Gender and Technosexuality

[JessicaDupre]

.

[Stephaniebot]

I would say that in terms of numbers, there are more guys than girls. Made more complex by girls like me, who used to be guys lol! But there are a number of women who enjoy the fetish too, just not in the same numbers.
Why? Because guys like being strong, and macho, and the idea of an obedient fembot, obeying their commands, would appeal no end. Or just guys who prefer the lesser complexities of a robot woman, over a human one. I think the snag for some women, is its a very submissive thing to be, if played strictly. Robots are given commands, obey commands, and things like that. There are a number of us who are very submissive, and the idea of being/playing a fembot, appeals greatly.
Just my 2 cents, and logic

[tdlsn]

It would sure make things easier if both sexes could do it without fear of ridicule or shame.

Hyper politicization of sex roles,gender feminists and good ol' you're some kinda wierdo/looser for wishing to make it with a robot plain and simple.

[dale coba]

Hyper politicization of sex roles,gender feminists and good ol' you're some kinda wierdo/looser for wishing to make it with a robot plain and simple.

Let's all fondly remember that era gone by, before hyper politicization of sex roles, when no one would think you were a weirdo loser for wanting to make it with a robot.... Wait, WHAT ?! What alternative universe did you fall out of?

Robot sex has never been acceptable among the masses.

This mixed-up talk of "Hyper politicization of sex roles" slanders mainstream feminism and decades of progress empowering human beings.

The least qualified people to understand sociology are the least capable of appreciating how very unqualified they are to have any opinions on the subject.

- Dale Coba

[JessicaDupre]

.

[dieur]

Adding to the complexity, of course, is technosexuality is a catch-all for a lot of different peculiarities.

Never shamed, but never shared so that's not surprising. My GF knows only that I have an undisclosed harmless fetish that does not involve animals, violence, incest, or anyone underage ;D.

If you'll indulge a persona question, JD, and feel free not, given you enjoy the submission part of the fetish (or that's what I took from your post), why is your avatar picture of a fembot malfunctioning?

[JessicaDupre]

.

[tdlsn]

This mixed-up talk of "Hyper politicization of sex roles" slanders mainstream feminism and decades of progress empowering human beings

Wondering wtf is this "mainstream feminism" the professor speaks of. Maybe the kind that is concerned with the need for female representation in boys' teams in schools among other things or any activity heavily popular with males is worthy of reengineering.

Robot sex has never been acceptable among the masses

Hey,no shite genius. Furthermore,it's a given that social justice warriors (feminists) are concerned with the effect on civilization the availability to men a sexbot servant that may be dressed as a maid,nurse., etc.

The least qualified people to understand sociology are the least capable of appreciating how very unqualified they are to have any opinions on the subject

Yep, the internet allows for many things, including self important keypad morons who's attempt at personal attacks on anyone with an opinion needs to stay anonymous.

[tdlsn]

Hey look, this discussion pops up over and over and is nothing new.Way back when,(late 1990's) I would type the word(s) female robot or fembot into a search engine and almost immediately the results would include links to several books,online social studies and woman s activist discussion groups, most of with whom the main purpose is to dissect/critique the why female robots.
What amazes me is that no matter how many times or ways the subject is revisited you get the same few disingenuous pseudo
intellectuals when it comes to feminist types having a negative view of what a fembot represents unless of course it's the type that kicks ass or otherwise anything but sexy,controlled or even a damned fembot. Lastly,when as is often the case,words like submissive and dominant are used as in the above,this to my mind begins a discussion of sexual politics., a big turn off and not why I visit FembotCentral.

[dale coba]

Maybe the kind that is concerned with the need for female representation in boys' teams in schools.

How many times has this happened, what percent of teams?

Zero percent, rounded down.
0.001% ? Does that sound about right?

Name the incidents. Show me a count.
Your concern about boys' sports teams is a phantom, a hologram, a joke.

You have a distorted perspective and a persecution complex.

- Dale Coba

[tdlsn]

If these kinds of threads bother you so much, tdlsn, maybe just duck out of them.....

