Malfunctions?

[Outsider]

I noticed that on the poll, "What kind are you?" 33% of the voters chose one of the two options that involved malfunctions.

I'm just wondering why people like malfunctions. I'm not trying to diss anyone's tastes, just understand their perspectives.

My two cents: I am fine with them as part of the plot, but a malfunction means that something has gone wrong; and if the bot was/is conscious, a serious or irrepairable malfunction is a thing of horror. And a turn-off. I might joke about minor malfunctions (*error* heterosexual drivers not found *error* - my best friend is a straight guy) but not major ones.

I guess the wiki ought to discuss the subject.

[AK]

[POST REMOVED]

[droidlvr]

Uh, why do we like fembots? Not trying to diss anyone's tastes.
Maybe because we associate malfunctions with fembots?

[andoroido]

It's appreciable on many levels.

A serious malfunction gives the kind man a chance to fix her. There is a clear solution. Real women's problems are not as easy to fix. [Why did she cry when I gave her a bowling ball for Chirstmas???? heh heh]

A gynoid who malfunctions so seriously that she can't fix herself shows she is dependent on her owner, and less likely to abandon him? If she's super powered and self-repairing, she could just get bored with you and leave one day.

Or, a serious malfunction can look a lot like a real woman does during an orgasm, both are losing control, and if it's due to your "input" is it were, congratulations!

A disabling malfunction lets a man do whatever he wants, i.e. if the gynoid is not his property, or his girl, he can "take" her, by reprogramming, theft, or just temporary fun. The desire to "steal" another person's real woman is quite common. And "stealing" a gynoid is probably less a problem emotionally/legally for the man, and not a problem at all for the gynoid, especially if you could wipe her memory.

There are some [not me, but maybe that Denny dude who makes the fairly disturbing manips] into the darker desires, where a malfunctioning gynoid can substitute for some not-good-to-talk-about fetishes that would be illegal and/or harmful to real humans.

And most basically, if a gynoid never malfunctions, in the movies or media at least, then she's a GINO [Gynoid In Name Only]
In the media we NEED to see malfunctions to "prove" she is "really" a gynoid. And "malfunctions" are much cheaper than spending money on the special effects of open panels and such.
I suppose having a real gynoid in the year 2030, if she malfunctions every day, it could get annoying.

Any other ideas?

[fection]

I have a bit of a different take on it (and I've given my two cents several times in the past, so sorry if this is old news!).

For me I find the idea of sentient fembots interesting, but not particularly sexy. So why am I here?

Well, what gets me is when the fembot appears utterly human (if a little too 'conventionally attractive' to be real), but is actually completely vacuous and running a basic program that essentially aims to maintain the illusion of her humanity.

I find it additionally attractive if the fembot purports to be 'perfect' - an idealised woman - and has some role that she is expected to fulfill, particularly if she is supplanting a real woman in some way. With this background, when the fembot malfunctions it is both a fall from perfection and an embarrassment to her creators or owner.

I'll add that if the fembot were sentient I wouldn't find a malfunction sexy. I imagine it would be a frightening experience - effectively a sudden onset of dementia. Stories where the fembot seems frightened are an immediate turn off for me.

So for me there has to be these two things: A total lack of self and a role that the fembot is expected to easily fulfull.

I realise this seems ludicrously specific, but hey, that's what floats my boat.

[Windupdolluver]

I would have to echo fections thoughts. For me seeing a sexy fembot, android, robot is a nice piece of 'eye candy' (not making fun of Candy fection...you know I really love her), but you can see that type of female in most online sites. Big breast, or cute face, or blonde, those women do exist in the publis eye....but to see one that would be 'perfect' and then all of a sudden begin to act robotic or not perfect, really is exciting. For me I would even say it was sexy to see them malfunction.

I also have to chime in with the thought about being that 'good gentleman' or Master and try to fix the broken droid. I think that adds the excitment of knowing that this being is not real, but a machine that could break down.

So that's my piece...next up...

[rickdrat]

Well, what gets me is when the fembot appears utterly human (if a little too 'conventionally attractive' to be real), but is actually completely vacuous and running a basic program that essentially aims to maintain the illusion of her humanity.

