Feminists seek legislation over sex bots

(see also http://theantifeminist.com/david-futrelle-advocates-child-killing/ (*Trigger Warning*) )

Only yesterday I posted my discovery that Jessica Valenti, leading online feminist, wanted realistic sex dolls to be banned on the grounds that they 'objectify' women.

Obviously, as learned readers of this blog will know by now, as well as anybody with an ounce of common sense, Valenti and her fellow feminists want to ban sex dolls because such things, increasingly realistic, threaten to give men sexual independence from women.

Now I learn that feminists in Canada are already drawing up legislation that would limit the sale and ownership of sexbots - realistic androids created for the sexual gratification of men.

Following the recent Ontario/Canada Roundtable on Gender Equality, the below provisions have been proposed for the new Human-Robot Personal Relationship Act, the first draft of which is currently being finalized.The provisions are specifically meant to target the concerns that were expressed at the roundtable that sexbots will negatively impact the pursuit for gender equality and may unduly emphasize the objectification of women as sexual objects.The suggested provisions fall into the larger framework of regulating the emerging service robot industry that will be governed by the Human-Robot Personal Relationship Act and under the direction of the Ministry of Robots and Artificial Intelligence, to be established in Ontario and other Canadian provinces and territories at the end of next year.

It is further proposed that provisions 6 and 7 are integrated into the Criminal Code of Canadato ensure uniformity with respect to the illegal creation, use, distribution, advertising, export and import of sexbots which are made in the image of minors under the age of 18. For the purposes of s. 163.1 of the Criminal Codethe definition of “child” should include sexbots created in the image of minors under the age of 18.

...The use of sexbots shall be restricted to government-regulated establishments unless otherwise approved by the Ministry of Robots and Artificial Intelligence.

...The use of sexbots in the privacy of one’s home is prohibited, unless otherwise permitted by the Ministry of Robots and Artificial intelligence or a relevant regulating agency as per the criteria outlined in the Human-Robot Personal Relationship Act.

Dr Ian Kerr, a grinning mangina, apparently holds some position as professor of robot ethics at the University of Ottawa, and it appears that this fact gives him the ability to influence government policy and law making.

Terrifying.

And what is most terrifying is the glimpse it gives us into how femi-nazi anti-sex laws, which lead to the rape of the male, come to pass. Sex bots are still a few years away, yet already there are 'experts' on the ethics of human-robot sexual relationships, feminists whose supposed expertise on such matters means that they can hold a ridiculous conference behind closed doors and then fully expect the government of their land to pass laws that will deny happiness to millions of men and criminilize those men as sex offenders if they dare seek that happiness. Simply because all these 'experts' have to say are the magic words 'need to protect women and children' and any rational scrutiny, let alone empirical judgement or testing, is not required.

In Ian Kerr's case, it seems his ability to pass laws that will affect millions of people arises from being a middle-class kid who obtained a degree in philosophy at a second rate university and wrote his doctorate on a subject (ethics of human-robotic relations) that maybe only a dozen other people in the entire world have explored. Sex bots are still some distance away, no society could have an intelligent discussion on what laws need to be passed, because most people are completely unaware of what sexbots even are, let alone what ethical issues they might represent.

This strategy follows that used by feminists in the past with regard to new technology changing porn and sex. For example, the United Nations convention on the rights of the child, recently 'celebrating' its 20th anniversary, included the outlawing of any pictorial representation of a minor in a sexual context. In other words 'child pornography, defined to the max. Now, in 1989, any such pictures would be photographs of actual minors. Yet the feminists were careful to word the convention in terms of 'representation'. Probably few of the 180+ countries that signed the treaty in 1989 realised that the wording of the documents that they were putting pen to paper to would lead to millions of ordinary men being criminalized for clicking on a mouse to view a digitally created anime picture that was merely a possible 'representation' of a person under 18.