Ya know,you could have left it just at that without inferring that I'm bitching about anything.

[JessicaDupre]

.

[xerxes31415]

Fetlife is a good resource, and I've actually found it to be relatively 50/50 regarding the gender distribution in the general populace. However, it's primarily geared towards people meeting in real life at events and whatnot, but it does have some communities and whatnot in it.

[Miss Pris]

(With trepidation, and not to start up a problem) I want to point out that feminism is one of the 20th century movements largely responsible for freeing the idea of sex from reproduction, especially for women, and reminding the world after several hundred years of b.s. about the subject that women actually enjoy sex, have orgasms, and find pleasure in something other than gazing longingly into our paramours' eyes. Thanks to my upbringing in a post-feminism world I am here on this site now, openly engaging in "insider ethnography" research (so when I publish anything, I am "outed"), and not afraid to stand up for my right to... um... party, with anyone or anything with which I am legally allowed and morally disposed. Thanks to feminism, many of you fine gentlemen have had some great experiences roleplaying with sexually liberated women. The "F" word doesn't have to be a curse

Unfortunately, as with nearly any movement, there is a very vocal extreme version of "feminism" (which is often nothing less than hatred, really) who would not only denounce anyone for technosexual interests (by their very nature as potentially heterosexual and/or involving a woman choosing to be submissive in any way, even as a fantasy) but would burn me at a stake for being a woman involved in such an interest (even though I am not submissive, and am attracted to cyborgs, sentient gynoids and sentient androids.) We should not judge a group by a vocal, extremist majority. Most people are more nuanced than a single group or subsection of that group would allow.

Anyway - sorry for the side track. In terms of technosexuality itself, I'm not looking into numbers in the general population or anything, but just from speaking to people (in academia at least) about my research, I think women would be considerably more disposed to an android or gynoid sexual partner, or roleplay as or with one, if there was more awareness of this interest. Most of the people I speak to about my research - women or otherwise - were completely unaware of the existence of technosexuality/ASFR or anything similar.

[darkbutflashy]

I think there is a strong bond between today's "feminism" and nannying everyone. Because many many "feminists" believe the world would be a better place if everyone sticks to the rules. Because, "when you stick to the rules, no one gets hurt." And then they start to make rules for everything.

That's not a property of feminism but a property of clueless people coming to power. They'll overdo it. And when people ignore their bullshit, they are getting loud and obnoxious.

[BD]

O_O feminists are in power?! Since when? As far as i know up 'till now they are just asking and are widely ignored. Personally after hearing their requests i don't find them eirthe constrictive or in any way demeaning. But seriously: Feminists are in power?! Since when?!

[darkbutflashy]

Ah, no. You don't need to be all-over powerful to be in power. And the smaller the actual power is, the more absurd it is how people want to exercise it. That's where it gets ridiculous and later, obnoxious.

For example, there's a panel discussion about game design. And you decide it can't be held because there's no woman in the panel. Err, what? It was all set up, the guests were there, the audience was there. But you decide it can't be done because there's no woman in the panel. Err. WHAT?


Or take "genderized speech". In Germany, it started with requiring all job names to be written as male/female variant. Meaning, when you look for someone who can make bread, instead of looking for a "Bäcker", you have to look for a "Bäcker/-in". If you look for a "Bäcker" only and any woman applies, you have to choose her or you are fined (and you have to take her). By law. I don't know how this helps women finding a job, because anyone owning a bakery is looking for a "Bäcker/-in" and keeps the reason why he chose a man undisclosed.

But it's not job advertisments only. "Feminists", quickened by their success in the field, now require any official text and any school book to be changed that way. As the most school book editors and auditing officials in education are women (and the few men there don't want a "feminist" "uproar") they are on their way in making German more awful than Mark Twain could have ever imagined.


