Fantasy or Reality?

[adef]

Hello, this is Allison; it has been a long time since I have been on any ASFR boards. Since making the ASFR doc short in 2001, I’ve been working towards a PhD (which I finished last year). I’m now finally starting to write about some of the things I’ve been interested in over the last decade. I’m currently working on an essay about ASFR for a special sexuality edition of Science Fiction Studies Journal, and I wanted to ask you all a number of questions that I'm not entirely clear on:

To what extent is the fantasy and the activities that you participate in (both at home and out in the world–whether posting to fembot central, writing stories, creating images, or something more passive like watching a movie) around the artificial woman or man the gist of ASFR … OR will these things be less important when robot companions are available for sale at an affordable price (or is this not an either/or thing)?

If a robot companion were available today, would you buy one or is that not what interests you?

Also, along those lines, do you or does any ASFRian that you know own a realdoll? And, if so, was it a satisfying purchase or disappointing? (And to what extent do you think that the ASFR and life-sized lovedoll community overlap?)

Sorry for the long post …. Any and all feedback would be greatly appreciated and, if you’d prefer to answer any of these questions privately, send me a private message and I’ll send you my email address.

[jolshefsky]

I find that I use my robot fetish as a mental tool to open myself to more radical and less socially-acceptable fantasy, although not deliberately. As best I can tell now, I have a shame-based relationship with sex. To prevent myself from feeling shame about it, I started fantasizing about sex with robotic women. Compounding it, all sorts of stimulus contributed to the fetish -- from seeing dolls naked to the airbrushed perfection of Playboy, not to mention the direct contribution of the electronic woman presented by the occasional TV show or movie.

So now I can't help but use it as a crutch. Somehow I feel guilty having sexual fantasies about a real-life woman, but if I -- in my fantasy -- make a robot copy, I can freely have my way with the robot version.

As such, I feel that the prospect of a robot companion will only fuel my fantasy. I wouldn't actually want one although I would fantasize about it. I realize it makes for quite the paradox and I don't have an answer for you: I would fantasize about owning a robot companion but I would never actually want to have one.

[adef]

Thanks Jason, that's incredibly helpful. I think that when many people–myself included–first hear about ASFR, it sounds very objectifying. However, my sense is that many ASFRians have a great deal of self-consciousness, particularly around issues of female objectification (although I've only met a handful of ASFRians in person, they all considered themselves to be "feminists"). And I've often wondered whether one of the appeals of ASFR is the ability to sidestep social politics through the fantasy of an android that is "programmed for pleasure."

[Teknophile]

Hmm, this is an interesting topic. I'll just post my own thoughts on the subject....

...The fantasy and the activities that you participate in … will these things be less important when robot companions are available for sale at an affordable price (or is this not an either/or thing)?

I honestly don't know. For one thing, whether or not these robotic companions we envision will ever become a reality at all is unknown. Someone with a lot of engeneering, manufacturing and software development capability would have to decide to build them, and a whole lot of people with deep pockets would need to invest a lot of capital to make it happen.

That being said, if robot companions ever did become available, I think we would see a decrease in ASFR sites and activity. ASFR is attractive, in large part, because it is fantasy - like dragons, lost cities and buried treasure, things that are out of reach have a kind of magnetic allure. If companion robots ever did become a practical, affordable reality in daily life, I think that ASFR would lose some of its appeal, having become more mundane. Fantasies about watching beautiful robot women malfunction, for example, would quickly turn sour when faced with the financial reality of maintaining a robot.

If a robot companion were available today, would you buy one or is that not what interests you?

This depends on what you would count as a "robot companion". I don't own a real doll, and they don't really interest me, nor would they even if someone crammed a bunch of electronics in to make them walk and talk.

Personally, my ideal synthetic woman is not so much a herky-jerky oversized doll, but basically a human being without all the "baggage" we normal folks are always stuck with - no age, no sickness, no mental or physical defects. It's also my fantasy because, while "beautiful people" in the real world tend to stick with their own kind, an artificially created woman wouldn't have all that social "programming", so she would be more likely to accept and appreciate the good qualities in anyone (especially her owner).

