelor tax because it would disproportionately affect minorities who are less likely to marry.”

    google “bachelor tax” and “childless tax”, we essentially already do have one.

    I am reminded of this as I get divorced and am switching my W-2 from “married, 2” to “single, 1”

    I am paying more, much much more.

    It’s a failure in most places, true. Doesn’t mean they won’t do it.

    The alternative is to pay people to mate, which is what Israel did if I recall correctly. That was a failure too.

  69. What I find kind of ironic is that the fear of having their sexual commodity devalued with a substitute is really a vicious circle for women. Egalitarian equalism has basically taught women from a very early age to strive for the Strong Independent Woman® ideal. I covered this in Equalism and Masculinity but what an equalist mindset attempts is to create independent individuals that have no interdependency and certainly no recognition of complementarity in men and women.

    With regard to women, even the thought of developing aspects of themselves that might be considered ‘value added’ features is offensive. Preparing oneself to be a better wife, mother, nuturer, help-mate, etc. only serves the the nefarious wants of men – exactly the opposite of what a SIW® ought to be doing according to ‘equalism’. Devoid of those aspects, women reduce themselves to the one value they have for men – sex.

    In essence they make themselves into sexual objects and then complain of being objectified by the men they don’t deem worthy of that one value, while hoping the men who are worthy (Alpha men) will objectify them long enough to have sex and then perhaps consolidate on monogamy with them. As such it’s no wonder that so many women conflate their sexual value with their personal value, and likewise become upset when that co-mingled value is objectified by an unworthy man, while hoping an apex man will appreciate her gladly accepted sexual-personal worth.

    Separating Values

    Conflating Values

    One of the major problems women have, and more than even some red pill men have, is the conflation of sexual market value with their intrinsic personal value as a human being.

    It needs to be emphasized that while personal value is influential in sexual market value, SMV is distinct from your value as a human being. I’m stressing this because, in the age Disney Princess empowerment, this conflation of the two has become a go-to social convention; and not just for women.

    What Korth suffers from is presuming her personal value is her sexual market value.

    It’s disruptive to her self-perceptions and ego-investments when that presumption is challenged by a man who doesn’t want to fuck her for reasons based on the intrinsic value she believes she’s entitled to by virtue of maturity and imaginings of self-sufficiency. Just as women aren’t aroused by men’s own self-concepts of virtuousness and aspirations of higher purpose, men aren’t aroused by whatever ephemeral self-perceptions a woman may have.

    […]When you attempt to quantify any aspect of human ‘value’ you can expect to have your interpretations of it to be offensive to various people on the up or down side of that estimate. There is simply no escaping personal bias and the offense that comes from having one’s self-worth attacked, or even confirmed for them.

    The first criticism I’ve come to expect is usually some variation about how evaluating a person’s SMV is “dehumanizing”, people are people, and have intrinsic worth beyond just the sexual. To which I’ll emphatically agree, however, this dismissal only conveniently sidesteps the realities of the sexual marketplace.

    Again, sexual market value is not personal value. Personal value, your value as a human being however one subjectively defines that, is a definite component to sexual market value, but separating the two requires an often uncomfortable amount of self-analysis. And, as in Ms. Korth’s experience here, this often results in denial of very real circumstances, as well as a necessary, ego-preserving, cognitive dissonance from that reality.

    Denial of sexual market valuation is a psychological insurance against women losing their controlling, sexual agency in their hypergamous choices.

  70. The outright denial of complementary interdependence is why equalism is so wrong. I cannot see equalism going away as a disease just because men find technological solutions to what it is they lack. In order for equalism to die (specifically the notion that women are the equal of men, rather than their complement), women must be forced to actually choose either a life of sterility, or financial dependence on another. I have no idea what the final form of that reckoning will take. It could be pandemic, it could be social unrest, it could be another world war, it could be some kind of societal awakening.

    That said, isn’t it jumping to a conclusion to say that equalism will die? I just read somewhere that science is ~5 years away from being able to create viable sperm from the stem cells of any individual (including women). If science both enables males to escape their biology (and reality), and lets women procreate without compromise, who is to say that this (to us absurd) status quo won’t find some equilibrium in the future?

