A fembot bashing video by the New York Times

General chat about fembots, technosexual culture or any other ASFR related topics that do not fit into the other categories below.
Post Reply
User avatar
Silkscreen
Alternate account
Posts: 162
Joined: Thu Jan 22, 2015 12:25 pm
Technosexuality: Transformation
Identification: Cyborg
Gender: Female
x 1
Contact:

Re: A fembot bashing video by the New York Times

Post by Silkscreen » Thu Aug 09, 2018 7:11 am

I do not think any woman is more afraid of sexbots as they were afraid of hookers. You don't want your husband to have one at home, or at your leisure residence, and that was it. Maybe he let a dominatrix bash him, in her lair? Well, that may be fun but if you aren't into it … as long as he's caring for you and the children … it's just more sex than you ever want to handle.

Please watch the video again and replace all the occurences of "sexbot" with "hooker", and you see the cheap showmanship.

Duuuuu, hookers … bad thing, hookers … duuuuuuu … men only like … hookers … duuuuu … it's the coming false standard … hookers … duuuuuu … all women must be afraid of … hookers :-S

It's so ridiculous.

User avatar
Uncom
Posts: 363
Joined: Thu Sep 08, 2016 10:12 am
Technosexuality: Built
Identification: Human
Gender: Male
x 14
x 51
Contact:

Re: A fembot bashing video by the New York Times

Post by Uncom » Thu Aug 09, 2018 7:28 am

h
Last edited by Uncom on Fri Jan 05, 2024 5:21 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Saya
Posts: 419
Joined: Sat May 07, 2011 5:04 pm
Technosexuality: Built
Identification: Android
Gender: Female
Location: Right here, silly.
x 14
x 8
Contact:

Re: A fembot bashing video by the New York Times

Post by Saya » Thu Aug 09, 2018 7:38 am

Robotman wrote:I don't think this is so much a "left vs right" thing as an "authoritarian vs libertarian" thing.
I would argue that it's more an example of entitled idiots talking out of their asses most of the time, on both "sides" regardless of political ideology or social mores for the sake of making clickbait and getting attention.

There's always going to be people attempting to claim that some paraphilia or sexual lifestyle is going to somehow cause the downfall and endangerment of our society. Be it arch-conservatives arguing that homosexuality will result in the erosion of "family values" (whatever those are supposed to be, anyway), or hyper-leftists arguing that BDSM is an endorsement of violence against women. Both fall prey to the biased, skewed thinking that there's one root cause for a particular pitfall of society, perceived or actual, when in reality it is a host of other causes ranging from societal pressures to the state of the economy.
"If the time should ever come when what is now called science, thus familiarized to men, shall be ready to put on, as it were, a form of flesh and blood, the Poet will lend his divine spirit to aid the transfiguration, and will welcome the Being thus produced, as a dear and genuine inmate of the household of man."
- William Wordsworth

User avatar
Silkscreen
Alternate account
Posts: 162
Joined: Thu Jan 22, 2015 12:25 pm
Technosexuality: Transformation
Identification: Cyborg
Gender: Female
x 1
Contact:

Re: A fembot bashing video by the New York Times

Post by Silkscreen » Thu Aug 09, 2018 7:43 am

Uncom, but you don't expect your wife to do the housework, do you? That's what you pay the janitor for.

hint hint.

User avatar
Silkscreen
Alternate account
Posts: 162
Joined: Thu Jan 22, 2015 12:25 pm
Technosexuality: Transformation
Identification: Cyborg
Gender: Female
x 1
Contact:

Re: A fembot bashing video by the New York Times

Post by Silkscreen » Thu Aug 09, 2018 8:43 am

Ignorance would be bliss. That's why I apply ignorance to those fearmongering lunatics.