Similarly, it appears feminists are drawing up laws against sex bots before even most educated people are fully aware of what the consequences of these laws might be for ordinary male sexuality in a future high-tech world. And one thing that keeps feminists motivated in doing this is that they know full well that once passed, it is almost impossible to repeal any sex offender legislation 'that protects women and children'.

However, what might trip up the femibeasts is that they themselves do not know what the full implications upon society will be if the sexual trade union laws that they create are applied fully and logically in a different world.

For example, recently, a British airport's security added x-ray scanners that are so powerful that they literally create an image of the naked body of the person being scanned. But now a 'child rights' group has pointed out that the creation of those images, when the person who passes through the scanner is under 18 (or looks under 18), is contrary to the government's own virtual child pornography laws. The x-ray scanner has now been scrapped.

Ian Kerr and his fellow feminists want any sexbot that looks under 18 to be banned full stop, under the pretence of virtual child pornography laws that criminalize the creation of any sexual image of a minor. Never mind that such ultra-realistic androids would surely prevent 'paedophiles' from having the urge to have sex with real minors.

But hold on a moment. If an 'image' now includes the three-dimensional shape of a sex doll or a sex bot, then surely the multi-billion dollar cosmetics industry is going to go bankrupt overnight? Given that most teenage girls are fully developed at age 16 or 17 these days, an image of a person looking under 18 must include any woman who attempts to make her skin or her body as youthful and as perfect as possible (i.e. when it was 16 or 17 years old). The Swedish celebrity false rape accuser Ulrika Johnsonn, recently paid over £50,000 to 'have the body of a 16 year old girl'. Now why isn't she in prison being raped by butch lesbians for 'creating the sexual image of a person under the age of 18'? This is the logic that follows from the creation of these absurd feminist laws designed to restrict sexual competition to themselves in a widened free sexual market - in other words, the rape of the male.

I would suggest that in the year 2020, when Josef Shiele of Bremerhaven, Germany, becomes the first person to be dragged before the courts for having sex with a cute, youthful looking Japanese sex bot (well, if they're all going to be banned you may as well get yourself a good one), he takes his case to the European Court of Justice and points out that this is a gross violation of his human rights and dignity. That he should be punished for 'creating' the realistic, 3-dimensional sexual image of a desirable nymph when millions of women attempt to do the same each and every day with their own bodies (in order to be attractive to men like himself and all the other 'perverts' who constitute the vast majority of the male sex).

This will become even more absurd in the coming years, as scientists finally develop ways of obtaining the age old female dream (and men's) - of permanently giving women the appearance of youthful, virgin skin. Already rich, middle-aged women are flocking to expensive Asian clinics in order to have stem cell therapy with the intention of giving their skin a more youthful (pre-pubescent, in fact) look. And by all accounts, this therapy will probably work, at least when mastered in a few years time.

It's going to be a strange and brave new world, in just a couple of decades or less, when virtually ALL women, even 70 year olds, are walking around looking like Miley Cyrus. Who knows how such a thing will change the dynamics of the free sexual marketplace? One thing is for sure - the same feminists who create these absurd virtual child pornography laws that criminlize ordinary men for victimless crimes, will be the first to seek the treatment that turns their faces and bodies into that of buxom 16 year old girls.

After all, how could they possibly hope to compete with the sexbots otherwise?

If you would like to contact Ian Kerr and tell him what you think of his shameful participation in the rape of the male, his e-mail address is : iankerr@uottawa.ca

Top Heavy
In the not too distant future, most women will look like this..

97 thoughts on “Feminists seek legislation over sex bots

  1. theantifeminist

    Post author

    LOL, the first thing that entered my head when I clicked on the link and saw the faces of those dolls was - 'the Stepford Wives'!

  2. theantifeminist

    Post author

    I knew it was possible in Japan, but I didn't realise you could hire out sex dolls in Europe. I'll have to look into this, haha.

