Your ideal fembot is..........

The Collector · Post by **The Collector** » Thu Aug 18, 2005 6:20 am

Can one vote both? This is a fembot after all, whos to say it can't be programmed to be one or the other on command?

fection · Post by **fection** » Thu Aug 18, 2005 9:01 am

I'm not sure I'd like to own a fembot at all. What appeals to me is the fantasy of this beautiful machine failing to appear human. And partly there's something about a woman 'really pretending' to be a machine as well. But that's not to say I wouldn't be curious if the opportunity arose.

1001011001 · Post by **1001011001** » Thu Aug 18, 2005 3:23 pm

For me, it would be a toy. I could never see myself developing the type of strong emotional bonds that would exist for a companion and at the most, it would be a strong sentimental attachment sort of like one has for his classic car. Would I be deeply upset if she were to suffer irrepairable damage and have to be scrapped? Sure, but I can't see myself truly mourning the loss as I would over a close friend or relative who dies.

Besides, the 'toy' aspect in my mind allows me to do things to her that I wouldn't bring myself to do to a companion.

droidlvr · Post by **droidlvr** » Thu Aug 18, 2005 6:02 pm

I'm with those who lean towards seeing an object for what it is; an object.
To me,that's what this ASFR thing is all about: a hetro fantasy for the female object so that you and I CAN DO ONTO this object what you CAN'T do onto flesh and &1@@).That is all.

DrFranklin · Post by **DrFranklin** » Fri Aug 19, 2005 4:25 am

Fembots are a control fantasy, a sex object. I also enjoy erotic mind control stories too.

This seems to be a common lesbian fantasy as well. I enjoy Trilby Else & Tabico's stories, which have been referenced on this board.

Mirage · Post by **Mirage** » Fri Aug 19, 2005 4:32 am

Must be a companion for me....

If I want a toy, I got all my transformers collection to play with! (none sexually, of course... Sick bastards...)(L)

Mirage

keraptis · Post by **keraptis** » Fri Aug 19, 2005 6:43 am

DrFranklin wrote:Fembots are a control fantasy, a sex object. I also enjoy erotic mind control stories too.

This seems to be a common lesbian fantasy as well. I enjoy Trilby Else & Tabico's stories, which have been referenced on this board.

True, and I too am a big fan of those authors. (FYI Trilby is a guy, but Tabico is a woman.) But lots of times the mind-controlled women in those stories act like companions, too. In other words sometimes they end up acting like mindless drones but sometimes they end up simply having their allegiances turned while still able to behave somewhat normally.

I like the idea of a robot who acts like a loyal companion and best friend, and consciously / happily accepts that part of her role is submitting without question to whatever my whims might be.

droidlvr · Post by **droidlvr** » Fri Aug 19, 2005 9:50 am

Hopefully my last point on this: females have their sex toys,(an accepted virtually ubiquitous part of feminine sexuality) we guys should at least have the ability to imagine one for us. It never fails to amaze me on how it's universally accepted,even expected that one sex can have masturbatory aids while the other can't. A synthetic female for a companion? Not me,might as well find a "real" one for that matter.

amandabot · Post by **amandabot** » Sat Aug 20, 2005 8:26 am

definatly TOY is part of it. Companion fits too and I would be a larger part.

rs5420 · Post by **rs5420** » Sat Aug 20, 2005 7:29 pm

A toy for me.

Maybe she'll be gorgeous and could fool anyone about her true nature, but she'll stay a machine to my eyes and nothing more.

GZ02 · Post by **GZ02** » Sun Aug 21, 2005 5:55 pm

As above. If the technology existed right now and there were companies out there that were actually building these things, I couldn't see them as more than very sophisticated toys. Even models that would be custom-built, with 'unique' personalities, mannerisms, wardrobe etc. would be essentially domestic appliances, not much more, and probably advertised as such.

But that's the thing that appeals to me - a machine that looks and acts like a woman but essentially does not have the 'consciousness' to understand she is one. She is a object in the shape of a woman.

Like a few of the posts above, if I wanted a companion, I'd get a real girlfriend. Someone with their own interests, wants, needs, opinions and so on. To me, you just simply cannot form that bond with a machine. It's just wrong in my eyes - no matter how clever the simulation. And I could never treat a woman like that at all, unless she says so.

On the upside, there are some advantages, an ever-ready sexual partner at your command being a definite one. She'll keep the place spotless, never burn the roast, always make the bed, never get sick and will do anything to please you. Who knows, maybe she would be made in such a way that she could morph into a comfortable easy chair or bed and move from room to room so you'd never have to get up. She could work on the car, perhaps have attatchments for vaccumming or for mowing the lawn or shovelling the driveway. She would dress differently depending on the time of day in accordance to your wishes and have your breakfast, lunch and dinner done and ready at just the right time.

