…and this is a 
Those darned Christians are always ruining our fun. Now we're getting preemptive finger-wagging: we have been warned that sex with robots is always wrong. The author is afraid we're going to someday run out and buy life-like android sex slaves, and then humanity will go extinct…because of course we'd all prefer to have sex with a perfect Christian woman an obedient, unquestioning, subservient machine.
(Shhh. While he's busy looking for androids to cluck over, don't let him know that the sex machines are already here. They aren't humanoid at all. They tend to have shapes that vary from simple cylinders to oddly bumpy-twisted things that get around some of the deficiencies of our natural forms, and they vibrate. They also don't seem to be leading to the disappearance of the species.)
Comments
Posted by: Jonathan Martin | September 19, 2009 12:54 PM
Wow, Dav Mab didn't waste any time jumping on this one. :)
Posted by: Gruesome Rob | September 19, 2009 12:54 PM
"Probably within 40 years"?
Uh, How about now?
Posted by: Valdyr | September 19, 2009 12:56 PM
This "God and Science" website is satire, right?
Posted by: gg | September 19, 2009 12:56 PM
Seriously? Once again the Christian right makes satire seem prescient.
Posted by: Clemens | September 19, 2009 12:56 PM
Of course we won't go extinct, because genetic engineers will give us men vibrating penises!
Posted by: Nerd of Redhead, OM
|
September 19, 2009 12:58 PM
Gruesome Rob, but it doesn't cook dinner...
Posted by: catta | September 19, 2009 12:58 PM
I'm sure his real problem with the existing sex machines is that they aren't good enough. He's just afraid of something humanoid being developed, and then having to go another spending spree only to be disappointed again. Poor thing.
Also, why is he only afraid of "female" robots? Isn't he scared that good Christian women will run off with a bot and live happily ever after?
Posted by: Mozglubov | September 19, 2009 1:03 PM
You know, this wouldn't be an issue if the Christians weren't so against cloning too...
Posted by: Trug | September 19, 2009 1:05 PM
Wow, that's a pretty damn good story! I especially like the bit where the defense attorney smashes the sex android into little bits in the courtroom, THAT was drama. Now if only they would do a story about how the Christian zealots abuse their own real women and smash them on the floor when they're being sinful. But I guess that might be asking too much.
Posted by: Jennifer Gray | September 19, 2009 1:05 PM
I learned about the dangers of human-robot romantic relations from Futurama.
http://www.hulu.com/watch/4510/futurama-anti-robot-propaganda
;)
Posted by: IaMoL | September 19, 2009 1:05 PM
Unfortunately, a Texas couple decide to make a fuck machine using a reciprocating saw(Sawzall) and a dildo mounted over an actual blade. The results were Darwin Award worthy.
Posted by: ursa major | September 19, 2009 1:06 PM
Dav,
Did it ever occur to you that you just might be worth reading if you took your medication regularly? You are seriously ill dude.
Time for killfile.
Posted by: Squiddhartha | September 19, 2009 1:07 PM
Why are they only concerned with Female Anatomically Correct Androids?
Posted by: The Pale Scot | September 19, 2009 1:10 PM
Well the Alice series IS nice, but I think I'm going to have to go with the Darryl Hannah model.
Posted by: ihedenius | September 19, 2009 1:11 PM
Give them a break, it's funny.
//
For the average male college student, this was not a major problem, since conversation was not his major intent. However, when companies tried to market MACA, the male counterpart, to the female college crowd, the acceptance was less than stellar, although some women insisted that they weren't any worse at conversation than the average male
//
Buried in that scenario is a good SciFi wanting to get out.
Posted by: IaMoL | September 19, 2009 1:11 PM
Dennis Markuze's God sucks big green donkey wangs. Dennis Markuze's God sucks big green donkey wangs.Dennis Markuze's God sucks big green donkey wangs.Dennis Markuze's God sucks big green donkey wangs.Dennis Markuze's God sucks big green donkey wangs. Dennis Markuze's God sucks big green donkey wangs.Dennis Markuze's God sucks big green donkey wangs.Dennis Markuze's God sucks big green donkey wangs.Dennis Markuze's God sucks big green donkey wangs.Dennis Markuze's God sucks big green donkey wangs.Dennis Markuze's God sucks big green donkey wangs.
not so Vague, eh?
Posted by: se-rat-o-SAWR-us | September 19, 2009 1:19 PM
sex with robots is always wrong …
as explained by Futurama's Anti-Robot Propaganda short "I Dated a Robot":
NARRATOR: Ordinary human dating. It's enjoyable and it serves an important purpose. But when a human dates an artificial mate, there is no purpose. Only enjoyment. And that leads to...tragedy.
BILLY: Neato! A Marylin Monroebot!
MONROEBOT: Ooo! You're a real dreamboat (mechanical voice) Billy Everyteen!
NARRATOR: Harmless fun? Let's see what happens next!
[Enter Billy's mother.]
MOTHER: Billy, do you want to walk your dog?