Ultimately, such a woman appeals to me because, as you said, it's a way of "sidestepping social politics" in the process of finding a mate, giving a shy and very self-conscious man like myself a chance with a woman who would normally be out of my league.

If intelligent gynoids like what I've described were available today ... well, I couldn't afford one today, but I'd definitely start saving up!

[jolshefsky]

I think that when many people–myself included–first hear about ASFR, it sounds very objectifying. However, my sense is that many ASFRians have a great deal of self-consciousness, particularly around issues of female objectification (although I've only met a handful of ASFRians in person, they all considered themselves to be "feminists"). And I've often wondered whether one of the appeals of ASFR is the ability to sidestep social politics through the fantasy of an android that is "programmed for pleasure."

I think you'll find further that there is only a little common ground among us. First, the characteristics that any one of us "fetishizes" is always different -- and often to a large degree -- from anyone else's. But also, the psychological undertones and the way we integrate this into our lives is entirely individual. The common ground is pretty small. In the broadest sense, I suspect that each of us here can agree with the broad definition, "I am attracted to things that look like people but aren't." And that each of us will further want to qualify that assertion in some way that we feel is important.

For years I've tried to figure out what exactly is "objectification" and when is it good or bad? I guess what I think of as an ideal sexual attraction is when I'm engaging with another person (as I would with any person) and, for no conscious reason, I am sexually aroused in their presence. If I'm distracted from conversation by conscious observations of physical characteristics I find desirable, that's not as ideal and closer to objectification. If I'm attracted physically first, then my goals are different and I don't much care to take the chance on personality compatibility so I try to dominate the conversation -- far more objectifying and far from ideal.

It's pretty easy for me to fall into the trap of that last scenario. I tend to be wary of the warning signs: if I'm strongly physically attracted to someone, if I desire to herd, corner, or isolate that person, and if I get to talk with them, that I don't shut up. As such, if I see someone I'm strongly physically attracted to, I take a mental picture and fantasize about them as a robot later. Otherwise, I end up embarrassed and apologetic.

Because of those issues, I think it's important for me to separate the physical beauty from the person by making a non-person fantasy. In that way, it's kind of a defense mechanism to prevent me from going any further -- preventing me from coercing sex or being a rapist. I don't know why the robot part is so pivotal. Perhaps it's my expertise with machines, electronics, and computers, but I find it kind of odd that I must have a plastic-and-wires kind of robot to be attracted. I am seldom able to simply pretend that I get to do what I want with a fictional human.

And I think it's important that I have certainty that there are no sentient robots out there that I'd want to have sex with -- and I'm certain it won't be possible in the next 15 years, or probably my lifetime.

[PsychoKirby]

Fantasies will become less important to me once companionship robots become a reality. As soon as one of decent quality becomes affordable, I'll definitely get one.

[adef]

Thanks again for these posts, which are all helpful in giving me a sense of the spectrum of ASFR, which is clearly difficult to generalize.

One of the things that I'm trying to address specifically in my essay is the way that certain fantasies create tension, whether between human and robot (as in "transformation" fantasies) or animate and inanimate (as in "built" fantasies), and particularly in moments of unmasking and disassembly (when what looks and acts like a human is suddenly revealed to be robotic).

Any and all thoughts (here or in private) on how you explore this and why you like it (or if you like it) would be greatly appreciated.

Also, I'm curious how these kinds of fantasies would work or not work when robotic companions are available.

[petey]

Of course, the 'fetish' and it's accompanying fantasies would change if any of these stories come true and it's possible to either buy an android or have you/ a loved one transferred into one. I don't think it would kill the community, just change it. There's already interest in news stories regarding progress toward creating these things, so I don't think most of us want to keep robots confined to fantasy.

But the fantasy might become geared more toward "I'd love to try out this Ferrari." And "I'd love to see feature X." By necessity, the fetish will become more practical, but there are a lot of other fetishes that are popular and fit into 'reality'. So the magazines will be somewhere between 'Maxim' and 'Car and Driver'.