  3. theantifeminist

    Post author

    I guess if 'ephebophilia' refers to anything real, it would be men who are emotionally attracted to young teens as much as physically.
    I don't think there's anything wrong in that whatsoever (leaving aside feminist crap about men wanting power over young girls), but it is interesting to consider whether 'ephebophiles' will be treated even worse when most women look 15 or 16 (and 'ephebophiles' still want the 'real thing'), or whether women will just be content that young girls no longer have a sexual advantage over them (in the eyes of most men).

    It's a pity that Highwayman doesn't comment here very often these days - I hope he will participate in the discussion if I write a big article on 'ephebophilia' this week. One thing he points out is that whilst most men might not want a relationship with an immature teenage girl, this could be attributed to the infantalisation of such girls in today's society (although he is firmly of the belief that ephebophilia is real).

    Regarding the legislation against sexbots - this article has been the most read out of any that I've written here. In fact, it 'went viral' to some extent. Presumably, Ian Kerr - the Canadian mangina who was working with his feminist students to draw up legislation banning sexbots - recieved so many e-mails as a result of this article that he dropped the webpage within a few days. I don't think there's been so much as a squeak out of him about sexbots since then. This shows that even a small site like mine can produce results and hamper the sexual trade union.

    BTW, as regards my idea about remote controlled sexdolls - I saw this today :

    http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/02/14/telesar_five_like_avatar_but_ugly/

  4. Dontbeahypocrite

    By your line of reasoning doesn't a dildo objectify men? If so, then why aren't dildos illegal? As far as I know most women these days own said dildos. Very few men, if any that I know, own something that simulates a vagina. I don't think a hand counts as it's not a product that is knowingly purchased.

  5. Jhon Holmes

    If sexbots objectivfy women then surely dildos and vibrators objectivfy men by dislodging the penis and alowing women to use it as a mere tool. I suggest using dildos and vibrators be made a criminal offense. All dildos and vibrators must be handed in within the end of the year or the owner may be charged and fined.

  6. Is psychological propaganda, they will try to sell this middle-age-sex and the city look alike dolls being the average women you see around walking western world so women will proclaim how men are so afraid of the "liberated women" and middle age women will feel happy thinking men are buying dolls that look like them, why buy that when you can get it for free? you pay for what you want,desire and don't have, here is when Asian real dolls and trafficking guys save us.
    http://www.dhgate.com/japanese-asian-sex-doll-real-doll-realistic/p-ff80808132c6b7b50132ce1a515121ba.html

    The anime me and videogame culture on Asian countries is away better developed than the Western where you can't have a collection of anime novels without looking "creppy", weird or ashamed.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eg3tGvuQyVA&feature=player_embedded

    Even women and specially young are feeling attracted to the Asian culture

    'I would be more worried if she came home drunk': Teenage girl's mother praises her obsession with looking like 'living doll'

    Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2125028/Venus-Palermos-mother-Margaret-praises-15-year-old-daughters-obsession-looking-like-living-doll.html#ixzz1r8RnREpB

    Meet the real-life Barbies: Internet craze sees teenagers turn themselves into freakish living dolls.

    Concern it could encourage sexualisation of young girls

    Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2122177/Meet-real-life-Barbies-Internet-craze-sees-teenagers-turn-freakish-living-dolls.html#ixzz1r8SRf8po

  7. Anonymous

    If we can determine anything from the current market of high-functioning sex toys, then the largest clientele base of sexbots will be those who have been deemed "unattractive" or of "inferior mate quality" by society. I'm sure these people would love a real woman, but no woman would love them. These people did nothing to deserve their low sexual value, as society determines this value based on factors almost entirely beyond one's control (ex. aesthetics/height).

    Thus, they have a natural restriction on their autonomy which the attractive people do not. Therefore, there is a natural inequality which is perpetuated by the purely libertarian interpersonal marketplace. I say the sexbot makers are doing a civil service in allowing these naturally handicapped people a means to satiate their sexual urges.

    Most radical feminists would ideally see all male "masturbation" illegal if it involves women somehow (if they're depicted on a videotape or their form is used on a doll). Basically, they would demand that all effective forms of satiating sexual urges should be illegal, less the act of sex itself. So, attractive men may still have an outlet, but the ugly/creepy/short/endomorphic/unintelligent won't. And they will die miserable, lonely and horny.