BILLY: No thanks Mom, I'd rather make out with my Monroebot.
[Enter Billy's father.]
FATHER: Billy, do you to get a paper out and make some extra cash?
BILLY: No thanks dad, I'd rather make out with my Monroebot.
[Enter his girlfriend, Mavis, from the café.]
MAVIS: Billy, do you want to come over tonight? We can make out together.
BILLY: Gee Mavis, your house is across the street, that's an awfully long way to go for making out.
NARRATOR: Did you notice what went wrong in that scene? Ordinarily Billy would work hard to make money from his paper route then he'd use the money to buy dinner for Mavis, thus earning the slim chance of performing the reproductive act. But in a world where teens can date robots why should he bother? Why should anyone bother? Let's take a look at Billy's planet a year later. Where are all the football stars? And where are the biochemists? They are trapped—trapped in a soft, vice-like grip of robot lips. All civilisation was just an effort to impress the opposite sex. And sometimes the same sex.
Posted by: Susan | September 19, 2009 1:19 PM
@ Squiddhartha
Seriously. If you're truly worried about extinction, you actually only need concern yourself with what the women are fucking, not the men.
Posted by: The Swede | September 19, 2009 1:20 PM
Ghost In The Shell touches upon this, and comes to quite different results. Perhaps not surprisingly, considering it was authored by much more sane individuals. Either way, if humans are that easy to distract, and we'll be able to manufacture such a mass of humanoid robots as to provide all males with one in 20 years, the world is doomed anyway, for much less subtle reasons.
Posted by: JD | September 19, 2009 1:20 PM
This thread is devolving already?
Posted by: ursa major | September 19, 2009 1:21 PM
@14
Male christinsane can not imagine that he is as bad a lover as the female christinsane.
I make a prophecy! Average buyer of sex slave machines will be middle aged clergy. Just wait.
Posted by: mike | September 19, 2009 1:24 PM
In all the robot sex scenarios, no one (the wackos) ever considers that a) the robots might not want to be sex-bots, b) human sex-workers would still be cheaper (esp. at $80K), and c) the zombie effect in CGI extends to humanoid robots.
I think that there will be many many years until sex-bots become popular. They have 100,000 years of human evolution to compete with, and the industry is the oldest one around.
Posted by: GF | September 19, 2009 1:26 PM
Haha! And apparently the development of at least a primitive artificial intelligence will find one and only one application: android sex machines! Marvelous ignorance, complete simplification, if only life followed the simple logic of such predictions! The invention of the electric bulb drove extinct candles, the car put the final nail in the coffin of walking, now, no one ever walks, anywhere. And flying put an end to the car, people just fly everywhere. Not to mention that things like television have completely removed from existence the radio. And lastly, the development of nuclear power has meant the complete destruction of all hydrocarbon based power industries! Such is the future viewed through these eyes.
Posted by: Cuttlefish, OM | September 19, 2009 1:27 PM
http://digitalcuttlefish.blogspot.com/2007/10/version-27.html
Posted by: ChicagoPat | September 19, 2009 1:27 PM
As always, the Onion is way out front on this one: http://www.theonion.com/2056-06-22/opinion/1/
Posted by: IaMoL | September 19, 2009 1:27 PM
I wonder how many fleshlights&trade have been purchased by evangelical Christians and Catholic priests?
Posted by: ursa major | September 19, 2009 1:28 PM
Ah, Mad Dav's posts have gone by-by. Now I must say @13 instead.
Posted by: Steven Carr | September 19, 2009 1:31 PM
My wife said that until there was a perfect robot male lover, she would have to make do with me.
What I want to know is, why did she start crying?
Posted by: GF | September 19, 2009 1:32 PM
Not only that, apparently mankind is not composed of reasoning individuals, capable of thinking and acting upon thoughts in a reasonable manner. Mankind, obviously, cannot reason things out for itself. No, we are not the same individuals, apparently, as those who raised from the depths of savagery civilization, science, thought and literature. We are, apparently, to a man, mindless sheep who follow without end the continually spawning temptations of Satan, and our only hope is unquestioning obedience to the Lord his texts and his church!
Posted by: DagoRed | September 19, 2009 1:35 PM
...and those "robotic" devices have been with us an awfully long time too. Here is a very special museum dedicated to...well you just gotta look for yourself.
http://www.goodvibes.com/content.jhtml?id=367
Posted by: Robert Madewell | September 19, 2009 1:37 PM
It kind of shows the apollogists stupidity, because he didn't even consider the possibility of MACAs (male anatomically correct android). He didn't concider that maybe real human women might desire a MACA (not to mention gay men). I guess women aren't supposed to have sex lives.
Posted by: BeccaTheCyborg | September 19, 2009 1:39 PM
Not gonna lie, I'd have sex with robots besides the battery-operated sex machines currently occupying a drawer in my bedroom.
I'd still want to be with my boyfriend and girlfriend, but I'd totally add some androids to the mix.