Bottom line: I don't think anyone is going to be crying big crocodile tears over being able to buy a copy of Anne Hathaway that loves sex, cooks, cleans, doesn't cheat, and laughs at your jokes.

[jolshefsky]

In that way, it's kind of a defense mechanism to prevent me from going any further -- preventing me from coercing sex or being a rapist.

HOLY FUCK you creep me out.

Likewise.

[Stephaniebot]

Well its hard for me to comment here given that my only desire is to be transfomed.
But just glad to see that it is developing some worthy discussion

[keraptis]

I figured out what you meant by your first question.

Or will these things be less important when robot companions are available for sale at an affordable price (or is this not an either/or thing)?

I know that personally, ASFR themed art, videos and stories have lost a lot of appeal since I started having fembot-themed phone sex. Where art/videos/stories are static things, a phone conversation is interactive and dynamic. I would much rather talk on the phone to a woman pretending to be a robot than to read a story, watch a video or look at some pics. That doesn't mean that I won't view ASFR art at all, but to me it's just not as fun as the phone call.
That same sort of phenomenon would happen if I had bought an actual sex android. I would probably lose most of my interest in phone sex if I could just reach out and play with a female android of my very own.

I wonder about that. I imagine it would depend completely on how sophisticated the AI of the robot was. You said it yourself, you prefer an "interactive and dynamic" experience to "static things."

Speaking for myself, I have no interest in a real robot because I know it would completely bore me. To me it would be little more than a super-advanced blow-up doll. The whole fetish, for me, is about a real woman acting like a robot.

I realize that's not a view shared by many people on this board, but I suspect that the reality of a real-life robot would ultimately prove disappointing to most of us, however powerfully compelling the fantasy might be.

[jak]

[POST REMOVED]

[Sthurmovik]

I'll chime in from the opposite corner of the room. I am a huge transformation fan, so I am here primarily for that element with the android bodies just being one type of transformation I specifically enjoy. Android bodies also allow for easy body mod and other fun play that doesn't result in death or injury. I mostly see the inorganic body as a huge enabler for all sorts of other sexy things and I am not really into the control or domination aspects.

I am also here for the trans-humanist themes and would willingly give up my limited flesh existence in a heartbeat.

[dale coba]

One of the things that I'm trying to address specifically in my essay is the way that certain fantasies create tension,

I start with the premise that the tension is a narrative necessity: a repeated event with no drama would become rote.
The lustful Id knows no proportion; and if fantasy is safely understood as such, why constrain that Id by minimizing the dramatic tension?

whether between human and robot (as in "transformation" fantasies)

A moment of "sexualization", an ascension to or assumption of a fuller state of lustful being.
With involuntary transformation, the event is permanent, irreversible - a key element for any fantasist who pessimistically would anticipate an end to any desired sexual arrangement.

or animate and inanimate (as in "built" fantasies),

Is it perhaps that the animation of the normally inanimate indicates that the being is new, possessing a novel "soul", or none?
Then there is no prior personal history to contend with; as well the option of a creation which is declared as an object, and thus won't amass personal issues going forward.

and particularly in moments of unmasking and disassembly (when what looks and acts like a human is suddenly revealed to be robotic).

If one can see definitively inside the body, robot-nature is proven. Yes, she is the desired object of attraction; yes, she will not reject me. A definitive, dramatic denouement.

Also, I'm curious how these kinds of fantasies would work or not work when robotic companions are available.

I'm not the kind who wants to believe that created beings should have their "desires" honored. Robots are not people, and a list of options chosen artfully by computer is not the recording of an actual emotional history - more like a depiction.

As a Stepford Fan who fears not that a trembling soul might be suffering inside, malfunctions, betrayal and dramatic revelations are erotic.
I would program my fembots to act out stories, act as though/"thinking" themselves to be human, and malfunctioning by narrative design.

- Dale Coba