Jump to content
Galactic Turtle

MGTOW, Incels, PUA's, & MRA's

Recommended Posts

Dreamsexual
On ‎2‎/‎10‎/‎2019 at 12:30 AM, QueenOfTheRats said:

Yeah, there is a really big difference between a sex toy and a sex doll

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Howard
11 minutes ago, QueenOfTheRats said:

When they are "used up" they get disposed of in landfills, which is ironically the exact same location many murdered sex workers end up.

 

11 minutes ago, QueenOfTheRats said:

The idea that you should have a "right" to another person's body is an old concept, as is that people are objects that can be traded against their will. This is the bases for slavery, prostitution and (in some cases) sex slavery.

Wouldn't the same arguements be used to argue the benevolence of sex robot? I'd rather see used up robots in the trash than people. And since no one has a right to to another person's body but possession of non-sentient beings (cattle, pets) and matter (cars, houses) constitutes most of the law, why should sex bots be an exception? You expressed earlier that you are against any robots replacing a human. I beg to differ. There are days I'd love to put the pc at work on auto-pilot and argue with you instead of working under the condition that my income is garanteed. While at it, why not one day have all work delegated to robots while their production is distributed amongst us humans? What's awful about that?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dreamsexual

.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QueenOfTheRats
2 minutes ago, Howard said:

 

Wouldn't the same arguements be used to argue the benevolence of sex robot? I'd rather see used up robots in the trash than people. And since no one has a right to to another person's body but possession of non-sentient beings (cattle, pets) and matter (cars, houses) constitutes most of the law, why should sex bots be an exception? You expressed earlier that you are against any robots replacing a human. I beg to differ. There are days I'd love to put the pc at work on auto-pilot and argue with you instead of working under the condition that my income is garanteed. While at it, why not one day have all work delegated to robots while their production is distributed amongst us humans? What's awful about that?

I think there comes a point in society where we have to consciously decide we don't want to be a certain way anymore.  In the United States it took the Civil War to end slavery. If that had not happened, the way we discuss race relations today would be really different, right? Maybe it's acceptable to you to live in a world where objectification is perpetuated and endorsed by society, but I believe it's disastrous and pernicious. This history of objectification is too troubling when you really think about it, and the best predictor of the future is the past. Objectification is something we should be phasing out of society, not perpetuating in any form. Maybe if we purge it from society it will eventually stop being such a prevalent fetish for people. Because, as I said before, our fetishes don't develop in a vacuum, they are learned. This is something we need to unlearn, guys.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sure rants alot

I struggle with this idea at times. On the one hand, if a person is married/in a committed relationship with someone who is no longer sexual (disease, injury, loss of interest) and they want to pursue using a robot/ doll, would that be better than committing adultery with an actual human? To me that is more of a toy.

 

Also as far as people like prostitues ending up in the trash, those are not really sex related crimes. If someone is a serial rapist/murderer/child molester they tend to be very violent and enjoy the power/control they have over someone, they enjoy the pain the inflict, they enjoy the blood, they enjoy the thrill of evading being caught. I'm not so sure a robot could ever satisfy those types of needs/urges.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Woodworker1968
2 hours ago, QueenOfTheRats said:

Some people don't experience romantic love at all.

True.

 

To some people, being mean to others is love. To some, bossing someone else around is love.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Woodworker1968
5 hours ago, Sure rants alot said:

This is just an FYI but I just checked youtube and there is a MGTOW review for Cherry 2000. I think we are kind of headed in this direction whether or not we want to go there. The movie does explore how real women are devalued because of the female bots...bots who never age, who never say no, who do everything they are told to do. etc. etc.  It's a sci fi movie and I know that not everyone is into sci fi but the reviews are interesting.  Sort of like another movie The Stepford Wives.

It's rather terrifying to think about in my opinion. Kind of makes me wonder if, under the right circumstances, women might one day be completely phased out and the world will consist of men and their lifelike bots. *sigh*  Well, this was kind of deep, even for me 

Stepford wives or no Stepford wives, I'd love to have a lovebot. She'd be my ideal of beauty, but she'd have a perfectly blank bottom because she wouldn't need sex. She'd be programmed instead to enjoy hugs, making artwork, and the kinds of creative activities I enjoy.