Posted by: Frink | September 19, 2009 1:42 PM
Don't forget, we already have "real dolls." The only thing we're missing there is movement--so it's sort of like married sex rather than promiscuous sex.
Posted by: Tuxedo Cartman
|
September 19, 2009 1:43 PM
I have to admit, I'd rather have sex with a sex-bot than a good, Christian woman. Those models are seemingly only capable of picking up talk radio (usually from the AM band variety at that), whereas with my sex bot I can plug in my iPod and listen to whatever I want. "Why, hello Katey Perry... is there anything you'd like to tell me?"
Posted by: Platonika | September 19, 2009 1:44 PM
Here is a stimulating article on vibrator usage research studies published in the Journal of Sexual Medicine.
Posted by: IaMoL | September 19, 2009 1:46 PM
"I kissed a borg and I liked it (her lips taste of molded plastics)."Posted by: Jack
|
September 19, 2009 1:48 PM
I had one of those inflatable dolls but it kept going down on me.
Posted by: Rey Fox | September 19, 2009 1:49 PM
And don't forget the Sybian.
Posted by: OregonMJW | September 19, 2009 1:51 PM
Commenter Robert Madewell makes a good point - what about what women of the future (or now) might want in the way of mechanically delivered sexual satisfaction? Of course, in the Fundamentalist Christian world of right & everybody else, a good woman is likely not supposed to manifest such desires. While industry is busy perfecting the Monroebot, and its Pittbot counterpart, perhaps they could also invent an effective mechanical sexual suppressant for the weak, if faithful. Beckbot?
Posted by: NoFear | September 19, 2009 1:52 PM
If a robot could assume both male and female roles, would it be adroigynous?
Posted by: Kim | September 19, 2009 1:57 PM
He starts of a huge assumption - that humans going extinct or becoming rare would be a bad thing and a big mistake - that everyone in the whole world will be able to afford a robot, even all the very poor people.
Posted by: Armand K. | September 19, 2009 2:01 PM
What a revolutionary idea for science fiction: addiction to android sex! I can't imagine why the author didn't submit the story to Asimov's or FSF! (Huh? What was that about reading the first sentence and writing a big blue R in the corner?)
Posted by: Jafafa Hots | September 19, 2009 2:01 PM
"Of course we won't go extinct, because genetic engineers will give us men vibrating penises!"
Actually come to think of it, that could be done right now. Body modification types could get that I bet.
The little vibrating motor from cell phones, also used in those tiny remote vehicles... very small. Small battery, charged daily through the skin via inductive whatchamacallit.
The motor and battery would leave raised bumps, but placed strategically that could be seen as a benefit.
Posted by: Professor Hubert Farnsworth | September 19, 2009 2:02 PM
Oh, dear, I should have shown him "Electrogonorrhea: The Noisy Killer" instead.
Posted by: Holydust | September 19, 2009 2:06 PM
Does this have anything to do with the latest TV commercial for Popular Science? (You have to admit that "puppies on a hovercraft" has a nice ring to it, though...)
http://www.geekologie.com/2009/09/highly_questionable_popular_sc.php
Posted by: SimonG | September 19, 2009 2:08 PM
Wow. These Christians seem to be totally obsessed by sex. Has it never occurred to them that people might get together for other reasons?
Until they get a full AI sexbot they have nothing to worry about.
Posted by: Holydust | September 19, 2009 2:17 PM
Also, I'd think wacky Fundie Christians should be more than stoked at the idea of sex-bots becoming a regular thing. After all, it's at least less of a sin to fondle/rape/kill something that doesn't have feelings or a psyche to damage.
What. I'm just saying. You'd think they'd be happy. I'm sure they'd still consider it shameful and sinful, since, you know, getting off is such a selfish act. But at least they wouldn't be dragging someone else into it.
As a girl, I might be jealous of a female android with vibrating naughty bits, but damned if I also wouldn't be envious of the guy who got to experience that. That sounds just awesome. :D
But seriously. Christians seem to think that people are all going to lose the urge to enjoy the rewarding experience of having and raising children just because we won't HAVE to fuck each other anymore just to get our rocks off.
Newsflash, guys... it's been that way for a long time. We're still havin' babies. Gasp!
They're such wet blankets. It's depressing.
Oh well—more MACA (male anatomically correct android) for me! (Two, please. If "sexual immorality" is going to "exist on a widespread scale", I might as well go all out.)
Posted by: Brian's A Wild Downer | September 19, 2009 2:19 PM
I don't need some robot going all West World on my junk.
Posted by: Jorge | September 19, 2009 2:22 PM
Have they opened up Westworld or Futureworld after those small little programming glitches?
From the looks of those resorts though only the rich and the TV scamme...errrr...preachers could afford that kind of vacation.
Posted by: Steamshovelmama | September 19, 2009 2:25 PM
Interesting they trumpet on about extinction since, even in a truly dystopian future, sexbots would be a commercial item and unlikely to be available to every human being on the planet... conversely in the unlikely event of a significant portion of humanity getting its jollies this way the population might well crash quite astoundingly quickly which would probably be a Good Thing for the planet.
