Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Robots objectify women?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Robots objectify women?

    http://www.seeker.com/sex-robots-kil...paign=carousel


    Article about ethics of AI includes researchers Kathleen Richardson and Kate Devlin and makes some claims such as the following:


    "Doesn't the issue of consent, at some point, have to factor in?"

    "doesn't the very idea of a female sex robot exacerbate the objectification of women? "

    "she thinks the very concept of a sex robot echoes cultural patterns of ownership and slavery. "We have to understand what is at work in the development of sex robots — and the way in which prostitution is invoked as the background"

    "the development of sex robots will ultimately reinforce behaviors in which women are treated as sexual objects. "What we are creating is a version of instrumentalist sex that is so destructive to humanity, and building reciprocal social relations"




    It seems to me, that there is some misandrist feminist influence at work here and gynocentrism at the very least. They never mention if robots will objectify men. They never mention men being used as sex objects. I wish I were present at the conference to ask some of my questions...... Is using men as walking ATMs objectifying men? Do dildos objectify men? Do dildos give consent before each use?
    Last edited by Gar Castle; 10-24-2016, 03:24 PM. Reason: added quotes

  • #2
    I can see it now...robots will be ''accusing'' men of rape...because feminism. >.<

    Comment


    • #3
      Christ, some people think too fucking much, and are addicted to attention too fucking much. Of course she's against sex robots, just look at her. And it won't objectify women, it will objectify sex robots. What it will do, however, is hold women up to high standards of sexiness. Are men going to buy 300 pound, blubbery, cottage-cheese-thighed, loud-mouthed sex robots? Hell no, they're going to buy robots which look like a 25-year-old Salma Hayak (well, the brunette lovers like me, anyway) and obey their every sexual whim! At least one won't have to worry about poopy on the dicky with a robot.

      Typical feminist. They can't just let men just fuck off and have fun.
      Stay single and prosper!

      Comment


      • #4
        It's sad that humanity is pulling apart like this.

        I would much rather have harmony.

        But women chose to become oppressors.

        So we will make our own way without them.

        Even if they make sex robots illegal, you can buy the parts and build it yourself. There is no way to stop it.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Gar Castle View Post
          http://www.seeker.com/sex-robots-kil...paign=carousel


          Article about ethics of AI includes researchers Kathleen Richardson and Kate Devlin and makes some claims such as the following:


          "Doesn't the issue of consent, at some point, have to factor in?"

          "doesn't the very idea of a female sex robot exacerbate the objectification of women? "

          "she thinks the very concept of a sex robot echoes cultural patterns of ownership and slavery. "We have to understand what is at work in the development of sex robots — and the way in which prostitution is invoked as the background"

          "the development of sex robots will ultimately reinforce behaviors in which women are treated as sexual objects. "What we are creating is a version of instrumentalist sex that is so destructive to humanity, and building reciprocal social relations"




          It seems to me, that there is some misandrist feminist influence at work here and gynocentrism at the very least. They never mention if robots will objectify men. They never mention men being used as sex objects. I wish I were present at the conference to ask some of my questions...... Is using men as walking ATMs objectifying men? Do dildos objectify men? Do dildos give consent before each use?
          A lot of that is "covered" on the page of the Ban Sex Robots Campaign page:
          https://campaignagainstsexrobots.org...s-sex-objects/
          Of course it is "covered" in the sense of "not true and doesn't matter", with a heavyhanded shaming appeal to be a "Good Man" who doesn't abuse his power in the sexual marketplace - as if men had any. She is totally blind to society's empathy gap wrt. men.

          I don't think dr Richardson is a frontline feminist - I haven't found "patriarchy" in any of the articles yet - but she is definitely a gynocentrist, claiming that women's values are universal values, and certainly trumping men's values; which highlights how feminism is gynocentrism on steroids, weaponized, even all the way down to the split of men's interest in AI, having to do with killing and weaponry, and female interest in AI, centered, inevitably, on a certain body orifice. Which is weird, considering that a hole consists of virtually nothing.

