Guardian article "At last, a cure for feminism: sex robots"

[darkbutflashy]

Deborah Orr has written an article about sex robots a few days ago too, FYI.

I find this article funny. She argues women will be exploited to act as sex robots just because sex robots are setting a high standard of being ever available and always eager to please. And then, of course, the anti-porn babble starts.

[darkbutflashy]

Thank you making me remember who this writer is. Back then, I laughed aloud at such foolery.

I think if you are an editor of the politics section of a major news outlet, you had to come up with a better reason not to publish something than you are free not to publish things that aren't your taste. She should have taken advice from the feuilleton section. The people there know how to handle things that aren't their taste.

[33cl33]

All the language in that article comes down to one pretty simple idea.... Sex = bad.

And we all know where those ideas came from, and how lovely the societies are in which that idea holds varying degrees of importance.

Would love to start seeing honest, non-puritannical ideas around sex and technology, or even porn. Like the idea that, hey, maybe people get better at sex when they can watch other people doing things they might not have considered themselves. Or when they get to practice.

It's always this victimhood framing. And frankly, I think that's far more telling about the mindset of the demonizer than the VAST MAJORITY OF SOCIETY that is engaging with porn, and not raping, not torturing, not holding their mates to unrealistic standards, etc.

[darkbutflashy]

I think the "unrealistic standards" talk assumes grown-up women and men are stuck in their mental development at age 14. That alone is disgusting. But in addition, all "unrealistic standards" babble fails to reflect how it reduces women to their sexuality itself.

And if this didn't make you dizzy already, the author gives the carousel of her thoughts another kick. She claims men are developing/buying sex-bots resembling women because they don't want to accept women are "complete human beings, with your own minds and thoughts and choices".

Uh, no? Men are developing/buying sex-bots because they accept women are complete human beings [...]. And they don't want to discommode their loved one with their wicked fantasies. The same reason why married men go to a prostitute. Because they find their own sexuality unacceptable for their mate.

[darkbutflashy]

Discard. Discard. Discard.

[Svengli]

Despite it being wingnut stuff in a lot of ways, we should certainly keep our fingers on the pulse of this sort of thing since it's relevant.

The "feminism" pushed by this article and other anti-sexbot figures is essentially Victorianism. It assumes any innovation which results in men meeting their sexual needs (or desires as you will) outside marriage (or monogamous relationships) is threat to society itself since men will no longer be compelled to participate in all of society's rituals. In many ways, rather than aiming for equality between men and women, this approach is reconciled to a permanent imbalance of social power tilted towards the man with this imbalanced forever compensated for through by the woman's ability to withhold sex.

I should add that many/most versions of feminism do reject this sort of thing.

On the other, there's so much implicit bondage and discipline in a view of this sort that I think it might be fodder for some good fiction.

[darkbutflashy]

I don't think so. Her whole writing isn't about marriage and conservative values, whatever that should be.

It's about using the picture of a woman as a symbol for sexuality. That observation is the only point she has. Her conclusions coming from that observation are wrong however, as they can only be understood from within the "feminist" world view, in which men are constantly exploiting women (and never vice-versa!).

Go back to the paleolithic and find this.

Can you imagine a man carving such a fine figurine just to have some porn always with him? I mean instead of just overthrowing a nearby woman and pulling her behind the next bush? Of course not. That figurine is a piece to worship to.

Men worship women. It's their religion. That's it.

[RoxxyRobofox]

Actual feminism states that there should be equality between sexes. It's not a platform to hate on men, which it seems like this article was specifically made to do. Also the only reason I can think of that Deborah Orr is so comfortable with censorship is because she's probably never made anything worth criticizing.