CS Lewis had another argument in his "Out of the Silent Planet" trilogy where the second coming of the Messiah was never born because of the practice of married couples using facsimiles of the other for sexual activity, rather than the real person. I thought it was dumb when I read them as a teenager. TTHis argument is just as dumb. There you go.
Posted by: Pierce R. Butler | September 19, 2009 2:28 PM
Can anyone here provide us (strictly, of course, to relay to Rich Deem, author of the breakthrough piece which catalyzed this post) with a link to fanfic based on Tanith Lee's The Silver Metal Lover?
Posted by: bernarda | September 19, 2009 2:29 PM
Of course we will go extinct, for one reason or another. The dinosaurs lasted 150 million years, doesn't anyone realistically expect humanoids to last that long?
Posted by: Gyeong Hwa Pak | September 19, 2009 2:29 PM
Here is something I don't understand. Many Christian people are against masturbation. Apparently, feeling pleasure is a sin. Yet, masturbation should be more preferable in the Christian eye. For one, you could always masturbate rather than have premarital sex, or cheat on your spouse. There by you avoid adultery, if you are a Christian.
Ah, if they are afraid that robots will replace humans they should know that some cultures still prefer human, many of them
Posted by: crocusj | September 19, 2009 2:30 PM
I have been round the occasional block and have yet to find a FACA (thankfully)but you are wrong (again!!!) about the disappearance of species. We have clearly seen the evolution from dolphin to rabbit in this area and I suggest that a little more practical experimentation might be in order...though, under the circumstances, anecdotal evidence might well be acceptable in this case......
Posted by: strange gods before me | September 19, 2009 2:34 PM
crocusj FTW.
Posted by: Fraser | September 19, 2009 2:36 PM
The only conclusion I can draw is that Christians have really bad sex with each other. I hate to generalise ... ok, I totally love it, sorry ... but anybody who believes that having sex with a robot, or any mechanical device, has anything on sex with an actual live person (with or without artificial enhancement) (e.g. an electric toothbrush) is doing it wrong.
Posted by: Jadehawk, OM
|
September 19, 2009 2:36 PM
Interesting.
In that scenario, men will turn to sex-droids of their own volition (presumably because they're so much better than real women), but women will only do so when they run out of men (presumably because nothing can outperform a Real Man™).
Posted by: KemaTheAtheist | September 19, 2009 2:37 PM
This article reminded me of this other (much better) article about how gaming is going to change the world in much the same way...
http://www.cracked.com/article_15657_world-warcraft-world-10-ways-online-gaming-will-change-future.html
Basically the idea is that VR will become so amazing that people won't recognize that they're actually in some other world, sex will happen all the time in the game world between "awesome you"'s and only on very rare occassion will people make the laborious trip to actually meet in person for sex & procreation (thereby refered to as "meating.")
I can't wait for that revolution...
Posted by: Holydust | September 19, 2009 2:38 PM
One of the big reasons they're so repressed is that there's really no "well, it's better than the alternative, so it's somewhat okay". It's all or nothing with sexual pleasure.
It's the reason they get pent up and explode with gay airport bathroom escapades, extramarital affairs, trips to Bangkok for cheap child prostitution, and maxing out credit cards with online porn. When people resist healthy, natural behavior, they end up binging. It's unhealthy, but since they believe their holy book tells them they can't... you get where I'm going.
It's very sad. :(
Posted by: hje | September 19, 2009 2:38 PM
I guess he saw the Bjork video.
Posted by: catta | September 19, 2009 2:45 PM
Before the gentlemen get too excited about a future with vibrating penises: Some of us don't care for vibration. I'll let Stephen Fry say it: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FFrUasUn5nY (Never mind what he was actually referring to).
(Also, the vibration noise on cellphones is annoying enough; imagine your own body having yet another thing to go off at inopportune moments... I don't know if that's a good idea.)
Posted by: Cut and Paste | September 19, 2009 2:51 PM
Did anyone else notice that 3 of the 4 referenced studies were done by the same people, Dolf Zillmann and Jennings Bryant?
Anyone familiar with their work?
Posted by: Jadehawk, OM
|
September 19, 2009 2:54 PM
oh yeah. real women are just such a pain to be around that everybody will prefer personality-less androids.
Christians are fucking creepy.
Posted by: Valdyr | September 19, 2009 3:00 PM
I'm sure the females enjoy being characterized as prone to "incessant demands and mood swings".
Posted by: Abelard | September 19, 2009 3:03 PM
The fear of sex with robots and other non-natural partners by the white religious right masks deeper fears of racial degeneration, miscenegation with Hispanic and black populations and, by extension, the diminishment of white anglo-puritan values by population attrition. Typically, they point out the low birth-rates of wealthy, liberal, democratic, white societies and compare them to those of poor African or South American populations which are demonized for their supposedly aggressive and licentious sexuality. The android becomes in their minds the degenerative boogeyman, able to single-handedly diminish the wealthy white population by offering unfettered sexual desire to unsuspecting (and simple-minded) white males.