I'd personally like my first encounter to be like an introduction where the dealership would bring a pre-selected model over with everything ready to go from there.

But, as I said, she would only be an appliance, built solely to help and please, being a machine. I don't see anything like a truly sentinent artificial being seeing the light of day in my lifetime as that isn't part of the fantasy for me anyway. 'Nuff said.

DollSpace · Post by **DollSpace** » Mon Aug 22, 2005 12:09 pm

rs5420 wrote:Maybe she'll be gorgeous and could fool anyone about her true nature, but she'll stay a machine to my eyes and nothing more.

I regularly "fool" everyone about my true nature and I believe I'm loved and accepted as a human in most of my relationships. I do consider myself a toy (moreso at different times) but...I'm a companion, not just a machine! I mean, I know my name is spelled Ryn, but if you spell it Rin (in Romaji), one of the meanings is "companion". I am a companion bot. XD

GZ02 wrote:As above. If the technology existed right now and there were companies out there that were actually building these things, I couldn't see them as more than very sophisticated toys. Even models that would be custom-built, with 'unique' personalities, mannerisms, wardrobe etc. would be essentially domestic appliances, not much more, and probably advertised as such.

I am not a domestic appliance! It's like calling me a toaster! If you drop a toaster and break it, that toaster doesn't feel pain, doesn't feel hurt (unless it's the toaster from "Red Dwarf"

), but I would, and I do. Does it make me any less of a person (notice I didn't say human...yet) because I'm made of chips and wires or gears and cogs instead of flesh and bone and get my energy from charging a battery or winding a key instead of food? I tell you, I feel "real" emotions the best I can, and sometimes I really wish I couldn't...

Anyway, I recognise everyone has their own opinions on this, and since most of you will probably never meet me in real life, well...I'll let everyone go back to their imaginations now!

And relax, I'm not really offended by what anyone has said; I'm just providing an alternate viewpoint.

*hugs to all*
Rynnie

GZ02 · Post by **GZ02** » Mon Aug 22, 2005 8:58 pm

Sorry, rynchan, I didn't mean to offend. I was only generalizing - but that's my honest opinion.

Stephaniebot · Post by **Stephaniebot** » Tue Aug 23, 2005 12:24 am

Ryn,
I second your feelings on the matter.Trouble is I suppose our 'creation' was so perfect they dont realise that we arent humans!Just in my case they forgot to put in the 'human sex emotion simulation' package I think!

Ironically work has cottoned on to the real me,my nickname there is 'The Robot',what flattery!

As I said earlier in the thread I would love to be reprogrammed in a really useful role in the medical field or something similar,but unfortunately I seem to have been left to cope as I am.

A.N.N. · Post by **A.N.N.** » Sat Aug 27, 2005 3:50 pm

I voted for TOY, though I could see my vote going either way depending on circumstances. For instance, I'm very happily married, and my wife is already my perfect companion. So I wouldn't need another companion. I wouldn't be able to commit or support another companion.

BUT, if I wasn't happily with someone, I could see myself wishing for a companion, fembot or real woman.

"Don't you think that you need somebody,
Don't you think that you need someone,
Everybody needs somebody,
You're not the only one..."
-- G'N'R

FembotsInCharge · Post by **FembotsInCharge** » Wed Aug 31, 2005 11:53 pm

My fantasy fembot would be a companion, with full AI, but I tend to fantasize about a bossy, loving-but-stern fembot who takes charge of my girlfriend and me and basically runs our lives for us, setting our bedtimes and curfews and behavior rules, and punishing us when we break the rules.

She's be very loving, and very strict. For some reason, the fantasy usually has her looking much younger than us, too.

WilloWisp · Post by **WilloWisp** » Thu Sep 01, 2005 8:37 pm

There seem to be a few different camps on this subject:

A) The sentimentalists. "I want a robot with the capacity for human emotion."

B) The Mad Scientists. "I want a robot who has only the illusion of humanity." (The further extreme of this includes transformation fantasies which is a whole 'nother can of electro-plated worms.)

C) Those who wish to be a fembot. For them, this specific question is a non-issue. What kind of fembot you want to be is a slightly different issue. Not attacking here, just observing.

I think it's interesting to see how A and B form the polar extremes of a kind of spectrum, with answers ranging in between and at both ends. It's also fascinating to see this reflected in inverse among the C camp ("I crave being a toy to be used," vs. "I crave mechanical perfection but want to keep some sense of self").