Another example, a few years the former chairman of the F.D.P party, Rainer Brüderle, had made a suggestive comment, denying a talk with a female reporter. Nothing happened, he just commented she was "pretty much too pretty" for that job. A year later, when he was up to be re-elected, she decided to make a story of that incident, accusing him to be a sexist. In result, "feminist" twitter users organized an "#aufschrei" (uproar) of what they felt was daily sexual haressment. It was even featured in U.S. newspapers, I think. The conclusion drawn by newspaper author Birgit Kelle, who was soon recognized as "anti-feminist" by various "feminists" was: if it wasn't grumpy old Rainer Brüderle but George Clooney, no one had raised a brow.


Concluding, A feminist fairy tale.
Once upon a time, in ye olde town of Goslar, lying at the foots of the lovely Harz mountains, there once was a "Gleichstellungsbeauftrage" ("equal opportunity commissioner") who was, of course, a woman. And of course, that woman made her job just extrafabulously. Until the day, when she recognized men are often discriminated when they want to see their kids after a divorce. From then on, she fought for the rights of those men, as she did for women, too. Then, there was a great carnival in town, for the good sake of the poor beaten children. And she found it good, apart from the fact, it was advertized as "Beating women and children is not okay!". She said, the carnival is not about women, but about children, and it's discrimination, as children are beaten by women, too, and men aren't always the ones who beat women, but vice versa, too. Then, after a lengthy "feminist" uproar, the city council, in it's ultimate wisdom, found a reason why the commissioner had to be dismissed. It was the holy Godwin, which was found in a forum comment on a father's rights website linked from the commisioner's offical site.

[darkbutflashy]

Ah, I should add another one.

We have a powerful "feminist" over here, Alice Schwarzer. She's a publisher of her own "feminist" mag, "Emma". She was that powerful she had made the German state of North-Rhine-Westphalia pay 400 000€ per year for her private "centre for documentation of crime against women". In that "centre", she employed herself and her three female friends/lovers, each for a salary of 80 000€ per year. There was no controlling. But the men governing the state had that fear to be targeted by one of her campaigns, they threw tax payers money into the rat hole.

It had taken two women, the new governor of North-Rhine-Westphalia and her secretary for families and women, to stop that nonsense. But Mrs Schwarzer did not give up so easily, no, she was accusing the two women in power to abuse their power (sic!) to impede "documentation of crime against women".


There's another story about Mrs. Schwarzer. A woman accused the well-known weatherman Jörg Kachelmann of having raped her. Mrs Schwarzer found him guilty in an instant, and wrote from the courtroom. She wrote for a tabloid she always accused of being "sexist" before, BILD. As the trial went on, it was found Mr Kachelmann had two dozen girlfriends in the last years, sometimes five at the same time. The woman accusing him was one of these five, which he denied to marry. So Mr Kachelmann was sure guilty to Mrs Schwarzer, and she wrote it down in BILD and they made a hate-campaign against him.

To his luck, the judge panel (men AND women) found him to be not guilty. That way, he wasn't imprisoned but only lost his well-payed job as weatherman on the top broadcaster in Germany. He was well advised to have founded his own meteorological company years ago, so he had another income.

Mrs Schwarzer still says he's guilty to her.

[--NightBattery--]

oh my godness. friends, this thread was created by a master troll. About a topic that despite who is wrong and who isn't it is under the smiting eye of political correctness.
be careful. For the good of all of us.

[darkbutflashy]

Yeah, that's why I thought giving some hilarious real-life examples would make people stop taking "feminism" too seriously.

[BD]

First of all most of your accusations do seem to be mostly about "i could do this before why can't i do this now?" which is the opposite of bad, it just means that finally women have a say in stuff where they previously were completely excluded as if their presence was to be considered "useless" or even "damaging".

It's not a sign of "feminism" is a sign of "it's the fucking 21st century and you don't want to recognize half of the world's population as important yet".

Feminism might be when people started making other people notice that they were sexually harassed, which is (i would say) yet another sign of progress. Slapping somebody's butt "playfully" might have been accepted 50 years ago, i hope not today. Telling people that they have to accept your invitation out for a beer or else should never have been accepted in the first place and so on and so forth.