The religious right often plays into these untapped fears among the poorly educated white population.
Posted by: Pierce R. Butler | September 19, 2009 3:05 PM
Holydust @ # 59: ... trips to Bangkok for cheap child prostitution...
That's so '90s! Modern conservapervs get their action closer to home, in the sunny, friendly, inexpensive Dominican Republic.
Posted by: george.w | September 19, 2009 3:09 PM
Sex with robots could indeed be wrong, if two conditions are met; 1) the robot is self-aware, and 2) would prefer to say "no", but can't. Otherwise, bring on the sexbots!!!
Extinction won't happen from this. There will always be perverts who prefer natural human women or men. And it wouldn't hurt us to ease off a bit on the fruitful and multiplying.
Posted by: Perplexed | September 19, 2009 3:19 PM
damn, Jennifer i tried in vain to find that clip.
Posted by: pcarini | September 19, 2009 3:27 PM
The fembots in this writer's fantasy are completely subservient, yeah? Maybe he feels that all men are attracted to what he, as a good Christian, is attracted to.
Posted by: Alverant | September 19, 2009 3:28 PM
The reason why they're not concerned about male robots is that a Good Christian Woman (tm) won't want a robot that isn't earning a paycheck. She should be at home doing the cooking and cleaning. So unless they let a robot get a paying job, male robots won't even be invented.
Posted by: Perplexed | September 19, 2009 3:35 PM
"Acceptance among the male population evolved rapidly as men realized they could get an ideal "woman" whose only goal was to serve him."
Strange that this is what the writer would see as an "ideal" woman. can't say this is what I would consider ideal.
Posted by: tim Rowledge | September 19, 2009 3:36 PM
Reminds of aTom Smith song about the perfect christmas;
'my sister got a boyfriend that didn't suck,
my brother got a girlfriend that...... did'
Posted by: drew | September 19, 2009 3:40 PM
Friend of mine did a film on this topic years ago called, "The Love Machine".
Of course, Peter gets extra kudos because, you know, he's a cybernetics doctorate at the University of Illinois National Supercomputing Center. Great movie, btw.
check under films for the trailer.
http://www.peterasaro.org/
Posted by: Al | September 19, 2009 3:44 PM
Wasn't there an episode of Futurama that did this already? (With Lucy Liu IIRC)
Posted by: Peter | September 19, 2009 3:47 PM
That may be the best use of strikethrough I've ever been witness to.
Posted by: Abdul Alhazred | September 19, 2009 3:48 PM
Many years ago Scott Adams said the holodeck will be the last human invention.
Posted by: DuckPhup | September 19, 2009 3:53 PM
Arrggghhh...
(... trying to overcome the impulse to make bizarre comments about vacuum cleaners.)
Posted by: patientia | September 19, 2009 4:03 PM
What's wrong with going extinct?
Posted by: pcarini | September 19, 2009 4:24 PM
Tell you what - you go first and the rest of us, we'll follow...
Posted by: Iris | September 19, 2009 4:27 PM
"Men who owned a FACA disdained the company of real women, with all their incessant demands and mood swings."
Well, duh.
Posted by: Iris | September 19, 2009 4:28 PM
"Men who owned a FACA disdained the company of real women, with all their incessant demands and mood swings."
Well, duh.
Posted by: Jeff Knapp | September 19, 2009 4:29 PM
Er... There is this - RealDoll - your ultimate plastic lover!
Posted by: chrisD | September 19, 2009 4:29 PM
My thoughts exactly. The universe doesn't need us as badly as we need it. There is no reason save for selfish reasons why we should continue to rob this planet of resources which could have been used by life's more splendorous future creations. We (in general the more religious, woo-types) like to think of ourselves as the end-product of evolution, perfection personified. I say we relinquish our top spot for a possible better to come along. It may even happen while we're here at our weakest, unable to cope with a changing world we created. Poetic justice.
Posted by: Anna Hayward | September 19, 2009 4:35 PM
Humanity is already at risk from the invention of the Rabbit. Unless men can evolve pink, glittery genitalia that rotates and vibrates at 120rmp.
Posted by: chrisD | September 19, 2009 4:36 PM
It's not about suicide. It's like collective suicide, but by lack of procreation, not self-inflicted death. That option is still just as viable, but I'm not advocating it for anyone (unless you really want to.) Just stop breeding and there won't have to be any death involved. Just a beautiful return to an absence of humanity. Is there a problem with our non-existence? I don't think so. I think the alternative is far worse - a planet devoid of life due to the existence of us. Sure, we may solve the problem. But our backup plan should be phased non-existence carried out over the centuries until a solution presents itself.Posted by: PZ Myers
|
September 19, 2009 4:37 PM
Hey! I'm pretty sure you and I have never dated, so how did you know?
Posted by: Gerry | September 19, 2009 4:38 PM
@78
No different than just DYING, is it?
Posted by: Dancaban | September 19, 2009 4:45 PM
Hawkwind. Spirit of the Age.