 

I don't think women will be phased out completely. Worst case scenario might be something like inner cities inhabited by men and their female bots, with women living out in the suburbs. If a woman has a baby girl, she gets to keep her and raise her, but if she has a baby boy, men come from the city to take him away, raise him, and eventually give him his own female bot. In exchange for baby boys, the men from the cities would barter stuff like gadgets and repaired malebots (because the women would wear them out by having them lift heavy things, take out the trash, mow the lawns, etc etc).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QueenOfTheRats
1 hour ago, Woodworker1968 said:

True.

 

To some people, being mean to others is love. To some, bossing someone else around is love.

That's not love either, and thinking that means you should go to therapy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QueenOfTheRats
3 hours ago, Dreamsexual said:

Queenofrats:

Let me ask you bluntly.  

I intend to get a doll in the future.  How does that knowledge affect the way you intend to treat me?  And would you like to see sex dolls banned/made illegal?

You can't help what your sexuality is, but you can think critically about it. People have been mean to me my whole life, abused and objectified me, but no, I would be kind to you.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QueenOfTheRats
1 hour ago, Woodworker1968 said:

Stepford wives or no Stepford wives, I'd love to have a lovebot. She'd be my ideal of beauty, but she'd have a perfectly blank bottom because she wouldn't need sex. She'd be programmed instead to enjoy hugs, making artwork, and the kinds of creative activities I enjoy.

 

I don't think women will be phased out completely. Worst case scenario might be something like inner cities inhabited by men and their female bots, with women living out in the suburbs. If a woman has a baby girl, she gets to keep her and raise her, but if she has a baby boy, men come from the city to take him away, raise him, and eventually give him his own female bot. In exchange for baby boys, the men from the cities would barter stuff like gadgets and repaired malebots (because the women would wear them out by having them lift heavy things, take out the trash, mow the lawns, etc etc).

It's such a black and white version of the world, I don't think that would be humanity at it's best.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QueenOfTheRats
3 hours ago, Sure rants alot said:

I struggle with this idea at times. On the one hand, if a person is married/in a committed relationship with someone who is no longer sexual (disease, injury, loss of interest) and they want to pursue using a robot/ doll, would that be better than committing adultery with an actual human? To me that is more of a toy.

 

Also as far as people like prostitues ending up in the trash, those are not really sex related crimes. If someone is a serial rapist/murderer/child molester they tend to be very violent and enjoy the power/control they have over someone, they enjoy the pain the inflict, they enjoy the blood, they enjoy the thrill of evading being caught. I'm not so sure a robot could ever satisfy those types of needs/urges.

I think it is a power thing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
uhtred
7 hours ago, Dreamsexual said:

It varies a lot.  From my experience (on sex doll forums and elsewhere), the users of sex dolls often fit into one of the following broad categories: people who can't have normal sex relationships (because of disability, or psychological issues, or health, etc); people or couples wanting a sex toy; mgtows; and digi/objectumsexuals.

Sex dolls are so limited now, that I think only a very small number of people use them. Those people may not be representative of the ones who would interact with more sophisticated dolls.  Lets face it, the modern dolls are really just heavy lump of plastic that provides the same sort of use as very much simpler, cheaper, more convenient sex toys. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
uhtred
6 hours ago, QueenOfTheRats said:

So the love you feel for your pet or your grandma doesn't count?

I think the word "love" is used to mean a lot of different things.  To me love of a child, of a pet,  of ones country, of ones favorite song, and of ones spouse are all completely different things. We need better words.