          In one of the articles, she presents a fairly weird anthropological ontology of sex devices: https://campaignagainstsexrobots.org...en-richardson/.
          Kudos to anyone who can unravel how she gets from A to B here.

          The BSR campaign, btw, operates from the interesting angle that only men will have sex robots. It will probably be more positive to females being able to buy themselves a "AI Stud 2.0 model Brad Pitt ". It is also assumed that sex is the only emotional needs people are going to build robots for. What if someone builds a companion robot for frustrated housewives to scold and nag? A mute boyfriend who has to listen to prattle day after day after day? What if someone built a child robot for females who cannot conceive? A child that will be the recipient of any one females frustration and pain and suffering - an abused child robot?

          We should make that "AI ethics research board" .... get some government grants ...

          M

          Edit:
          - She is plenty googleable, and dissected in a variety of 2015 YT-videos, when she launched her campaign.
          - There is a photo here (at own risk): http://mypetjawa.mu.nu/archives/219955.php
          If you snip along the hairline and the "smile", what cruel weapon of hand to hand combat will appear...?
          Last edited by Manalysis; 10-24-2016, 06:08 PM.

          Comment


          • #6
            Irony.

            The problem isn't that it "objectifies" women; it's that it commoditizes them.

            Women's value is rooted in objectification, which sounds bad until you look at the alternative, which is to be valued only for utility, the way men are.

            Comment


            • #7
              Not all men view women as interchangeable with robots. (at least the ones I know, personally) As some men have even posted on this forum, they don't just view sex as a mechanical act, but rather need to have feelings involved before they become interested in sex.

              Comment


              • #8
                Prove to me that a robot can provide consent. Hell, prove to me how a women can provide consent... legally... as consent is a state of mind. If we can't do that right now with humans why are we even thinking about worrying about AI consent.

                And none of this bypasses biology.. currently humans need other humans to make humans. Sure, I imagine artificial wombs, cloning, ect... those might eventually replace the current squishy/STD version of human reproduction.

                The trick for women will be... how will they justify theft of male resources if human reproduction is not a female-only monopoly? Right now, men pay the lions share of the world's burdens for food, transportation, housing, utilities. All that extra male motivation for courting female sexual market value... for reproductive purposes... hinges on the promise of being a dad one day. Without that motivation... well... see modern day Japan.

                Not that I am worried about that happening any time soon... human robot and medical progress will be bankrupted by the state just like everything else. The inevitable conclusion of socialism is communism.. and the inevitable conclusion of communism is mis-management of resources, apathy and starvation.

                Feminism is extremely expensive, requires state violence to enforce, and leads to more miserable women, and men of course. Its a Utopian ideology that will end up the same as all other Utopian ideologies... bankrupt or dead from eating their seed crop.

                The parasites don't care if they kill the host.. because they think there will always be another host to latch onto.

                Objectification is just another made-up socialist word for 'give me more money because of vagina or I'll have the state put you in jail'. It just a fancy replacement for the other taboo word: "discrimination", which is just another way of saying "unaccountable" or "infantile".

                Discrimination is vital.. based on people's behaviour.. because some behaviours are objectively not-preferred, and evil.

                Objectification is another way of saying something is evil, without having to define why, and without having to have direct evidence. Its just another 'state of mind' subjective term.

                Objectification... nothing objective about it... which is the ultimate irony.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Deidre View Post
                  Not all men view women as interchangeable with robots. (at least the ones I know, personally) As some men have even posted on this forum, they don't just view sex as a mechanical act, but rather need to have feelings involved before they become interested in sex.
                  I'm not sure about feelings, but I for one need flesh and blood, not silicone and circuitry. Now if they started talking about human clones purposely bred brainless, to be later installed with a digital brain, hell yeah, I could handle that. That's kind of creepy actually.
                  Stay single and prosper!