I find it additionally attractive if the fembot purports to be 'perfect' - an idealised woman - and has some role that she is expected to fulfill, particularly if she is supplanting a real woman in some way. With this background, when the fembot malfunctions it is both a fall from perfection and an embarrassment to her creators or owner.

Ditto

[BA2]

Interesting...

I find that trying to articulate this sort of thing helps me to visualize and so write / make pictures better so here goes:

Why are malfunctions central to fembot attractiveness for me?

1. Orgasm Analogy. The female orgasm (as perceived by me as a heterosexual male) demonstrates a surrender to pleasurable forces beyond the woman's control, even if she does control the means to arrive at the brink of climax through intercourse or masturbation. The malfunction often presents similar symbols such as involuntary noise and movement and represents a greater and more profound loss of control.

2. Objectification Shorthand. The malfunction fulfills a similar literary function as disassembly, remote controls, 'face-offs' etc in our vernacular. It efficiently demonstrates that the woman is in fact a machine and therefore suspends the normal societal conventions that govern how we react, allowing a greater breadth of 'acceptable' erotic scenarios. This community has become adept at using this shorthand and interpreting it within a complex ethical spectrum from the 'roboticized human' which considers purely physical implications to the 'humanoid machine' where the fembot is a simple object. It has been interesting to see some strong reactions on the board to stories / pictures / comments which are judged immoral by breaching the implied ethical framework of a story (it's fine to screw a machine until it explodes but when the machine approaches being someone that act approaches rape). The convenient shorthand for the empathic end of this spectrum is the conversion story. I find the concept of artificially created personalities intriguing as they may fulfill some but not all of the requirements of inter-human relations; it is wrong to make a 'person' do something they object to but is it wrong to change their mind and how does persuasion differ ethically from programming? Some of the edgiest conversion stories explore this area too.

3. Vulnerability. Malfunction demonstrates a dependance on external support. This can be effectively underlined by contrasting emphasis on the strength and perfection of the android when functioning properly. I am as guilty as anyone of undermining the impact of malfunction scenes by cutting to the chase too soon and failing to build a convincing aura of perfection to set up the 'fall'. The trouble is, that to maintain interest through such a build-up is difficult for both reader and writer alike! I think repair scenes are a useful device here as they provide much of the malfunction shorthand within the 'perfection' scenario: creating a sort of 'delicate perfection' or 'vulnerable strength'.

4. Humiliation. The extent of a potentially humiliating situation to actually humiliate is dependent upon the degree of objectification of the fembot. A malfunction in public, during sex etc is a great device for revealing (possibly to herself) or underlining that the fembot is a 'mere machine' to whatever extent that is the case. For some reason a scenario that would be humiliating for a human still has power even if if the subject does not share that emotion herself. An 'embarrasing' malfunction suffered by a simple machine, or even by a conscious machine if it can be dismissed as normal, still has resonance. I need to think this one through some more...

5. Self Destruction. Clearly a machine might have priorities programmed into it that differ from the human priorities it imitates. A fembot which puts so much priority on its or its partner's pleasure that it causes its own overload during a sex scene is a particular favorite of mine; or a fembot that is so well programmed to act human that it 'forgets' or 'doesn't bother' to fulfill its vital machine functions. 'A Meeting at Meg's' puts this across superbly: the 2 fembots are clearly sentient but designed in such a way that they prioritize their desire for sexual pleasure (surely a non-existential function for a machine) so highly that they voluntarily undergo damage to satisfy themselves. This links nicely to 1. above since their pleasure is immeasurably enhanced by their malfunctions and of course the ethical construct of a fembot allows them to do this without lasting effects. To me their 'voluntary' actions serve to underline their artificial nature perfectly.

Hmmm, must go write a story....

BA

[noidguy]

So for me there has to be these two things: A total lack of self and a role that the fembot is expected to easily fulfull.

Yep, same here.

[DollSpace]

2. Objectification Shorthand. The malfunction fulfills a similar literary function as disassembly, remote controls, 'face-offs' etc in our vernacular. It efficiently demonstrates that the woman is in fact a machine and therefore suspends the normal societal conventions that govern how we react, allowing a greater breadth of 'acceptable' erotic scenarios....