User avatar
Silkscreen
Alternate account
Posts: 162
Joined: Thu Jan 22, 2015 12:25 pm
Technosexuality: Transformation
Identification: Cyborg
Gender: Female
x 1
Contact:

Re: A fembot bashing video by the New York Times

Post by Silkscreen » Thu Aug 09, 2018 9:03 am

Slightly related: A recent poll "American's views on the Media" found people have most trust in … The Weather Channel. Maybe because they don't sell forecasts for truths and because meteorologists aren't exactly known for taking advantage from of the storms they predict? (though they seem, sort of, fascinated by the thing.)

User avatar
Uncom
Posts: 363
Joined: Thu Sep 08, 2016 10:12 am
Technosexuality: Built
Identification: Human
Gender: Male
x 14
x 51
Contact:

Re: A fembot bashing video by the New York Times

Post by Uncom » Thu Aug 09, 2018 9:07 am

h
Last edited by Uncom on Fri Jan 05, 2024 5:20 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Silkscreen
Alternate account
Posts: 162
Joined: Thu Jan 22, 2015 12:25 pm
Technosexuality: Transformation
Identification: Cyborg
Gender: Female
x 1
Contact:

Re: A fembot bashing video by the New York Times

Post by Silkscreen » Thu Aug 09, 2018 9:25 am

I just imagine a law which requires media to have the a "probalitity-of-occurence-meter" layed over all their news shows and if they hadn't collected sustainable data to backup their claims, it's required to read 0%.

Odd enough, that was good practice in the 19th century! E.g. German newspapers had put N.T. at all dubious stories, which meant "not testified". If we had such a practice today, they had to put it on their anchor's pocket square, I guess.

User avatar
Silkscreen
Alternate account
Posts: 162
Joined: Thu Jan 22, 2015 12:25 pm
Technosexuality: Transformation
Identification: Cyborg
Gender: Female
x 1
Contact:

Re: A fembot bashing video by the New York Times

Post by Silkscreen » Thu Aug 09, 2018 9:39 am

Oh, they can tell all the crap they want. They are just required to have it labelled "fiction" if they can't backup it happened exactly the way they described it.

User avatar
Stephaniebot
Posts: 1918
Joined: Thu Oct 23, 2003 12:13 pm
Technosexuality: Transformation
Identification: Android
Gender: Transgendered
Location: Huddersfield
x 2
Contact:

Re: A fembot bashing video by the New York Times

Post by Stephaniebot » Thu Aug 09, 2018 1:28 pm

Seen another article today about a gentleman who is terrified of complimenting, or talking to women for fear of ramifications. Not that anyone would want to compliment me on looks, I'm sure, but...a very sad state of affairs.

Even sadder was the number of comments by Feminazi's wanting to complain about him, for suggesting that its a bad thing

:cry:
I'm just a 'girl' who wants to become a fembot whats wrong with that?

User avatar
Silkscreen
Alternate account
Posts: 162
Joined: Thu Jan 22, 2015 12:25 pm
Technosexuality: Transformation
Identification: Cyborg
Gender: Female
x 1
Contact:

Re: A fembot bashing video by the New York Times

Post by Silkscreen » Thu Aug 09, 2018 3:23 pm

Honestly, I can't understand that either. It's the same whining, just reversed direction. Boys … hey, boys! … –crickets– … look,Tits!

Okay, now that I have your attention … if you have problems complimenting women who deserve it, your mother-detector needs to be adjusted. No prob there, you have that thing built into you. All of you. But you have to understand it's a receiving end problem if it doesn't work properly. It's not women's fault if you fall for witches.*

Stay away from women with psychological problems. It's simple. You can sense it. Your mind has a detector dedicated for finding agreeable women. It's just out of tune because people told you women and men are the same. Because if you tune it to agreeable person women turn gray and uninteresting as other men are. Because that's what you do with men – you ignore them, mostly.

Are you totally, romantically moved by a woman? Does she make your heart beat harder? Does she make you sweat? Go for it. Stop thinking, damnit! :lovestruck: :lovestruck: :lovestruck:


*And I know what I'm talking about, because I am a witch. Just a nice one, who only beats you up during sex, not claiming you did, or had started it.