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    At least a robot would come with a remote-control that has a volume button
                    "Men, it has been well said, think in herds; it will be seen that they go mad in herds, while they only recover their senses slowly, and one by one" - Charles Mackay

                    And therefore never send to know for whom the bell tolls; It tolls for thee. - Donne

                    "What we are seeing in this headless misandry is a grand display of the Tyranny of the Underdog: 'I am a wretchedly longstanding victim; therefore I own no burden of adult accountability, nor need to honor any restraint against my words and actions. In fact, all efforts to restrain me are only further proof of my oppressed condition.'
                    "It is the most perfect trump-card against accountable living ever devised." - Gladden Schrock

                    "What remains for most men in modern life is a world of expectation without reward, burden without honor and service without self" - Paul Elam

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Deidre View Post
                      Not all men view women as interchangeable with robots
                      Oh, please ...
                      No man views woman as interchangeable with robots.
                      Wrt. their purpose, robots are interchangeable with any other kind of masturbation.
                      Wrt. their construction, robots are probably easier to repair than women.

                      they don't just view sex as a mechanical act
                      What does "viewing sex as a mechanical act" even mean ...?

                      but rather need to have feelings involved before they become interested in sex.
                      Sure here are feelings involved. Always. Like horniness.

                      M

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        I don't even know why anyone in their right mind would claim that robots shaped like women would "objectify" women. At least they are trying to create the appearance of a whole woman. Women just use lifelike imitations of a man's penis (without the rest of the body) to get themselves off and no one has a problem with that. Have you seen some of the dildos that women use?
                        “No one is free who has not obtained the empire of himself. No man is free who cannot command himself.”
                        ― Pythagoras

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Manalysis View Post
                          What does "viewing sex as a mechanical act" even mean ...?
                          Maybe ask the manufacturers of these sex robots as to what that might mean considering that a robot would only be capable of providing a very sterile, robotic (no pun) type of sexual experience. Guess time will tell.

                          As to the OP, I don't see why feminists concern themselves with these things, tbh. Are they worried women will be replaced by sex robots? lol I think the average woman who isn't a feminist (myself included), doesn't even contemplate this.
                          Last edited by Deidre; 10-24-2016, 11:03 PM.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Gar Castle View Post
                            "she thinks the very concept of a sex robot echoes cultural patterns of ownership and slavery. "We have to understand what is at work in the development of sex robots — and the way in which prostitution is invoked as the background"

                            "the development of sex robots will ultimately reinforce behaviors in which women are treated as sexual objects. "What we are creating is a version of instrumentalist sex that is so destructive to humanity, and building reciprocal social relations"
                            Way I see it, if you have concerns about women being treated as objects but someone has a fantasy around owning a woman...well they can safely act out this fantasy with a robot, why not let them have that option? I don't think it reinforces poor behaviours so much as it creates an outlet for anyone who might have frustrations there. This sounds like it's more about denying male sexual pleasure than anything else. I'd be more concerned about the social negatives in reducing one on one interactions than I would be about objectifying.
                            Funny thing about shit -- good things tend to grow out of it

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Deidre View Post
                              Maybe ask the manufacturers of these sex robots as to what that might mean considering that a robot would only be capable of providing a very sterile, robotic (no pun) type of sexual experience. Guess time will tell.

                              As to the OP, I don't see why feminists concern themselves with these things, tbh. Are they worried women will be replaced by sex robots? lol I think the average woman who isn't a feminist, doesn't even contemplate this.
                              They 100% are because that's the only card they have. If they don't have that as a bargaining chip then they don't have men, if the don't have men they will fail miserably...society will overall. If it came to some kind of state of men vs. women I really don't think us women would strive on our own....just look at any survival shows with men vs. women haha. It's a bit of a predicament for them because deep down they know that too so they're trying to get the balance of not having to put out for men (or please them in anyway) but still having them by the balls and at their beck and call....currently just the promise of sex can achieve that from most average men.
                              Funny thing about shit -- good things tend to grow out of it

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X