That said the only case in which a feminist did something criminal in all you said was with the condemnation of a rapist before he was sentenced guilty. That is unacceptable, but in all your stress venting that was the only one thing i saw. I understand you don't like it, your two post speech was a gigantic venting of stress, but personally i think most of those things you said are signs of progress not of "feminists in power".

Feminists are not in power, they are still a minority, even if they represent *half of the world's population*, and in general they are getting heard just like other minorities: slowly and painfully.

Saying that feminists are in power because you can't harass women in your workplace is like saying muslims are in power because somewhere in your town they "dared" to put a mosque.

[jolshefsky]

I want to point out that feminism is one of the 20th century movements largely responsible for freeing the idea of sex from reproduction, especially for women, and reminding the world after several hundred years of b.s. about the subject that women actually enjoy sex, have orgasms, and find pleasure in something other than gazing longingly into our paramours' eyes. Thanks to my upbringing in a post-feminism world I am here on this site now, openly engaging in "insider ethnography" research (so when I publish anything, I am "outed"), and not afraid to stand up for my right to... um... party, with anyone or anything with which I am legally allowed and morally disposed. Thanks to feminism, many of you fine gentlemen have had some great experiences roleplaying with sexually liberated women. The "F" word doesn't have to be a curse

Here here!

... denounce anyone for technosexual interests (by their very nature as potentially heterosexual and/or involving a woman choosing to be submissive in any way, even as a fantasy) ...

I like to point out that there's differences between "think", "say", and "do". You can think whatever you choose. But when you take action, you need to have a consenting party. I get that "saying" is weird since you can't "unhear" or "unsee" something, but is anyone at fault there, or is just the nature of the world? On the one hand you could not express the ideas, and on the other (in most cases) you can simply not read/watch/hear. I'm not sure what my point is other than maybe the condemnation does seem misguided since the whole point of women's rights is to not forbid consensual, desired behaviors that were heretofore forbidden. For people to use the "feminism" label as a tool of condemnation and censorship of consensual, desired behaviors seems altogether incorrect. If they'd just self-describe as a nosy, busy-body puritan, there would really be no issue.

Most of the people I speak to about my research - women or otherwise - were completely unaware of the existence of technosexuality/ASFR or anything similar.

This I find very fascinating. As a fetishistic category, I think it has some unique traits. For myself, it's a fetish entirely of fantasy so I don't desire to act it out in any deep way (e.g. I don't really want to have a robot copy of some attractive woman, just fantasize about it). I think most fetishes are based on the ability to have real-life experiences (everything from foot-fetishists to BDSM). There are no sentient androids–just as there are no giantesses or anthropomorphic animals–so I wonder if there is an unexplored category of sexuality there.

[darkbutflashy]

First of all most of your accusations do seem to be mostly about "i could do this before why can't i do this now?" which is the opposite of bad, it just means that finally women have a say in stuff where they previously were completely excluded as if their presence was to be considered "useless" or even "damaging".

Ah, no again. What you don't understand is I actually LIKE women being empowered. At the workplace, in public, in sexual affairs. It would be nice to have more engineer women around me so I won't feel so alone any more.

And that's why I find it so ridiculous that "feminists" use their (indeed) very limited power to do nothing but annoying everyone. That's the opposite of good politics. It scares away men AND women who want a change and true participation of women in society.

Slapping somebody's butt "playfully" might have been accepted 50 years ago, i hope not today. Telling people that they have to accept your invitation out for a beer or else should never have been accepted in the first place and so on and so forth.

I hope so, too. But my example was about less than that. Mr Brüderle denied the female reporter an interview, and tried to be charming in denying, which failed because he's a ditz. Then, a year later, this was used against him and "feminists" had nothing better to do than calling him the worst of all. (Though I think nobody summoned the Holy Godwin.)