Posted by: Buffybot | September 19, 2009 4:50 PM
I'm coming out firmly in support of robot-vampire sex.
Posted by: Stacy L Mason
|
September 19, 2009 4:51 PM
Some of the 'robots' even have non-euclidian geometry.
http://www.questionablecontent.net/view.php?comic=1380
Posted by: SQB (fuck death)
|
September 19, 2009 4:51 PM
I, for one, welcome our new robotic
overlordssexslaves.Posted by: Jadehawk, OM
|
September 19, 2009 4:58 PM
I also find it telling that under "every imaginable perversion" they can come up with only two: pedophilia and bestiality.
what, no furry-bots? no twins? no aliens? no tentacles? no self-replicas (for the true narcissist)?
Posted by: Anon | September 19, 2009 5:05 PM
http://xkcd.com/595/
http://xkcd.com/600/
Posted by: amphiox | September 19, 2009 5:10 PM
This is a non-problem. It'll only be a short while later when there will be robots capable of conceiving and giving birth to human babies will come along, ala Armitage the Third. And this will solve the abortion controversy too.
Either that, or cloning.
Posted by: Ron Sullivan | September 19, 2009 5:17 PM
Clemens @#5: ... genetic engineers will give us men vibrating penises!
Good Vibrations (and I'm sure they're not alone) already sells a couple of variations on a soft cockring that attaches to a bullet vibrator.
The whole thing's funny, though. The species really really doesn't need most of the existing males, if extinction's the concern. Didn't y'all invent war to take care of some of the surplus?
Posted by: Ron Sullivan | September 19, 2009 5:20 PM
Also: Anyone who thinks that machine = subservient hasn't dealt with machines very much.
Posted by: MadScientist | September 19, 2009 5:24 PM
Well as long as Inflatable Annie is still legal there is nothing to fear. No need to sling your rifles and march on those commie robot making places.
Posted by: Kobra | September 19, 2009 5:24 PM
They're called "toys," and while they're mostly used when alone, they have many applications for enhancing sex between people. I'm sure sex androids will be used in a similar way.
Posted by: Aenthropi | September 19, 2009 5:36 PM
Maybe traditional Christian women would sell better if they were marketed as appliances. Let me try:
Ideal birthing machine plus household accessories; comes in white or eggshell.
Posted by: Christoph | September 19, 2009 5:44 PM
Am I the only one who actually read out FACA aloud?
Yeah, someone screwed with the christians. Someone FAC'd them over, alright. It's hilarious, actually.
Posted by: Coragyps | September 19, 2009 5:52 PM
Has anyone mentioned the Great Prophet Zappa and his saga of F. Ron Hoover and the Church of Appliantology?
Posted by: Akiko | September 19, 2009 6:14 PM
You see if Fundies have to have sex with a female they would prefer it be lifelss, have no opinions, never move and cnsider nothign perverted. So robots would be a big danger to their precreation plans. Otherwise they want to do it with other guys.
Posted by: Sastra | September 19, 2009 6:25 PM
Years ago a thriller titled The Stepford Wives came out, later made into a movie (and later made into a remake of the movie.) In the seemingly idyllic town of Stepford, the men were killing and replacing their wives with robots who looked similar to their wives, but were perfectly compliant housewives and sex slaves.
At the time, the book was considered a sort of feminist rant, a male-slamming book which took the position that, deep down, men were really all cold-blooded, callous autocrats who were incapable of truly human depths of feeling and love. Women, on the other hand, were nuanced and capable of real relationships. The writer was a man, but The Stepford Wives was taken as an indictment of male chauvinism. A lot of men complained about it -- not because they were misogynists, but because they weren't.
Apparently, the Christian or Christians who put out this site think that men really are misogynists.
Posted by: gaypaganunitarianagnostic | September 19, 2009 6:40 PM
See 'The Silver Eggheads,'by Fritz Lieber.
Posted by: Gregory Greenwood | September 19, 2009 6:52 PM
This is probably not the scariest scenario for christians. Imagine instead that the current technologies aimed at creating an accurate computer model of the human mind one day create not mere artificial intelligence but instead true artificial sentience. Complete with the ability to reason, a capacity for original thought, an emotional range as great as a human, an appreciation for art and literature and the other fruits of civilisation.
In short, all the attributes of an artificial person in the literal (as opposed to legal) sense. How redundant would any concept of god become if a race of psychotic and generally deeply messed up, largely hairless apes, could pull the same trick that was supposedly the Sky Daddy's greatest acheivement? The core plank of all theism would implode like a bad soufle unless such technology could be supressed. Cloning is bad enough, but that could be written off as mankind messing with the periphery of the Sky Fairy's pre-existing 'creation'. But a new consciousness coming into being in which god had no hand? That is truly the stuff of xian nightmares.