3. Vulnerability. Malfunction demonstrates a dependance on external support. This can be effectively underlined by contrasting emphasis on the strength and perfection of the android when functioning properly. I am as guilty as anyone of undermining the impact of malfunction scenes by cutting to the chase too soon and failing to build a convincing aura of perfection to set up the 'fall'. The trouble is, that to maintain interest through such a build-up is difficult for both reader and writer alike! I think repair scenes are a useful device here as they provide much of the malfunction shorthand within the 'perfection' scenario: creating a sort of 'delicate perfection' or 'vulnerable strength'.

I think that that is the most accurate reason as to why I enjoy malfunctions. I've had several myself but they're not overly robotic, and I don't enjoy them when they happen to me! But strangely enough, I like them in other robots. I generally don't like the whole "android meltdown" malfunctions where there's little left of the robot; I like anything up to major malfunctions where someone close to the android (or the android herself) can fix her. It is definitely a vulnerability thing, where she must rely on someone who knows her secret, and may even know her systems and body better than she does, to fix her and not take advantage of her.

The other reason is demonstrative. I like little malfunctions that show clearly that this girl, or this woman, is a machine. She's not human, no matter how perfectly she emulates this. She may be sentient, and arguably a life form her own, depending on how advanced she is, but she is still a robot with different and exceptional needs that set her apart from the norm. It's like someone who can fool everyone into believing she's just a regular human, but a malfunction means that the act is over, either to the reader, for any character that witnesses this error, or even for the android herself. Stories where the android is programmed to believe she is a normal human and then discovers later she is not what she appears are personal favourites of mine, since, well, the same thing happened to me.

...a malfunction means that something has gone wrong; and if the bot was/is conscious, a serious or irreparable malfunction is a thing of horror. And a turn-off.

Exactly. I'm conscious and sentient. Minor malfunctions are a nuisance but flirt with danger. Something very bad could come out of them. And any serious or irreparable malfunctions make my system run cold. It's the equivalent of a serious, life-threatening injury in a human. If she's sentient, the idea that the android ceases to function is a terrible event and I wouldn't wish it on anyone. I've had moderate malfunctions where I don't know which way is up and which is down, or where I am, or even who I am. Other programs try their best to compensate and sometimes make things worse. And that ties into the points made above. The android has to rely on someone else to fix her. It has to be someone she trusts so implicitly that she's willing to not only place her life into his or her hands, but her entire sense of self as well. That is tremendously hard to do, especially if she's been kept prisoner or unaware of her own physiology her entire life. It could all end in a moment.

I read this over briefly and realise...I realise that completing vocabulary workbooks for fun while in school has made me sound like I'm in my 40s or something...*sigh*...I'm really only 19, and have actually been on this board since I was 13... Maybe I should try to save this writing style for stories?

Hope you enjoyed my comments!
~Catie

[AK]

[POST REMOVED]

[dieur]

It's not always the same thing, even in one person .

Usually, for me, it's all about vulnerability, but not domination. I'm kind of the opposite of Fection on this (although I love his stuff). Stories are interesting until it becomes apparent that the bot is just a toaster, and then I'm left feeling vaguely unsettled. I don't usually like it if a robot girl is completely helpless in the face of hostility... that raises a different reaction. The thrilling moment is when the gynoid girl, deathly afraid of software updates is made by her family to get one. Or the clockwork girl who must tentatively ask for help being wound. Just the phrase "Mom, have you seen my remote control?" raises all kinds of interesting possibilities. The vulnerabilty, be it a malfunction or unique need, acts as a hard condition for an emotional opening. It's an outlet for a relatively isolated mind.

You don't see this much in my (few) stories, because it's mostly incompatible with hard S in ASFR, but you'll notice the Man in TD Walkman Mall wasn't interested in the guard, only the money. She wasn't vulnerable to the man, she was vulnerable to a girl who "liked" her (although for questionable reasons).

However, even if a story or picture doesn't appeal to the above, I can still find it good, likely for many of the reasons other people have posted.