    The true horror of this scenario isn’t so much that men will be excluded from procreation, it is that women will be willingly living entirely unhappy lives while raising children, and consider themselves enlightened and empowered for doing so.

  71. One of the major problems women have, and more than even some red pill men have, is the conflation of sexual market value with their intrinsic personal value as a human being.

    Isn’t that true for men? I mean once you get to that point that you are so comfortable in your own skin that you don’t care what anyone thinks of you and you start saying whatever the fuck is on your mind and doing whatever you want because you fucking love yourself and nobody is going to change your mind about that, and people love you for it. I mean that’s “Game”…

    You might think I’m saying “be yourself.” I’m not. I’m not saying a miserable Beta should just “be himself”, but when you get your game to a certain level you just become that guy.

  72. There’s basically two related points going on that are exacerbating the process of men only seeing women as sexually commodities and acting accordingly:

    @Fred Flange:
    “And ultimately, technology will do a work around (reach-around) no matter what wacky wanky laws get passed or proposed. Just as pr0n made possible the spread of photography, then film, then home video, then digital video, then streaming. Lust will find a way.”

    Along with this:

    @Rollo:
    “Preparing oneself to be a better wife, mother, nuturer, help-mate, etc. only serves the the nefarious wants of men – exactly the opposite of what a SIW® ought to be doing according to ‘equalism’. Devoid of those aspects, women reduce themselves to the one value they have for men – sex.”

    So we have the social consequences of equalism and feminism which destroyed the useful non-sexual/physical aspects of women. We also have the technology created by males that makes it more efficient to capitalize on that one aspect of women that they need. Technology is always becoming better and more efficient, and it really isn’t going away unless we see WW3 or something. It’s really no surprise that a guy who is a teenager now will only need pornhub and Tinder and better technologies we’ll see 5 or 10 years down the road to get access to sexual release even more easily that what we can predict now. He’s probably not going to ever want to bother with marriage or traditional dating.

    I do think technology is an even more important factor that the social and political consequences of feminism. There’s a reason people drive cars instead of ride horses now. Horses are much more expensive in terms of time and money on maintenance and care, where cars mostly just need gas and an occasional oil change. Something like marriage requires a ceremony, shared resources, cohabitation, etc. Where meeting a girl off of Tinder might only take a few minutes and a few dollars.

    I guess in one sense it really is just the sexual marketplace becoming more efficient and destroying traditions along the way.

  73. To be sure, sexbots, if they are ever realized, will seem like a solution for men. In one aspect they’ll solve men’s sexlessness, reduce actual rape even more, etc. and in another sexbots will seem like an incentive for women to reexamine their priorities and develop more value added aspects of themselves that a sexbot can’t deliver to a man.

    That’ll be the selling point, but women wont change like that, particularly in an equalist social environment that relies on feminine-specific entitlements.

  74. @Andy, read that whole post.

    The difference is women expecting their personal worth and self-image is makes them sexy. The expectation is that the boner test has some esoteric, intrinsic value component to it, and then women getting upset that men don’t get aroused by how validated women feel about themselves.

    Equalism has taught women that men should love and be aroused by what’s on their insides so never mind trying to be what any man would prefer her to be.

  75. “I think you and I are picturing a different thing. You’re picturing a silicon sleeve attached to a series of joints and motors you can tell are joints and motors. I’m picturing what’s essentially a cyborg body with AI instead of a human brain, so it moves, looks, talks, and is for all intents and purposes a physical replacement of a human female. It just lacks the shitty attitude and the hypergamy. It’s a ways off, but it’s in the realm of reality.”

    Yes, let’s be clear on what we are talking about.

    When we are talking sexbots capable of replacing women, the end point is literally an android (or whatever they call it then) that you cannot physically tell the difference, whether you are looking, touching, conversing or fucking. There are leaps yet to make regarding materials and programming, yes, but it is closer than one thinks. For Christ’s sake, we have 3D printers that produce intricate tools from powder today. What’s coming tomorrow?