  8. Andrew

    The end result could ultimately be more sub-alpha women throwing themselves at Alpha badboys (as if they would have them for any duration).
    But if you look at Japanese Society, it is most all of their male population that traditionally partakes in & drives their "schoolgirl" porn industry, Soaplands, Delivery Health Services, Theme Brothels, Image Clubs, Erotic Clubs & cutting edge sex toys from reverse engineered pussy juice to years of gynecological researched onaholes to titanium skeleton touch activated moaning voice (well, "little virgin" squealing for Japanese anyways) dolls.

    If you look at International sexdoll forums such as The Doll Forum, or UK Lovedoll forum, or Our Doll Community, or German Gummipuppen forum, or The French Doll Forum, you find barely beta males thru omega males as only an increase of 50% to double representation of a Nation's male population selected at random. They statistically account for less than half of the sex doll enthusiast community. The other half (small majority) are simply younger men who need multiple sex partners & need to have sex at least twice a day & have a girlfriend or are in between relationships. Many others are married & hide it from the significant other or the significant other only "allows that" instead of "cheating". Or are men who have been "divorced" multiple times and are middle aged or seniors.

    Hey these older dudes only see a good thing - afterall 8, 9 & 10 doll pussy is better than Grannt pussy.

  9. Andrew

    Just because you misandrist feminists get angry when men are simply happy, aint gonna stop 3D immersive real touch hologram virtual reality babes generated at the touch of a keypad as regard to age, hair color, ethnicity, bust & number.
    Aside from 8, 9 & 10 hotness scale $10K heated Sinthetics, Real Taste Petite Jewel, Soft Skin Touch NEOim being better than feminist cow & Granny pussy.
    All men from most of the Alphas to everyone else will be saving every penny for this instead of spending it on their fat old wife.
    Anyhow most men are naturally polygamous & need since Homo Erectus/Neanderthal days a harem of some size at the disposal as the need occurs.

    As the French say "The penis is a shark & must be fed".

    Young men under 40 need sex multiple times a day - Modern feminist women in singles or even pairs will not make themselves available for that as the need arises.

    Plenty of not too bright semi-alpha males are in menial jobs stuck in 2nd or 3rd shift work & don't have easy hook-up pickings with alpha females of their choice always. If Elvis never made it in music & was stuck shoveling horseshit at 2nd or 3rd shift, he'd be purchasing this technology.

    Elvis penetrated the Youth (market).
    They purchase this stuff for the in-between times.

  10. You overlook the double standard between oppressor and oppressed in Cultural "Marxism". Demand abortion rights for men to shatter Cultural "Marxism".

  11. Geoff

    So because I have no drive to compete against other males for the biggest house, the most expensive car etc, in what is obviously an insane world, and therefore have no realistic chance with good looking women, I shouldn't be allowed to even have a plastic mold of a women so I can feel somewhat happy?

    If women stopped treating men who have little money as pathetic worms, you could stop men competing with eachother to get the most money from the Rothschild banking cartel.

    If women started showing men who actually have brains and can see what is happening in the world more respect, all these wars, destruction of the environment etc would stop almost instantly.

  12. Spokker

    I am convinced that the matriarchy will be more fascist than the so-called patriarchy was ever purported to be.

    I think anyone who buys a sex doll is a loser, but my God, they should be free to build and purchase them. Certainly from a technical and artistic standpoint, the more competent ones are interesting in an audio-animatronic sort of way (still would't fuck one), and there is demand for it. They basically want to take money out of an entrepreneur's pocket because their delicate sensibilities are shaken.

    Modern feminism is not compatible with freedom or liberty.

  13. Eric

    Spokker:
    LOL I actually got blocked from commenting on Futrelle's site for suggesting that sex dolls were an improvement over feminised women.