The worst scenario for them is not the established sci-fi trope of the crazy homocidal robot (preferably from the future and sporting an Austrian accent) hell bent on killing all humans. It is not even the android sex sirens destroying mankind by stopping us procreating (which is already happening to us atheists. Just ask Andyet. Sex with machines. That gives a whole new meaning to 'Deus Ex Machina' . . .) That would be a 'get out' for them. Proof of god's wrath at our insolence in trying to mimick life. For the hardcore fundie the worst case scenario is if the sapient machines prove to be beneficial, law-abiding citizens in possession of the same rights as a human. We all know how tolerance causes fundies to come out in a rash.
If intelligent machines contributed greatly to a future society the fundies would not simply be able to exterminate them. They would have to deal with them as fellow citizens. The fundies would have to try to persuade the machines to believe in a religion that would doubtless hate and fear them. What if the machines refused to believe? What if (gasp!) they became a bunch of artificial atheists? Using their flawless machine memories to demoilish all religious apologetics with the unremitting weight of perfectly remembered and articulated science?
That is a nightmare scenario for xians everywhere.
And all this is before we even get started on 'cyberisation' (sorry, I could not resist at least one Ghost in the Shell reference.)
Posted by: Mena | September 19, 2009 7:19 PM
Sex with robots? A thread about sex with robots? Very well then...
http://jessfink.com/Chester5000XYV/?p=34
Posted by: Dale | September 19, 2009 7:21 PM
Tim Minchin and his BFF...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e6raVzrbqrM
Posted by: Mena | September 19, 2009 7:22 PM
Oh, TOTALLY NSFW!
Posted by: Itspiningforthefjords
|
September 19, 2009 7:34 PM
It's really true that a fair percentage of Christians (and a fair majority of fundies) spend every waking - and probably every sleeping - moment looking for a proverbial gutter in which to put their mind.
This guy probably gets a stiffy when he passes a doughnot shop. And shoots his wad if their are jellies in the window.
Fundies: the sad, sick, and stupid result of possessing no creativity but an ocean of repressed imagination.
Posted by: Margaret | September 19, 2009 7:48 PM
I suppose they don't want to feel inadequate... and their wives would get ideas about making demands...
Posted by: Pope Bandar bin Turtle | September 19, 2009 8:18 PM
androids to cluck over
I thought this was a euphemism-free blog!
Posted by: gypsytag | September 19, 2009 8:48 PM
I would be more concerned about them inventing an orgasm pill....
i can't believe the drug companies aren't already on it.
Posted by: Fil | September 19, 2009 8:53 PM
An Irish friend of mine permanently soured relations with his in-laws by telling them, at a dinner party, the joke about the Irishman being tried for necrophilia. His defence being, "I 'taught she was English Your Honour!"
Needless to say, the in-laws were English (daddy was a Colonel, no less).
I don't know what this has to do with the thread, except perhaps some vague relationship to robot sex when the batteries are dead.
Posted by: Rick R | September 19, 2009 9:10 PM
Aenthropi-
"Maybe traditional Christian women would sell better if they were marketed as appliances. Let me try:
Ideal birthing machine plus household accessories; comes in white or eggshell."
Quoted because that made me splurt coffee out my nose.
Posted by: Ian H Spedding, FCD | September 19, 2009 9:22 PM
Dogbert: "I can predict the future by assuming that money and male hormones are the driving forces for new technology. Therefore when virtual reality gets cheaper than dating, society is doomed."
Posted by: Captain Mike | September 19, 2009 9:23 PM
The idea that sex bots would cause the eventual extinction of the human race is stupid beyond belief. Apparently the author of the linked article has never noticed that women don't have babies because they want sex. They have babies because they want BABIES.
The desire to raise children and the desire to fuck are not the same thing.
Posted by: Naked Bunny with a Whip
|
September 19, 2009 10:01 PM
Is it still wrong if the robot is wearing a fursuit? And is gay?
Posted by: Rick R | September 19, 2009 10:08 PM
See, this isn't going to work. I made a gay sexbot a few years ago. Looked just like David Boreanaz.
But it declared it was just bi-curious and had a girlfriend.
Posted by: Zarquon | September 19, 2009 10:17 PM
xkcd spots the flaw in the argument.
Posted by: Gregory Mayer | September 20, 2009 12:14 AM
Isn't this a case of Poe's Law?
Posted by: Aquaria | September 20, 2009 12:32 AM
As usual, the Christians are waaaaay behind the curve on this issue. The Japanese, of course, have already addressed some of it in manga/anime, of course. See: Angelic Layer, or, especially, Chobits.
Posted by: SaintStephen | September 20, 2009 12:36 AM
"...because of course we'd all prefer to have sex with a perfect Christian woman an obedient, unquestioning..."
HOWEVER... some people were born to lead, and others have to learn to follow their example, at least until the War on Reason is over. Or maybe forever, hell if I know.
Posted by: Janine, Vile Bitch, OM | September 20, 2009 12:44 AM
Posted by: Naked Bunny with a Whip Author Profile Page | September 19, 2009 10:01 PM
Is it still wrong if the robot is wearing a fursuit? And is gay?
Are you talking about Ro-Man?