Myself? I wind up falling more towards the Mad Scientist end of things, but not enough to be antisocial or uncaring. My fantasies generally involve fembots who are either unaware of their own nature, as in the Syntech stories (Hey, will we ever see a Syntech 4?) or who betray it either due to malfunction or maintenance while still keeping up the illusion (many of BA's stories). Usually, the latter involves a fembot who, while she knows herself to be an artificial mechanism, displays emotional responses which she seems to believe to be genuine (Such as the title character in Mrs. Allen's Two o'clock, or Verity in Childminder).

droidlvr · Post by **droidlvr** » Thu Sep 01, 2005 9:42 pm

Can't believe myself for commenting on this thread,but I can't understand how anyone can say that they'd want to relate to a fembot completely as they would a living thing. Again, to me the who thing about fantasizing about fembots involves an automation that is fashioned to resemble a human BUT IT is yours and to add can do things HUMANLY virtually imposible; freezing,interfacing with other computers/machinery ala the fembot in the anime "The pianist", etc.. To me nothing and I MEAN nothing extinguishes this "fetish" for me than the discussion of,advocation,writing or otherwise encouraging of the idea of the fembot as being "virtually indistinguishable" from a living thing to the point of being a living thing but just concieved in a non traditonal sense; CLONED. It's simple to me,let me have an automation, (yes one only I and maybe others with a trained eye) virtually alive but actually just the most advanced and complicated "machinery" ever created. That's sexy indeed to a certain number/breed of the folks here.

keraptis · Post by **keraptis** » Fri Sep 02, 2005 8:25 am

droidlvr wrote:Can't believe myself for commenting on this thread,but I can't understand how anyone can say that they'd want to relate to a fembot completely as they would a living thing.

Hang on, I think it's actually very easy to understand why. It may not be what attracts you to ASFR, but nonetheless this thread and many others have proven the very broad spectrum of people and interests here. (Which is a good thing.)

To take the specific statement I've quoted above, let's break it down a bit. I think most (all?) on this board would agree that when watching a movie or TV show with alleged fembot content, it's a complete waste when the audience is told "this character is really a robot" but the actress does nothing at all to distinguish herself from a normal person. That maybe part of what you're getting at, but it's sort of tangential to this thread.

Back on topic, it's another thing entirely to imagine having a real fembot in your life and deciding that in fact you would like her to behave just like a real person. Though I've been clear many times that this isn't my particular fantasy, nonetheless I'll take a pass at defending and explaining why it would be appealing.

For one thing, no matter how much this group loves seeing malfunctions depicted in fiction and artwork, I would expect having a real fembot in your life who doesn't work properly would become old REALLY FAST. To use your phrase, "I can't understand how anyone can say" that they'd really want a fembot whose arm or leg or chest could explode into a twisted mass of melted wires for no particular reason and at any time -- though most likely during sex, when the danger to others is greatest -- even though that might make for a great fantasy in a story.

For another, while for some the whole point of a fembot is to have an object / toy you can control, that is not necessarily true for everyone and I can guarantee it wouldn't be true in most cases if companion robots ever became a mainstream part of our culture. Let me put it to you this way ... and as I think of this, it occurs to me that this might be one of those lightbulb-going-off major insight moments. (Or it could be a load of crap ... you be the judge.)

OK, drum roll ...

We've talked at length about how a fembot can give her owner a feeling of control that he would not otherwise enjoy in a human relationship ... but what we're missing is that the same is true for the feeling of trust a fembot can give her owner.

How much the concepts of control and trust intersect or overlap in a particular relationship would be dependent not only on the nature of the owner and his intentions for the fembot, but also on the fembot's capabilities. (In other words, the degree to which one can "trust" a fembot is directly tied to how capable her hypothetical AI is.) But nonetheless, even the most rudimentary fembot can in theory be "trusted" not to betray her owner, which (if I may play amateur psychologist for a moment) is very much part of why some people need to feel control in the first place. Whether we want to admit it or not, there is a definite correlation within this group between wanting a fembot to control (or even abuse, which is just control taken to the extreme) and being frustrated, cynical or just plain fearful regarding human relationships.

Anyway, to illustrate my point with an example, imagine that fembots really exist and that you could buy one and take it home. Now imagine that the company you're buying from offers a fembot that comes pre-programmed with various customizations -- everything from appearance to basic personality and even skills -- but that once the "on" switch is flipped, is designed to behave like an autonomous person over whom you don't have direct control. In an emergency of course you can shut her off, or bring her in to be reprogrammed, but other than that she does her own thing fairly autonomously, within the bounds of the pre-programming. The only "control" you have would be the initial parameters: in other words, you can program her such that she will always love you, and never betray you, plus over time she would be programmed to adapt and learn so that she'll be better and better at pleasing you ... but she would always be capable of surprising you because she didn't get every last bit of her code from your (inevitably limited) imagination.