    I don't own one, and wouldn't purchase one (at least not at this level of technology LOL). Foreign women are really more to my liking. But it is kind of interesting that feminist females both shame guys who buy fembots as 'losers' while they fear them as competition at the same time!

  14. Alan Vaughn

    I am convinced that the matriarchy will be more fascist than the so-called patriarchy was ever purported to be.

    What do you mean 'will be more facist'? They are already are and have been for a long time!

  15. spookytj

    you mean like when women use sex as a weapon to get what they want? lets be real here, that is the real fear. If the major trump card that women have gets thrown out the window, then what for them?

  16. Sex-bot-Lover

    The feminists are retards! Sex-robots which look like women will LIBERATE the women from the men! If there will be robots which attract the sexually frustrated men - then the men will stop asking for sex all the time, stop offering money or gifts in exchange, and it will give freedom for men to make their fantazies come true (beautiful women who never say "no" to sex).
    The problem for many men is that they want sex all the time, and without complicated games... And the problem for many women is that men see them as "sexuall objects" - now in the future the robots can take over that role !

  17. Sex-bot-Lover

    you dont understand what sex-bots are for! They will replace women as sex objects, so you can be free from us men, stop wearing makeup or tight clothes etc etc...
    If the sex-bots (in like 30 years) will look EXACTLY like real women - but only serve the men in their homes - then no harm will be made against women, who will be left in peace, without any extpectations from men at all! - neither sexual or other expectaitons!

    If the women want male sex-bots., then you are free to develop them! No problem!

  18. theantifeminist

    Post author

    I don't know if you're being ironic, but if you're not, you have a fundamentally mistaken understanding of female psychology. The women who are complaining about 'objectification' etc are the women who aren't being objectified - i.e. the ugly feminists. It's called sexual jealousy. If men move on to sex bots, feminists will be jealous of the sex bots rather than the attractive 'objectified' women. That is why feminists are already trying to ban sex bots.

    And I don't think male sex bots will ever satisfy women the way that female sex bots will satisfy men - unless, of course, they do have human artifiical intelligence, which is probably decades away (and even then women will still feel jealous and threatened by the female sex bots and want to ban them).

    EDIT : Re-reading your comment, I see that you are being ironic (surely!)!

  19. lol

    You seem to think that men would buy Sex Bots thinking that they ARE WOMEN, in my case and many others the reason why we think on buying sex bots is precisely because THEY ARE NOT.

    We tire of your kind, but we still have urges to work with, will I do this to women? Nope you have shown me time after time you are unworthy of even the minimal of my attentions, so piss off and let us be.

  20. AnonymousMysogynist

    Women are so pathetic nowadays. They use their cunt as some sort of service denial weapon to control men.

    I highly doubt this legislation will pass, I can't wait for fembots to replace women in terms of sex quality.

    There should be a "Kill the Feminists" bill.

  21. Frank

    As long as they ban dildoes, vibrators, 3 ft rubber fists, and anal beads that objectify men by allowing women to explore their own sexuality in the privacy and comfort of their own home. STOP OBJECTIFYING ME DILDO-USERS. STOP CONTRIBUTING TO RAPE CULTURE. STUPID PRO-RAPE WOMEN. ALL WOMEN ARE THE SAME.

  22. Anon

    I think Barbie and Bratz dolls do a lot more damage.

    You should ban them first.

    But you won't because you are unable to do logic

  23. AmITheOnlySanePerson

    No, it's not alright to argue for these laws in any way shape or form. If you do you're literally evil, there's just no getting around it.

    I can GUARANTEE you, GUARANTEE YOU, that in any society where any variety of cheap realistic sex doll was cheap and had no risks attached, THE RAPE AND MOLESTATION OF REAL WOMEN AND CHILDREN WOULD DECREASE BY A VAST PERCENTAGE, MAYBE ALMOST ALL-TOGETHER!

    Giving these desperate mentally addled people a risk free alternative with no victim is a bad thing? Are you SERIOUS?