    Androids may very well be biological in nature, so some composite which mimics flesh. It just depends on which tech wins out.

    Yes, the first generations of them (real dolls are NOT it…those are large sex toys) will be awkward and creepy, but allowing for a lack of interference from authorities and no collapse of society and thus tech, they will arrive.

    Succeeding generations will get better and better until it will be harder to tell them apart from real women, except maybe for the bitchiness. Heh.

    And at that point, it will be a mistake to think of them as purely a “sexbot”. If I make a crude analogy, they will be the ultimate iPhone that you can fuck.

    We all at this point have smart phones and tablets that we carry around that are an extension of ourselves. It expands our memory, and they allow us to do all sorts of shit on the fly using apps which we can add to or alter. We carry in our hands a device capable of doing things than would blow the fucking minds of people not that far back in the past.

    We also see the beginnings of the automated house, which with a computer being at the heart of it’s day to day function. Technology is inserting itself into not only our lives, but in us, more and more each day.

    Now imagine the CPU and programming needed to make a convincing sexual partner and companion. It’s enormous,but once you get there, do you think the ONLY think she’ll be good for is fucking and stroking your ego?

    It is not just sex which they will replace.

    They can be programmed to cook, clean, do finances, taxes, walk the dog (assuming it’s a real dog), be your secretary, etc, etc. ALL without divorce raping your, or leaving your or bitching at you, or getting old and unattractive. If you want to trade her in for a new, different model?

    NO PROBLEM!

    Do you want to add another one to both spice things up in the bedroom AND to keep up with all the shit in your life?

    NO PROBLEM!

    They can even be programmed to interact with one another, IF ya’ know what I mean…(wink, wink).

    Being designed, every single android will be represent the peak of female perfection as her owner sees it, a perfection ‘she’ will not lose over time. How many women can compete when every android (let’s call them Fembots for now!) produced is a physical 10? One that is devoted to you?

    Are you getting the picture, yet? No wonder some women are freaking, and no wonder the ugliest ones first.

    Apart from carrying a child, WHAT will women offer that these things cannot? And even then, all you really need is a donated egg and a lab, and at some point, maybe not even the donated egg.

    Now, I am not being pollyanna with this.

    The tech to get there WILL take a while, and you sure as hell will see some pushback, and I don’t claim there would be huge societal disruptions possible with it. My point is it WILL happen, and when it does, not only with the average woman find it hard to compete, but MOST woman will find it hard to compete.

    Men have spent ALL of civilization creating tools and devices to make their lives easier, more productive and happier. It is what we designed to do, to think and create our way around problems. Fembots will be just another step along that chain unless the FI finds ways to quash it. I don’t think it will. Men need sex, and they intend to get it one way or the other.

    Do a little experiment.

    Go on Backpage.com and look up body rubs and escorts. This may be more impressive for more urban areas, so if you are rural, check the nearest city.

    See how many businesses and women are operating out in the open, facilitating male sexual needs. This is only a portion.

    Open up your local Yellow Pages, and look up “Escorts”. You will likely finds ads, several if not a dozen, for services. Again, advertising in the YELLOW PAGES.

    Look up your local version of a free press newspaper, or check other sources for women placing ads looking for sugar daddies, women who are basically just high priced whores looking to trade sexual access for assets in the guise of a “relationship” or “arrangement”.

    Illegal trade is happening all around us, tolerated except for the occasional bust for show, to facilitate male sexual needs.

    Likewise porn, which is everywhere and covers all sorts of needs.

    The FI has tried to stamp this stuff out, some of it is as I said even illegal, but it flourishes everywhere. Will it manage to kill Fembots?

    Hell, with the trend line for ‘progressive’ social policies, with formerly illegal things like gay marriage and pot becoming legal around the country, I can see that before Fembots get here, prostitution will become legal.

    The point is twofold…

    One, despite its attempts, the FI has a hard time (get it?) limiting male sexual outlets because it is just so strong an impulse. It tries to make arrests and screech false stats about human trafficking to put a damper on it, but it can’t contain it, not really.