That said the only case in which a feminist did something criminal in all you said was with the condemnation of a rapist before he was sentenced guilty. That is unacceptable, but in all your stress venting that was the only one thing i saw. I understand you don't like it, your two post speech was a gigantic venting of stress, but personally i think most of those things you said are signs of progress not of "feminists in power".

Did you read my comment? Really? Mr Kachelmann was found NOT GUILTY by the court, though Mrs Schwarzer did her best to tweak public opinion to consider him guilty. And she still does.

And you don't understand who Mrs Schwarzer is.

Mrs Schwarzer is not "a feminist" but the leading idol in Germany's "feminism". She's there since the mid-1970ies, with her "Emma" mag and she influenced generations of German "feminists". She's a terribly obnoxious person, from the beginning. Her basic political agenda in the 1970ies was "Let's cut off their dicks!" and she advocates all kinds of discrimination against men. Because men, in her view, are the source of all evil.

And Mrs Schwarzer is powerful. Can you think of anyone you know who is blackmailing state officials to send them 400 000€ per year? I mean, without being persecuted for blackmail but instead, actually receiving the money (for at least 8 years, IIRC), given at her free disposal? No controlling?

It's no wonder Mrs Schwarzer decided to report about the Kachelmann trial for the BILD tabloid, which is seen as powerful (roughly compareable with Fox News) and notorious in its hate-campaigns against anyone. It wasn't important she condemned BILD for almost 35 years before for displaying a half-naked woman on page 3 every day. She needed BILD as an outlet for her hate speech. All she has is hate-speech. Oh, wait. She has hate-speech and hate.

Saying that feminists are in power because you can't harass women in your workplace

Uh, no I haven't said that. And I'm pretty sure about that.

[darkbutflashy]

Maybe I add an identification figure for strong, independent women here in Germany. It's Beate Uhse. Much different from "feminists".

She became a pilot short before WWII, worked as a stuntwoman pilot in pre-war films, then did ferry flights of fighter planes later in war. After she lost her husband in war, she had to care for her son alone and started her own business, the world's first sex shop "Betu-Versand", which sold contraception manuals, a bit later condoms, a bit later she founded a porn film company. All very taboo back then, especially for a woman. And she had no problems with sex at all, was a naturalist actually.

So, that's what I call a feminist. Without ticks. No wonder Mrs Schwarzer hated Mrs Uhse.

[BD]

... denounce anyone for technosexual interests (by their very nature as potentially heterosexual and/or involving a woman choosing to be submissive in any way, even as a fantasy) ...

I like to point out that there's differences between "think", "say", and "do". You can think whatever you choose. But when you take action, you need to have a consenting party. I get that "saying" is weird since you can't "unhear" or "unsee" something, but is anyone at fault there, or is just the nature of the world? On the one hand you could not express the ideas, and on the other (in most cases) you can simply not read/watch/hear. I'm not sure what my point is other than maybe the condemnation does seem misguided since the whole point of women's rights is to not forbid consensual, desired behaviors that were heretofore forbidden. For people to use the "feminism" label as a tool of condemnation and censorship of consensual, desired behaviors seems altogether incorrect. If they'd just self-describe as a nosy, busy-body puritan, there would really be no issue.

This!

Fucking! This!

Only a narrow minded puritan would stop two consenting people from doing what they want. Let's not label them "feminists" just because some prick who is also a feminist got on someone's nerves.

For all i care you could mix together any kind of fetish. Like (out of the top of my mind) a male getting a footjob by another male while dressed in a pink rabbit suit and shitting in a diaper and then eating the shit. Do i find it repulsive? Yes. Would i masturbate to that? Hell no. Do i want to stop two consenting people from doing it? FUCKING NO!

The keyword here is C-O-N-S-E-N-T.

A normal person, feminist or not at the sound of that keyword would say "Okay, it's your thing, do it, i have no idea how you two found each other, though, and i REALLY do not want to know. I'll just go behind a wall, so i don't see you. Do your thing and don't bother me."

An hater/puritan/troll/whatever-you-want-to-call-it would say "THOU SHALL NOT!".

It's not feminism. It's the haters.