    THE WELL-BEING OF REAL PEOPLE IS WAY MORE IMPORTANT THAN SOMETHING OFFENDING YOU, YOUR FEELINGS ARE NOT MORE IMPORTANT THAT REAL RAPE VICTIMS.

    You really think that the number of victims of sexual crimes would INCREASE with these? REALLY!?

    LOOKS AND FEELS REAL!? NO RISK OF JAIL OR RUINED LIVES OR BEING KILLED BY VIGILANTES!?

    This is completely unacceptable, I don't know what to do but something needs to be done, we're on the advent of something that could prevent so many ruined lives... And you people want to prevent it because the idea is unpleasant to you, because of the way you were born. No, that's NOT ok and never will be, I'll fight this myself if I have to.

  24. Finn

    Now, I've taught classes to and talked with several guys who are extremely lonely and socially inept. Have you ever seen the kind of people that own companion dolls? Nicest guys in the world. They're often shameful of it too, not that it's anything to be ashamed of. Even psychologists recommend that it is a healthy practice, often because the user is aware that their habit is private, doesn't hurt anybody, and improves the individual's quality of life. If anything, it opens owners up to more loving habits and behavior towards people and relationships. You will get the odd crazy, but you'll always get the mutation, and I say they're better off with sexbots than out prowling the streets.

    If feminists want to hate on someone, it should be on pick-up artists like myself who have deconstructed women down to an science. Literally the woman becomes a vending machine if you know the right patterns. All that said, PUAs respect women more than your average idiot. We don't assume a girl is easily won by having no plan. A girl is not as easy as a free drink. As PUAs we refine everything from our social skills, to our jobs, and everyday lives, because women deserve better, and unless we want to make ourselves better, we don't deserve better either. But my role ends there. Pick-up is not the same as building a relationship.

    I respect many of the students I've had in my PUA classes because a lot of them have hobbies or habits that are really a demonstration of one-sided unconditional love and acceptance. This is something a feminist will never fully grasp because their motivation is to change people and put artificial barriers between people and their biological habits. The only person anyone should want to change is themselves, for the reasons of improving one's place in life, or transcending their foundational flaws.

  25. Anonymous

    This is crap proposed legislation, it is trying to outlaw something that can free men from the ball and chain called women. I also believe that by having all these laws that ban art work depicting minors in sexual acts people keep pushing real pedophiles more underground while marking people who have interest in these arts as criminals. By having sexbots that look like underage girls you could deter the rape for real underage girls.

  26. Vagina-Posessor

    Hey, as long as I get a sex bot too, I don't see the problem. There's the equality.

    Seriously speaking, I'll have to second the general sentiment being thrown around in the comments section here. I honestly do not see how sex dolls/bots in the shape of women are any more objectifying than realistic dildoes. Double-standards cropping up again, what's new.

    @ Finn: "This is something a feminist will never fully grasp because their motivation is to change people and put artificial barriers between people and their biological habits. The only person anyone should want to change is themselves, for the reasons of improving one’s place in life, or transcending their foundational flaws."

    Remarkably well-said. Kudos.

  27. theantifeminist

    Post author

    By having sexbots that look like underage girls you could deter the rape for real underage girls.

    Both common sense and scientific evidence points to that conclusion, and that is why one of our goals is to have the feminists behind such legislation prosecuted for child endangerment.

    Of course, feminists want teenage sex bots banned for the same reason they have criminalized sex with real teenage girls - they want to limit sexual alternatives and choice for men.

  28. F

    Jesus christ, I hate these people. I don't hate women, but I fucking hate feminists. Hurr durr let's ban everything because they don't cater to us STRONG INDEPENDENT WOMYN!!1

    Die in a ditch.

  29. Someone

    >give men sexual independence from women
    >created for the sexual gratification of men

    Who writes this crap?

    Sexbots will gratify both genders. The future will be everyone, male and female, humping their sexbots and nothing is going to stop this.