    Two, men are already paying for sex which is not “real” in the sense of the woman being into him, or having a relationship. They are actually willing to spend considerable amounts of money, and even risk arrest to get some of the ‘fake’ sex. Is it so hard to imagine they would embrace, literally, a Fembot which fulfills their sexual, and other, needs all in the safety and privacy of their own home?

  76. That’ll be the selling point, but women wont change like that, particularly in an equalist social environment that relies on feminine-specific entitlements.

    There would have to be a critical mass of unhappy women informing (intentionally or unintentionally) the next generation to capitalize on their femininity and looks at 23 and get the fuck back into the kitchen. Oh, and don’t get divorced.

  77. From The Fog of Menopause:

    As I work my way through the second draft of my next book, I’m beginning to see and build upon the real-world physical underpinnings women are subject to which motivate both the social buffers and the reasoning for their moving into the various mental phases of maturity I outline in the Preventative Medicine series of posts.

    At an earlier phase, women claim to deplore their sexual objectification while young and subjected to the lascivious attentions of the mythical Male Gaze. This is recently decried by the cat-call videos I mentioned above, but yet before these videos were ever contrived, older women, women in a later phase of maturity, had already decried how horrible it is to be “invisible to men” and how they yearn to hold male attention as they once did in their youth:

    Women feel invisible to the opposite sex at the age of 51, it emerged yesterday.

    A detailed study of 2,000 women revealed a large percentage felt they no longer received the level of attention they once did after hitting 51.

    Many even went as far as to admit they felt ‘ignored’.

    The women claimed their confidence plummeted after hitting 50 and blamed greying hair, having to to wear glasses or even struggling to find fashionable clothes.

    The lifestyle study, commissioned by herbal remedies company, A.Vogel, also found more than two thirds of women over 45 had walked into a room and felt ‘completely unnoticed’ by the opposite sex.

  78. “Equalism has taught women that men should love and be aroused by what’s on their insides so never mind trying to be what any man would prefer her to be.”

    Yeah, Whenever that Victoria Secret commercial with a bunch of fatties in underwear comes on TV I tell my wife “No amount of sexy underwear or shaming is going to make a fat woman attractive.”

    She gets so pissed.

  79. Watch this trailer and then tell me how believable this would be if the main character were a woman.

    Imagine there’s some new selective genetic engineering process that’s developed where boys and later men can be tailor bred to be exactly what every woman wants. Imagine a bio-eugenics program that wires all men’s brains to be in perfect physical shape, sexual only when a woman wants him, never to hurt her feelings, never violent, always knows what to say and when, essentially everything on this list.

    Essentially the perfect guy with no freewill agency who could be turned on and off at a woman’s whim. Would women hesitate to create that robot? Would women try to ban its development? Would they even have the insight to think about removing the freewill and randomness of men’s instincts and impulses that essentially make them men? Would there be a thought of removing that man’s humanity?

    If that sounds like the Blue Pill endgame you’re not too far off.

  80. “If that sounds like the Blue Pill endgame you’re not too far off.”

    And if that sounds like a plan for the extinction of the species due to inability to compete in the environment, you’re also not too far off.

  81. “And since modern Christianity is all about interpretation, I’m sticking with the (widely held, like basically every churchian I’ve talked to) interpretation that Onanism is God’s take on masturbation as well.”

    Born-again since 1998, and Onan died because he was greedy and wanted his brother’s inheritance and disobeyed a direct order from God in doing so.

    Oh, and this is “Stepford Wives” come to life. And I love it.

  82. IMO, If a woman was left to design her own robot exactly the way she wanted her reaction would be. “There’s something missing.”

    But I see what you’re saying. Take a super alpha, and then override the attraction impulse to make her the “perfect 10.” Yeah we’d be useless.

  83. When they wake up one day to find a bear in their urban yard they will complain about what is missing, but fail to identify that something is missing at the same time. Solipsistic Cognitive Dissonance.

    Of course the species won’t actually go extinct; what will happen is that the last human society to reject the FI will conquer and rule the world.

    Violence is the ultimate arbiter of everything.

Speak your mind

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