For the man who has everything…
I suppose it was inevitable. We’ve become so used to the artificial enhancement of body parts that a normal woman has begun to look abnormal. So, why not improve on things with a completely artificial woman?
Le, who built his first robot when he was four, has dedicated his life to creating the perfect humanoid and his success so far with Aiko has won him worldwide attention.
Aiko, whose name is Japanese for ‘love-child’ has an amazing artificial intelligence and can speak 13,000 different sentences in two languages
‘Aiko can recognise faces and says hello to anyone she has met,’ he said…
Aiko, whose age is ‘in her early 20’s’, is 5ft tall and has a perfect 32, 23, 33 figure.
She has real silicone skin and a real-hair wig made by a Japanese doll company. Her touch sensitive body knows the difference between being stroked gently or tickled.
‘Like a real female she will react to being touched in certain ways,’said Le.
‘If you grab or squeeze too hard she will try to slap you.
And so, let us leave them there, the perfect couple:
[Hat tip: Instapundit.]
the fun part will be reading the feminists tell us what men are thinking…
this is one place where more shaming, harping, carping, grousing, kvetching, suing, witholding, overspending, argumentative, et al… behaviors will just be digging a bigger hole
unlike women. throughout time men have had to accept that most of them would not have kids, while women through time and history had to accept that almost all of them did have kids.
you can have a western liberated (often deseased (over 40%)) ideological bound harpy..
or you can pick up mrs super manniquin..
guess which is cheaper (which will end up dove tailing with the men who argue the positive contributions of whoring)…
funny thing..
prior to modern liberal america, no man would have looked much at such other than fantasy or novelty…. today, well its a whole other thing… today feminisma and neo liberalism have created the market (by making relationships untennable as part of social control, and by moving us farther away from a material reality (dont dream it, be it), and so fantasy reality can be what you make of it, a dash of selfish relativism witohut god and you get an attitude that will accept such)
[and for the chinese who have 30 million extra men with no hopes of a woman… a nice market to meet. no?]
the odds of having a family and staying married and not get cleaned out for a lifetime are small indeed…
i wrote an article way back when they came out with a barbie sized girlfriend for guys. oh how the femnazis, and harpies crowed on that one. this will just be too funny…
[good thing they can make parthenogenic clonal mice from females only… will make solanas of s.c.u.m (society for cutting up men) real happy.]
🙂
i should mention that it only took 20 years for computer games to go from remodeled characters moving on a grid to emersive 3d alternate realities. given the market (which includes not just dates), this technology will improve by leaps and bounds very fast now that they can be more available for the more average masses.
[note that thanks to our new patent law changes, costs changes, lack of capital for startups (guys like me), and a focus on creating trivia as productive (information without any application actually in use is mostly trivia), dooms development to slower paths… ]
Big deal! We already have one of those. It resides in the White House and was built by Rahm and Dave.
Will she hang naked from a ceiling fan and say sumpin ingenious like…”I’m so glad you make such creative suggestions Hun”?
Of course the jokes here are endless…but perhaps this is what modern feminism has wrought. I mean, the robot has no standing to sue for alimony payment (yet).
Something to keep the beta males happy, while all the neo feminists are out becoming the other other other (ad absurdum) women to the pack alphas.
Our local TV station is advertising a new round of National Geographic’s “Taboo” series–non-judgmental enlightenment, don’t ya know–and one part of their promo highlighting their parade of oddballs, perverts and nut jobs–I particularly like the guy who likes to eat yummy roadkill, but of course, knowing how fast food joints and restaurants operate, perhaps we all have eaten roadkill– shows this repellant looking guy? cuddling and smootching a blow up woman while he? says on the voiceover something like, “I’ve never had a relationship with a real woman.”
This is what the Left and Postmodernism have wrought; every perversion known to man–no longer repressed by religion, morality, good taste, or ethics–has taken over the shadowed parts of our landscape, and unchecked and even encouraged, is slowly oozing out into the light of day, covered in its new, non-judgmental, “nothing human is alien to me”* clothing, and contaminating our intellectual and moral landscape, and I’ll tell you, it is getting mighty creepy out there.
*The Roman Comic Terence (185-159).
An weirdly fun movie to see about such things, “Lars and the Real Girl”.
http://video.search.yahoo.com/video/play?p=lars+and+the+real+girl&ei=UTF-8&fr=yfp-t-701&tnr=21&vid=0001196843685
SAB: Fellini’s film is much better.
Not creepy at all.
Stepford wives so hated by feminists, become reality…. while feminists who under procreate, remove themselves from the gene pool…
and thats the news this night 2110
tune in tomorrow and we will discuss the isreali conflict…
He looks like a guy who never gets a date…
Wallo,
liberals have no idea of the eroticism lost with sexual expression layed open and turned loose. It IS the respectful refusal to allow sex to become another common place event that makes sex the incredible thing that it is! But all that goes right over their little instant gratification heads.
SAB–Yeah, I actually saw this film, too and–if you just “go along with the flow” and don’t give it a lot of reflection–it all seems so enlightened, so humane, so non-judgmental, accepting and just, well, “swell” that a whole small Canadian village knows that strange, sad and relatively uncommunicative Lars has made an anatomically correct mail-order blowup doll his girlfriend, and introduces her as his girlfriend to all and sundry, that Lars talks to her, dresses her up, sleeps with her–(and I am sure screws the hell out of her), bathes her, and does things like bringing her to eat at his brother’s table, wheels her around town in a wheelchair, takes her to Church, and takes her as his date to the Christmas party and, out of kindness and understanding, his brother and sister in law, and the villagers are all going along with his fantasy.
