Made with Love

Dr Kathleen Richardson Motivated to Ban Sexbots Over Relationship Difficulties?

Canada-Man

Reviewer
Joined
Apr 16, 2015
Messages
2,289
Dr Kathleen Richardson, who wants to put men who use sexbots, or indeed any ‘intelligent’ male sex toys, in prison as sex offenders, gives an insight into her motivation by appearing to admit that her interest in ‘robot ethics’ stems from her lack of success with men (from 1:25 mark).



If she’s having trouble attracting men now (and to be frank, it’s not hard to see why) then it must be clear to her that it’s game over when the teen sexbots arrive in a few years time.
What kind of a woman wishes to use government force to incarcerate men (likely to be anally raped by other ‘sex offenders’) for not choosing her as a sexual partner?
 
Women would never replace a real man with a robot. Women want men to do stuff for them in exchange for sex. Men are different. Men just want sex, they don't want women to do something as a result of the sex. Therefore, men would use a robot, whereas women would still demand an interaction with a human male.

Feminists or women who try to cockblock men from having sex with other women are nothing more than haters. I have no time for people such as Ms. Richardson.

The current prostitution law punishes men for buying sex, but protects women who sell it. I, of course, hate all aspects of the prostitution law. But, the new and current law is equivalent to protecting a drug dealer while at the same time jailing the drug buyer. It is simply a result of feminists and their supporters punishing men and pushing them further into the black hole. Some women really hate men.

Great thing about Chinese culture (if you are an Asian Lover) is that Chinese women have no interest in feminism and in hating men. Disdain for men is a white cultural trait found predominently in Europe and North America.

And Caucasion women continue to wonder why more men are seeking non-traditional partners found overseas. SMH.
 
in the west Feminism is stronger in Anglo and Protestant Nations. it is weaker in Catholic Latin nations like Spain, Portugal, Italy, Central and South America.





  • [SIZE=+2]"It really comes as no surprise to me that several centuries later, the feminist revolution and emancipation movement found fertile ground for growth, and particularly in the Protestant countries. It was in part a reaction to a distorted view of women, quite different from the view of the Middle Ages, in a Catholic society where there were many outlets for a woman to exercise her influence and capacities."[/SIZE]
 
Sexbots would come in handy for people who are already in prison.
 
https://therationalmale.com/2015/09/20/planned-obsolescence/




The mainstream loves a salacious story about the sexual misconducts of men. With the recent Ashley Madison data leak the narrative was one of blaming and shaming the overwhelming majority of men who signed up for an account to cheat in their spouses. This has resulted in more than one suicide. A topic of the Man in Demand Q&A session I fielded was how the Red Pill lens isn’t limited to just scoffing at the Blue Pill in popular media, but that it also gives men a sensitivity and awareness to better understand the motivations for social narratives like this.Red Pill aware men understand that if there is an opportunity to cast blame or doubt on a man over his sexual impulse, or the consequences for allowing it to lead to behavior that conflicts with a feminine-primary social order, shaming will always be the go-to, socially acceptable strategy. Sex will always be a clichéd thumbscrew to gauge men’s personal resolve, and this is a built-in failsafe of control for the Blue Pill’s conditioning of men.
Red Pill men understand the motivating incentives for this “cheating” and that in a westernizing culture, 50%+ of marriages are clinically and practically sexless, it’s not hard to understand the want for a man to find some temporary sexual release in infidelity, porn or delusions of emotional infidelity. It’s also easy to understand how the paradox of commitment would drive such men to suicide.
This is simply one data point of many in a larger Red Pill awareness that indicates some very uncomfortable truths women need to confront; whether single or married, men will actively seek a practical solution to their sexlessness. And it is just this sexual problem solving that will ultimately challenge women’s unilateral, social and personal power over their own Hypergamy. On a limbic level women and the imperative are aware of this challenge. Thus, it’s controlled for by investing in conditioning men to feel guilt or shaming for ever embracing their masculine sexual nature. It’s a threat.
Keep this fact in mind as I explore today’s topic. Women and feminine-primary culture have done an amazing job at commodifying women’s singular, primary agency with men – their physicality and sexual availability. It’s de rigueur in the manosphere to write articles about women reducing themselves to being next to valueless to men beyond their sexual attributes. I’ve written in the past about women’s commodifying love and sex, however recently women are being forced to face the realities of making their sexuality a commodity.
What women, both prominent and insignificant, are coming to realize is that the ultimate plan of feminism (destroying the evolved, complementary family structure of parenting) is really a planned obsolescence for womankind. As I was coming to this realization I found it rather ironic that only 5 years ago we had the likes of Hannah Rosin profiting from the idea that men were (or were becoming) obsolete. Five years later it appears the fear now is that it’s women who will become obsolete in the most literal, commodified sense. That fear is beginning to show.




InnocentBystanderBoston had a good comment in that thread:
Aside from the purely moral question, there is another risk regarding sexbots. Our economy is built on the expectation that men will be motivated by marriage to produce in excess of their own needs. As we continue to degrade marriage, sexbots will be there to fill the gaps.
…with unilateral divorce law and the accompanying cash and prizes awarded to the female courtesy of judges immersed in the feminist imperative, I think s-xbots pretty much end marriage. If marriage isn’t completely destroyed forever with version 2.0, the s-xbot will most certainly destroy it. And why? The s-xbot will always give you s-x on demand. It will stay at home, faithful to you. It will not spend your money and ruin your credit rating. It will not get a judge to sign a restraining order against you. It can’t divorce you and take cash and prizes. It will never age maintaining its peak SMV forever (if you believe in Rollo’s charts.) So that will pretty much be it for feminism. Without the surplus wealth created by men to subsidize the parasitic nature of feminist centric Marriage 2.0, there can be no feminism. Women are net wealth consumers. Without husbands, there lives will ONLY be in decline. The feminist imperative can NOT allow these s-xbots to be made.
 
Back
Top Bottom