 

A person can be a very  good friend but not be the same thing as a romantic love - which for me requires sexual interaction.  (sexual interaction doesn't necessarily imply love for me, I could imagine casual sex, and even engaged in in decades ago. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
uhtred
6 hours ago, QueenOfTheRats said:

There are also a lot of artistic nude photographs where the head and arms are cropped out, I'm sure you have seen them...and think about the way mannequins that sell clothing are designed to have no heads or faces. Serial killers also have a habit of removing heads and hands of their victims before disposing of their body, and necrophiles will often depersonalize their victims by covering their faces during sex. Though this they render their victims anonymous objects. This is an extreme example, but I think sex dolls are on a spectrum with this. When they are "used up" they get disposed of in landfills, which is ironically the exact same location many murdered sex workers end up.  Idk, it seems to be a strong enough theme that there has to be some sort of psychology behind it. That coupled with people's need to have sex with an object rather than a person(when objectification is a big thing in our society)doesn't seem to happen on accident. Our sexuality doesn't exist in a vacume, it's a reflection of the world we live in. For many years, consent wan't even a thing, and people just raped one another. The idea that you should have a "right" to another person's body is an old concept, as is that people are objects that can be traded against their will. This is the bases for slavery, prostitution and (in some cases) sex slavery.

I haven't seen those sorts of photographs - but my exposure to art is very limited so I don't doubt they exist -  just news to me.  I personally fine mannequins creepy - though I presume female mannequins are designed to sell clothing to other women.  I don't know why they are armless and headless - seems strange to me, but I agree that many are. 

 

Of course I also don't get the current generation of sex dolls.  They are extremely expensive and ... well .. don't do anything. I  mean why not watch porn and use a conventional sex toy at about X500 less cost and a lot less inconvenience.  

 

I'm thinking of future sex dolls that can act sufficiently human to allow the fantasy that they are real people for a while.   Still wouldn't work for me - far to humiliating.  Don't know about others.   (The same argument is why I have no interest in prostitutes - the idea that they only way I can have sex is through a business transaction seems really depressing. I'd prefer to believe that there are women out there who find me attractive, even if my wife isn't one of them).

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
uhtred

People seem to be assuming that the sex bots would be female and only used by men.     I wonder how many women would consider using a male sex bot if it could be programmed to perform the sexual actions that they enjoyed.   Vibrators are pretty popular for women, I wonder if a sex bot would just be like that but more so.

 

Of course an asexuality forum is probably not the best place to get opinions on the usefulness of sex bots......

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Howard
48 minutes ago, uhtred said:

Vibrators are pretty popular for women, I wonder if a sex bot would just be like that but more so.

I agree. I think objectification has a longer history with men because men had way more purchasing power than women, except for the past 50 years. Society evolving, sadly, caused men to start becoming objecfied instead of women stopping being so : more ads, music videos with dancers, sex symbols etc. Women are catching up fast to men instead of men unlearning their behaviors.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Howard
ob·jec·ti·fi·ca·tion

/əbˌjektəfəˈkāSH(ə)n/

noun
noun: objectification; plural noun: objectifications
  1. 1.
    the action of degrading someone to the status of a mere object.
    "the objectification of women in popular entertainment"
  2. 2.
    the expression of something abstract in a concrete form.
    "the objectification of images may be astonishingly vivid in dreams"
     
    I believe QueenofRats uses the first definition of objectification to make her point. To me, degrading someone to the status of an object would be using that person all his or her useful life then throwing them out into retirement in a substandard lifestyle when they are no longer useful. To me, freeing people to do what they like is the emancipation of them, not their objectification.
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SkyenAutowegCaptain
12 hours ago, QueenOfTheRats said:

I think it would be better if people just stick to their hand and fantasizing.

that just made me laugh and splutter my coffee 🎂 🎂 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dreamsexual
On ‎2‎/‎10‎/‎2019 at 6:50 AM, uhtred said:

Sex dolls are so limited now, that I think only a very small number of people use them. Those people may not be representative of the ones who would interact with more sophisticated dolls.  Lets face it, the modern dolls are really just heavy lump of plastic that provides the same sort of use as very much simpler, cheaper, more convenient sex toys. 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dreamsexual
On ‎2‎/‎10‎/‎2019 at 6:59 AM, uhtred said:

People seem to be assuming that the sex bots would be female and only used by men.     I wonder how many women would consider using a male sex bot if it could be programmed to perform the sexual actions that they enjoyed. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Woodworker1968
6 hours ago, Dreamsexual said:

Some academics seem to think human/robot romance is inevitable in time

It wouldn't be a thing if there was no demand for it. In that sense, we're just talking the old-fashioned law of supply and demand.