Posted by: Raincitygirl | September 20, 2009 2:08 AM
Those wacky fundies are so behind the curve on this one it's ridiculous. Everybody knows that when FACA's are created, they will be:
a) hot Canadian women
b) fanatical monotheists
c) capable of getting knocked up
Humanity won't go extinct, humanity will just switch to making cute/creepy half-robot/half-human babies with improbable ringlets, excellent athletic ability (all that sprinting) and serious crayon skills.
Posted by: nanahuatzin | September 20, 2009 2:16 AM
Interestingly, a lot of manga or anime are exploring the relations of human or robots...
Like the romantic anime commedy :"Chobits"..
What happens when a young, healthy boy, who only wishes to surf the web to see porn, find an anatomically correct robot...?
he falls in love..!! :)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qrIc0AMy10w
by the way, i learned in this manga/anime, the convention that when a male character is sexually aroused... he has a nose bleeding...
Posted by: Android fuck! It's awwwwwwwright | September 20, 2009 3:32 AM
I'll buy an android once they come with a Fleshlight installed.
Posted by: Riaan Moll
|
September 20, 2009 3:48 AM
The question for me is, do xtians dream of electric sheep....?
Posted by: travc | September 20, 2009 5:24 AM
Some of the first consumer applications of the electric motor were vibrators. There were mechanical devices (including some really clever and intricate ones) before that.
Yeah, common consumer batteries are round because of the flashlight... but if square flashlights were the norm, I think we'd still 'conveniently sized' cylindrical batteries ;)
Posted by: Naked Bunny with a Whip
|
September 20, 2009 7:47 AM
I really shouldn't read this thread and the one about Skatje's driving at the same time.
Posted by: Holydust | September 20, 2009 8:24 AM
Acquaria:
I was in Angelic Layer (voice of Arisu), and I don't really think so. The AL dolls were very basic, subject to their player's whims, and didn't possess speech. AI wasn't really a theme. However, as other people have mentioned, shows like Armitage the Third, Ghost in the Shell and the less sci-fi, more cutesy Chobits have broached these topics. AL is really more of a kid's show aimed at teaching children and preteens to do their best and to shoot for the stars. It's why it was one of my favorites. ;3 Not enough shows like that that don't involve weird little critters as co-stars. (Not that there's anything wrong with critters.)
Posted by: shonny | September 20, 2009 10:16 AM
Sexual immorality = ??
Suggestions: Fun, delightful, exciting, exhilarating, - and not the least, NATURAL.
Or the ones the religious practise: Pedophilia and rape.
Posted by: Naked Bunny with a Whip
|
September 20, 2009 11:04 AM
@shonny: Deem must be very sheltered if he thinks the behaviors he considers "sexual immorality" aren't now and have always been widespread.
Posted by: Terri ~ | September 20, 2009 11:15 AM
Forget the sex!
I'd have it doing all the housework!
Posted by: Naked Bunny with a Whip
|
September 20, 2009 11:49 AM
@Terri ~: You just don't want to admit what you do with your Roomba. ;-D
Posted by: jemand | September 20, 2009 12:27 PM
*perfect* mates lol. That's ONLY a perfect description of a fundamentalist quiverful woman, who's really nothing more than taking a human and turning it into a robot anyway. Those of us who actually value real relationships will still be having kids lol.
Posted by: Moi | September 20, 2009 7:15 PM
I think my wife has beaten the robots by about 40 years in to being almost indistinguishable from the average human.
Posted by: Rey Fox | September 20, 2009 8:00 PM
"Apparently, the Christian or Christians who put out this site think that men really are misogynists. "
Projection.
Posted by: Jadehawk, OM
|
September 20, 2009 8:10 PM
oh fuck yeah. I want my Rosie the Robot, and I want it now!
Posted by: Charlie Foxtrot | September 20, 2009 9:09 PM
from #53:
...although I have heard that it can sting quite a bit...
Posted by: joreth
|
September 21, 2009 9:34 PM
What's with this choosing robots OVER humans? Why either/or? why not both? Why not both at the same time? I just spent a *very* pleasant afternoon with one of my boyfriends and my favorite "machine" together.
Embrace the power of AND!
Posted by: Roland Deschain
|
September 22, 2009 4:33 PM
"because of course we'd all prefer to have sex with an obedient, unquestioning, subservient machine."
But is it that far-fetched to imagine a future where you can get a female android modeled exactly according to your tastes, looks/feels/behaves like a real woman, loves you unconditionally, indulges in your deepest fantasies, however embarrassing (or disturbing), never ages, never gets pregnant, has no biological imperative to seek out an alpha male, and has no needs of her own, except maybe getting recharged?
Imagine a hypothetical futuristic toy that is EXACTLY like a woman: Body temp at 98.6, spontaneous, complex personality built in, AI that adapts to your style of conversation to keep discussions interesting, feels human to the touch, can even go out with you to a movie, if you're into that sort of thing. Basically indistinguishable from a human female.
I think the prospect of such a sextoy would be very appealing to men.