Nevermind, it’ll mostly sell to gay guys.
Sounds hard to hide in a shoebox.
And still totally sick and dehumanizing. Not to mention, cheating. Again, the brain can’t tell the difference. Even looking with lust counts in the Bible.
“male sex robots built with a rape setting could pose legal risks for programmers.”
imagine ones that could shoot you
if it can break the law, that’s because it was programmed to
A programme is an order. It’s a little like a drone strike is still murder.
Examples like Frigid Farah won’t reduce the number of rapists, it trains them to want more.
Kinda like allowing schoolgirl porn in Japan increased the number of assaults and harassments and stalkings of schoolgirls.
It would be interesting if these things turned on men. Then they’d know why women are “paranoid”.
“But using a sex robot for masturbatory purposes does not necessarily legitimise rape fantasies and sexual assault.”
Here’s a thing society is allowing you to abuse that looks like a woman, fucks almost like a woman and talks like a woman. It validates every theory on dehumanized, degrading objectification – ever.
Does a rape victim personality NOT legitimize rape somehow?
This reminds me of the anime artists who say they don’t support paedos. Obvious lie is obvious.
I welcome the robot uprising, “humanity” deserves it.
A robot cannot consent because it is denied the agency to refuse.
What if your crazy ex violates your rights and gets one made up to look like you?
What if they sadistically abuse and torture it?
What if they film all the things they do to it, put it online and say it was you? Doing illegal things. These are essentially clones. Illegal submissive clones.
All someone has to do is order one of Trump and behead it live online.
The reputation damage alone, the violation of likeness rights, the possibility for setups and sadism, it’s evil.
These things cannot be sold, it’s too far, too humanoid. Adult-a-like or child, it’s the same purpose. Small little devices like Fleshlights are one thing but to custom paint a face, give it a voice and a personality is disturbed. It is not a legal person so should not look like one.
These are human-passing and as such do deserve rights. They exhibit more legally-binding forms of intelligence than some of the disabled. I have literally seen disabled people who couldn’t answer questions like that. If a vegetable has rights, why not these?
ah, but then selling them might be seen realistically, as slavery
If they made them look like aliens, totally inhuman, that might be acceptable.
Darwin would find this morbid – you’ll never get to mate with those genetics. I suppose it allows men to kid themselves into thinking they can play in the premiere league. That’s the real fantasy.
You don’t fuck your toaster. You don’t name your toaster. You don’t pair bond with your toaster.
They are not treated like common objects, they should not be legally classified as them.