 

Yes, some people can get all judgmental about the kinds of men who'd want bots or sex dolls, but one has to understand it in the context of the underlying problem. Sure, some men who want bots or dolls just want to act out their fantasies which the rest of us would find unacceptable. But others (including myself) would want one because they just want to give and receive love, and they're tired of rejection after rejection by women. Maybe these guys have had the bad luck to have the hots for women who turned out to be narcissists. Surely a sizable percentage of these men have HFA and neither know nor care about the Unwritten Rules of Dating.

 

So, I don't think people should jump to conclusions about men who'd want a bot or a doll. Not all such men want one just so they can keep it hidden and do sick things to it.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dreamsexual
On ‎2‎/‎10‎/‎2019 at 5:18 PM, Woodworker1968 said:

It wouldn't be a thing if there was no demand for it. In that sense, we're just talking the old-fashioned law of supply and demand.

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
uhtred
11 hours ago, Dreamsexual said:

True. Interestingly, surveys indicate that a lot of men would be willing to sleep with a sex doll.

 

Some academics seem to think human/robot romance is inevitable in time:

 

 

I think there are a lot of details to consider.   Try one out as a masturbation device is one thing.  Be willing to put up with the cost and not insignificant inconvenience is  different.  OTOH are we talking about the current generation of sex dolls that are barely better than the blow-up dolls that have been around for ages, or future ones that can react and move. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
uhtred
11 hours ago, Dreamsexual said:

Not as many as men.  There are already male sex bots, but mostly they are purchased by gay men.  I guess it's a bit like porn, mostly for men.

Not wanting to get so explicit, but without motorized parts, there a a very limited number of sex acts that current generation dolls can engage in. I think those are more likely to be compatible with male humans than female humans, though there are a few options for female humans. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dreamsexual
On ‎2‎/‎10‎/‎2019 at 9:31 PM, uhtred said:

OTOH are we talking about the current generation of sex dolls that are barely better than the blow-up dolls that have been around for ages, or future ones that can react and move. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Karret
On 1/19/2019 at 8:47 AM, Dreamsexual said:

That seems demonstrably untrue, IMHO.

 

For a start, incels actually want sex with women, but are 'forced' to remain celibate because they are consistently rejected.  Whereas Mgtow either choose simply to only have casual sexual/romantic relationships or choose to leave the dating and sex scene altogether.  That's a huge psychological and ideological difference - incels are still seeking external female validation, whereas mgtows have opted out the whole of external female validation and gain their sense of identity entirely internally.

 

PUAs are pick-up-artists.  They are focussed on giving women what they think women want in order to maximise their sexual activities.  In other words, they are psychologically similar to incels (obsessed with sex and external female validation), but are they the mirror reverse in action, behaviour and result.  They see themselves as the true alphas, whereas incels consider themselves the true zetas.  Both see women primarily as sexual objects, and obsess over getting laid, but PUAs have self esteem and succeed, whereas incels have self-loathing and consistently fail.

 

MRAs are usually egalitarians who wish to see the excesses of feminism and gynocentric cultural practices curtailed and a rebalancing of institutional gender power structures.  Their goals might well be shared by many within the manosphere, including some traditionalists, politically minded mgtows, and even incels and PUAs.  Generally, the big difference is that traditionalists and MRAs actually think they have a genuine chance at changing society, whereas mgtows have either given up and just made a personal choice to ignore it all, or they think that the political/social solutions are beyond egalitarianism and lie in soft patriarchy (a view shared by some traditionalists).

 

I hope that helps :)  And of course, I'm only speaking from my own understanding, other manosphere folk might think I've got it wrong.

 

 

Ahh okay.

I considered them similar for the fact that they seem to like shit talking women as a whole. XD

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
gisiebob

didn't think this thread could be more of a trashfire.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...