It's easy (for me at least) to imagine an owner who would want such a product. In fact, for those of you who remember the Schwarzenegger movie "Total Recall," that's actually pretty much exactly the product he bought at the start of the film, except it was done with memory implants instead of robots. He was hoping to pay someone who would give him an adventure with a beautiful woman, with a guaranteed positive (exciting, fun) outcome, and though he wanted to set up some basic parameters for what the woman would look like and what sort of personality she would have ("sleazy and demure" ... remember? plus it was a given that she would be his friend and lover), he did NOT want to control her every action, any more than he wanted to control the script of the adventure itself.

And I won't even elaborate on the very real fact that if such a product existed, there would be a HUGE market among people who had lost a loved one and wished to replace her with a robot that could create the illusion of really being her.

I guess in summary my feeling about this whole thread is while I certainly understand the appeal of having a fembot who behaves like a "toy," I think many of us are overestimating how long such a toy could really sustain our interest. For me a fembot that didn't always have something new for me to discover would be colossally boring.

Mirage · Post by **Mirage** » Fri Sep 02, 2005 8:53 am

I agree with keraptis on his many points.

I see it more direct even,

Some would like a companion, affection, friendship, even a relationship if possible

and

some rather have a tool for sex instead, a computer the shape of human who can fuck.

romance VS sex

Simple

The romantic fool, Mirage

keraptis · Post by **keraptis** » Tue Sep 06, 2005 11:09 am

I'm a little surprised this thread has gone quiet over the last few days. I guess I was hoping to promote more discussion, not squash it.

Was it something I said?

ehy · Post by **ehy** » Tue Sep 06, 2005 12:30 pm

Nah. I think those who had something to say said it, and those who didn't have anything to say... didn't.

And those who had something to say but were too chicken to say it didn't either.

CherryKiss · Post by **CherryKiss** » Tue Sep 06, 2005 1:53 pm

well, as long as someone has given this a bump, and I'm still hanging around waiting to see if my old long lost friend will maybe talk to me.... might as well offer my own opinion here

To begin, as far as the fembot fetish is concerned... I feel a little sorrow for those with the fetish. Because, in real life, it is not obtainable

not yet... perhaps not ever... That said, the closest, most intimate place for me to touch unreachable fantasies is online, and it is online that I've experienced all the robot fetish play I have.

To continue, that means, on the other side of the computer screen, there is a living, thinking, feeling person, and I would never want to treat that person as nothing more than a toy. A toy for a scene, sure, but afterward, we are equals again. In that sense, I would choose "companion" because the only "real" fembots I know are all online

However, I assumed the poll meant, "what if a fembot was available, in real life?" If that were the case, then the bot would be a bot.... no human mind inside... indeed I would not want her programmed with a real mind or real feelings, and I would want her to be a toy.. a fun, sexy toy. I would continue to find my companionship with other people.

If fembots ever come into being, I think they would almost certainly be toys, long before they ever even hinted at being companions, if they ever developed to the point of human intelligence at all.

I would really hope for a fembot who could express pleasure and pain, disappointment and hope... and I wouldn't mind a few switches to turn off one feeling or another, for a time as it suited me

a disappointed fembot, after all, would make me very sad, unless I was able to dispell that disappointment quickly.

Have I rambled enough yet? yes, I think so

be well!

Disthron · Post by **Disthron** » Sat Oct 08, 2005 11:05 pm

First of all I'd just like to say hello to every one. As this is the first time I have posted hear.

Any way back on topic. In a compatition between...

romance VS sex : Mirage

I choos romance every time. Also, romance can often lead to sex but straght up sex dusn't nesaseraly lead to romance. Don't get me wrong, sex if fun but I'd mutch rather have a companion who can shear my feelings for her.

In my fantesys the robots are pritty mutch like people. Thay have hopes and asperations like every one and the main way to tell them from a human (if thay havent been damaged in some way) are the diferances in behavior. Thay don't have "human minds" becouse there not human. However thay are centiant and thay do have emotions. I'm of the school that all centiant beings think alike, to a sertin extent.

Some might think it a little pointless but my fantasy fembot would still have to be convinced that I wasn't just another human ass trying to controll her.

Brytestar · Post by **Brytestar** » Sun Oct 09, 2005 10:57 am

I went with companion. The toy part would clearly be secondary. I just think that companion would fit my stories better.

Your ideal fembot is..........

I would consider my ideal fembot...

Object

I agree with droidlvr

Re: I agree with droidlvr

companion?

Interesting Poll