  30. tech10171968

    Ironic, isn't it? They claim not to "need" men but then, on the other hand, they need us to need them! Meaning, of course, they need us after all.

    Feminist pretzel-logic at its finest.

  31. Mike

    @Someone "Sexbots will gratify both genders. The future will be everyone, male and female, humping their sexbots and nothing is going to stop this."

    YEs indeed. Difference is, women will lose their ONE AND ONLY POWER by it. Whats left ? their intelligence ? their ability to innovate ? please..

  32. Is this a joke? Does this come from the onion?

    …The use of sexbots shall be restricted to government-regulated establishments unless otherwise approved by the Ministry of Robots and Artificial Intelligence.

    …The use of sexbots in the privacy of one’s home is prohibited, unless otherwise permitted by the Ministry of Robots and Artificial intelligence or a relevant regulating agency as per the criteria outlined in the Human-Robot Personal Relationship Act.

    This is a nightmare. Absurd. Ridiculous

    You did not save the entire page, before it was deleted? it deserves to be posted, as a historical document

  33. Days of Broken Arrows

    In a way, feminists trying to ban sexbots is a good thing because it exposes them as petty oppressors -- especially since they champion vibrators and dildos.

    Beyond that, no one has ever stopped technology.

  34. Alan Vaughn

    So,, if a dildo looks under 18 it would be illegal???

    I would say FOR SURE it would be. In effect, that would be child-pornography, but realistic or '3D' child-porn. If you study the femihag definitions of what constitutes child-porn - i.e. (not a quote, but along the lines of): any image or textual story that causes its viewer or reader to experience sexual arousal...

    A dildo definitely causes not only arousal, but can even relieve such arousal by allowing the user to reach sexual orgasm, and if such a dildo is or appears to be underage? Well, work it out...
    BTW: This is not a joke, that is typical feminist reasoning or 'logic'...

  35. theantifeminist

    Post author

    So,, if a dildo looks under 18 it would be illegal???

    I would say FOR SURE it would be. In effect, that would be child-pornography, but realistic or ’3D’ child-porn. If you study the femihag definitions of what constitutes child-porn – i.e. (not a quote, but along the lines of): any image or textual story that causes its viewer or reader to experience sexual arousal…

    But of course they wouldn't admit it was child porn, and no judge would consider it child porn. Recall the 3D printed dildo of Justin Bieber I reported on a couple of weeks ago. That could well be child porn under their legal definitions. Yet a Japanese teenage sex doll that might have the proportions of the average 20 year old Japanese woman, but look 'underage' to a westerner, would probably get you arrested or at least your house raided and your computers seized if you tried to bring it into the UK.

  36. Joe American

    I think makeup and jewelry definitely objectifies women as it is done to please men. Makeup and jewelery must be made illegal just like all future female android companions, programmed to please and treat men kindly.

  37. Abel

    And then begin the Femen protest naked with the words: "raping me, please!" or "My body, your rules!."

    The monopoly will be broken buseta IN MY FUCKING GENERATION.

  38. HomieJ60

    all i have to say is who in the hell are any of you to tell me what i can and can not do i hate this legislation crap im 28 years old if i want to have sex with a robot i should be allowed to do that i hate when everyone has to nanny the world grow up and get it straight its my life and i have rights im tired of all these legislation's that try and tell you what you can't do i don't believe anyone should have the right to tell me i cant fuck a robot give me a break it's not like im hurting anyone elt's by doing so stupid i guess i will phone you guys at 9 pm every night and let you know that im not getting into trouble to and im being a good boy :Didiots

  39. Pingback:

  40. Anonymous

    But how to oppose them?
    Challenging their argument is futile because they are not logical and they will always use the "oppresion, objectifying, think of the women/children and morals!" card.
    But challenging them for not being rational just makes anyone seen like a bad person.

    Their demands make no sense, they are based on illogical ideas and we know it. It is the truth, it is obvious.
    And we can know it and tell it to them in their face all we want but that would not stop them from passing more laws to oppress men because the public will side with them.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>