The sexbot and the feminist
The fact that wacky, misandrist intersectional feminists are an unpopular minority — as a result of their horrid influence, just 18 per cent of women now call themselves feminists — doesn’t matter because they hold court in the media and on campuses, and young women are starting to parrot discredited and absurd nonsense about the “oppressive patriarchy,” picking up on a victimhood script they believe they can leverage for social and professional advantage.
In response, men are simply checking out, giving up on women and retreating into porn and video games. I call it the “sexodus,” and its immediate victims aren’t men, but women, who are being consigned to singledom as men lose interest in them or are simply too exhausted or fearful of the social consequences of approaching girls romantically. The truth is, men get along okay without women, unlike women, who become shrieking, neurotic messes if they’re still single in their 30s.
Sorry, no offence, but it’s true: women have been getting steadily unhappier since the Second World War, when they first entered the workplace in large numbers. It sounds bizarre, but ever since the rise of feminism, every decade has seen another slump in female morale. Women now report themselves more generally depressed and more likely to think about suicide than at any time in history. (The vast majority of suicides are still men, by the way. Women talk about it endlessly, but rarely pull it off.)
The fight for women’s “equality” has always been absurd: why would a woman want to step down to the lower status of being equal with men? Why should women be badgered into choosing to work over having babies and being happy? Why are feminists lying to women that they can look however they want — fat, hairy armpits, piercings, blue hair — and still be content?
Women were told by feminists that they could “have it all” — the career, the husband, the kids and the book club. But it was a lie. What they’ve ended up with instead is a tiny apartment in an “up and coming” bit of town, friends they hate, a string of disastrous and emotionally unfulfilling past relationships and a cat.
Had the relations between the sexes been healthier today, there wouldn’t be much call for sexbots to get in the way. Women already had the upper hand, sexually. They had what men wanted. There’s a reason the Ashley Madison leak showed that the site was over 90 per cent male.
But gender relations in the West are at their worst for fifty years, possibly more, which is why popular men’s bloggers are now asking whether sexbots will replace women entirely. The consensus seems to be: for some men, yes, totally. For other men, they will become a masturbation tool. A few “alphas” and players at the top will be able to bang their way around the entire female population, which will be comprised of ever more neurotic, backstabbing and insane behaviour.
Feminists always hate when they accidentally get what they want. They’ve been waging a war on sex on campuses and elsewhere for decades. Now, suddenly, they will earn the fruits of their labour: the “whiny manbabies” they’ve been bullying for so many years are going to be ejaculating into silicon-ribbed pleasure-bots, instead of grovelling at their feet for a chance to smell their knickers.
|Would YOU say no? I mean, once they get rid of all those weird lines?|
The entire market structure of dating will shift seismically in the direction of men becoming choosier and less willing to please and women becoming looser and more willing to please.
The basic premise I have outlined above rests on a simple observation — the more physically satisfying choices men have to sate their lust, the less needy they will be with women. And non-neediness translates into a slight downgrade in the asking price of single women. Because women are more loathe to settle than men, there will be a rush to the top as the dwindling number of acceptable male prospects commands the attentions of an ever-growing pool of women. Polygamy will rush in to fill the need.
Once the sex robots’ price gets down to the $500 – $1000 range, placing them in range of just about any guy who is not really poor (and even those guys will be able to rent them for a few hours), you will see the greatest shift in sexual power ever experienced by the human race. It will be equal to or greater than the upheaval during the Sexual Revolution of the 1960’s.
When any man can go home and fuck his Scarlett Johansson robot or Kim Kardashian robot (or whichever celebrity will be considered super hot at that time), and he can do so without her demanding dates, free dinners, a sounding board for her drama, marriage, monogamy, picking up his socks, or refraining from burping at the table, and he can fuck Ms. Robot bareback to his heart’s content without ever needing to worry about pregnancy, child support payments, or catching an STD…oh, when that happens…you will see, for the first time in human history, women lose most (if not all) of their power over men.
It won't just be the Gammas and Omegas and sad lonely shut-ins who will go for these new sex-bots. It will be ordinary men who want sex without having to deal with all of the hassle and nonsense of dating, and all of the drama that comes from dealing with an actual woman. As ordinary Western men flee their harridan wives and girlfriends in exchange for gorgeous, always-on, always-ready, and always-lubricated sex robots, Western women will suddenly find that they have exactly zero power over men.
|The Tricia-3000, Cylon version. Presumably without miniguns where her nipples were.|
|I almost regret not seeing the re-imagined "Battlestar Galactica". ALMOST.|
This isn't to say sex robots will have a positive effect on human society, indeed, those societies that don't ban them may well find themselves failing.