User avatar
Silkscreen
Alternate account
Posts: 162
Joined: Thu Jan 22, 2015 12:25 pm
Technosexuality: Transformation
Identification: Cyborg
Gender: Female
x 1
Contact:

Re: A fembot bashing video by the New York Times

Post by Silkscreen » Thu Aug 09, 2018 6:17 pm

Watching Weird Science again (thanks to that stupid collection of video snippets) I found its soundtrack featured O.M.D.'s Tesla Girls. Well, they also did Maid of Orleans. So much for digging tough women. :nerd:

User avatar
Miss Pris
Posts: 106
Joined: Tue Aug 07, 2012 11:27 am
Technosexuality: Built
Identification: Cyborg
Gender: Female
Location: The exotic occident
x 8
x 4
Contact:

Re: A fembot bashing video by the New York Times

Post by Miss Pris » Tue Aug 14, 2018 2:51 pm

The video has some points, but they wrongly attribute a confluence of social phenomena that existed well before the popular idea of "fembots" to recent images and ideas of gynoids. I've mentioned before on this forum that "feminism" includes SO many more forms of this critique than just the well-known varieties, such as radical feminism (which opposes fembots very strongly, as I'm sure everyone knows); as a feminist critique of popular images of women and beauty in social media, it's a fair commentary. They over-extend themselves however when they apply the current incarnation of "woman are there for men to look at" to either the machinic OR the artificial. This idea of women (and the critique of it) have been around for a VERY long time. You could even make the argument that the feminist academic critique of women's roles in society begins with Christine de Pisan in the middle ages. (Of course, I can't make the claim that the idea of an artificial person didn't exist yet, as Heron probably created such automata in ancient Europe, and the story of Galatea probably pre-dated him - before anyone jumps in with that - but I doubt these ideas were daily talking points.) Trying to blame "fembots" for something people previously blamed on other groups, images, power dynamics, etc. is just going to make people's eyes roll. We hear this argument again and again. Fill in the blank for what single-factor issue is "wrong" with society this week.

If someone's doing feminist critique "right" then they should be welcome to alternative interpretations and well-aware that few social phenomena have just one cause. There's always a deeper history to look at, and these vloggers (which is what they are essentially - no matter who's footing the bill) ignored it so they could make a sound-chunk video. Everything has a sound-chunk video about it now. As the saying goes about opinions... but now, all the assholes are video-capable.

User avatar
Sentient6
Posts: 153
Joined: Mon Aug 29, 2011 1:35 am
Technosexuality: Transformation
Identification: Human
Gender: Male
x 1
Contact:

Re: A fembot bashing video by the New York Times

Post by Sentient6 » Tue Aug 14, 2018 5:00 pm

Why is an ASFR forum even making reactionary dismissals of feminism when we could be upholding GLORIOUS CYBORG FEMINISM?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Cyborg_Manifesto

User avatar
Silkscreen
Alternate account
Posts: 162
Joined: Thu Jan 22, 2015 12:25 pm
Technosexuality: Transformation
Identification: Cyborg
Gender: Female
x 1
Contact:

Re: A fembot bashing video by the New York Times

Post by Silkscreen » Tue Aug 14, 2018 6:31 pm

…but now, all the assholes are video-capable.
all of them. That's the difference to before.

But it's a good thing! There's so much of this stuff out there, hardly anything of it matters any more. It's the cacophonic ending to one-way "communication". Sound bites. Video snippets. Slurred with random talk.

User avatar
Miss Pris
Posts: 106
Joined: Tue Aug 07, 2012 11:27 am
Technosexuality: Built
Identification: Cyborg
Gender: Female
Location: The exotic occident
x 8
x 4
Contact:

Re: A fembot bashing video by the New York Times

Post by Miss Pris » Tue Aug 14, 2018 8:52 pm

Silkscreen wrote: It's the cacophonic ending to one-way "communication". Sound bites. Video snippets. Slurred with random talk.
I love it - you make the whole internet sound drunk! :P

Post Reply
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 17 guests