But hey, everyone, including and especially the local minister, decides to “understand” Lars, and talk to and pretend his vinyl cutie is real, and voila, by the end of the film Lars is starting to warm up to one of his very understanding–and real–female coworkers who has played along with everyone else.
Now what could possibly be wrong with that?
Well, for starters, Lars obviously has some major problems with both reality and relationships, and by validating and encouraging that fantasy, that abnormality, there is a good chance that–in contrast to the reassuring results in the film–the kindly villagers are more likely to hurt, rather than help him.
Moreover, with someone that disconnected from reality, you never know what other idea that is divorced from reality–say that someone has said something bad about his vinyl cutie or given her a dirty look and needs to be punished for it, or that it might be nice to see what sort of pattern blood mike make in the snow if he cut someone’s throat, etc., etc. will also pop into his head.
I was a medic during the Vietnam War period, and I can still recall the patients who saw all sorts of things, like spiders crawling all over them, that terrified them, or thought that they had the power to “stop time,” and I don’t believe that the proper response–it certainly wasn’t one that the doctors treating those patients or myself or other corpsmen used–was to validate and encourage those hallucinations and breaks from reality.
Wolla Dalbo: You may not be familiar with this book. But it contains a series of essays about patients the psychoanalyst author has treated, the last one (to the best of my recollection) being a case in which the doctor entered into the fantasy world of a schizophrenic, treating it as real. The results were quite remarkable, and not what one might think. That’s not to say that would be a recommended approach to treatment, however.
Manequin I & II played out in reality…
imagine the irony when a husband of a certain name asks his computerized robotic mate to do something and they respond “i can’t do that dave”.
despite that, you realize that someone out there will teach theirs to sing “Daisy”?
“She” will never have a headache, and talk about low maintenance…
Neo–No, I have never read this particular book.
Since I believe that Jung has a better grasp of the human psyche than say, Freud or Adler, that life is much more of a mystery and mysterious than merely being the interplay of chemistry and physics, and that psychotherapy is always much more an art than a science, I have been much more drawn to the books by Jungian therapists, published by publishers like Inner City Books and Spring publications.
After many decades of exploratory reading, one thing stands out to me; how little we really know about where we come from, what our role here on Earth is, and where we go.
These eternal and essential questions, it seems to me, still remain open, even after many thousands of years of recorded speculation and argument.
So, all things are possible in Heaven and Earth, the jury is still out one the whether schizophrenia is mostly a chemical imbalance and/or more of a psychological disorder and, so, and it may be possible that in some cases entering into the fantasy of a schizophrenic may help to bring him back to reality.
That man has issues.
She is definitely not the perfect woman.
There is no fulfillment in that relationship.
There is no fulfillment in that relationship.
And modern harpies offer this?
And modern harpies offer this?
There are plenty of male harpies out there too. Look no further than the current Congress.
This is the ultimate result of the divorce of sex and personal devotion and involvement. In my view one of the major reasons of our civilizational decline.
When I read on websites of young people speaking about ‘alpha and beta males’, I feel we have sunk back to decadent Rome or even Nazi Germany, which selected ‘alpha’ men for their breeding farms.
And I feel sorry for todays young people who have to live in this chaotic and cruel sexual jungle. And I get angry at my generation that produced this mess.
Imagine: the most beautiful thing, a true and deep love, that is as a miracle when two young people engage in it in an innocent way, all out of reach of so many who desperately want it…
Read about the desperation of young men who are now into ‘Game’. It breaks my heart when I read these testimonies. Some cynical from the outset, dreadfully jaded with yet a whole life before them. Some who were raised conservative and told that they just had to be good and wait for the ‘true sweetheart’ that would eventually warm their hearts. Only to discover, that the old days are all over, girls want greedy sex preferably with ‘alpha males’ and find themselves rejected and mocked as Joe Goodshoes. Then they get angry at their conservative upbringing, and start the ‘Game’: it is all about cruel Machiavellian powerplay, you just have to learn how to act cunning, cold and cruel also. The girls are cold, we will be cold back.
How immensely sad…And this is the result of the “Summer of Love’ that brought the exact opposite of true love…
Hahahaha! He humps a robot…..
Neo,
sorry off topic – IPCC Chairman? Commercial interests that dwarf Al Gore’s?
http://www.redstate.com/vladimir/2009/12/29/meet-dr-rajendra-pachauri-global-climate-hustler/
If this is true – it needs to be widespread on TV.
I think you guys who connect sexual repression with this behavior are sort of being silly.
There’s a whole host of problems which result from sexual repression, too.
Having a healthy appreciation for sex without being obsessed with it is the problem — not a lack of “repression”.
And this guy’s “problem” (if you choose to see it that way) is clearly that he Isn’t Getting Any, not a lack of repression.
The problem does have to do with the unfortunate attitude engendered by the current climate that female feces don’t stink, and that men are lucky to have any woman willing to pay them any attention.
Women have just as many foibles as men, just as many foolish behaviors, but, even though there are comics who use those female behaviors as fodder, women all too often don’t manage to actually grasp that the humor works because there’s a *lot* of truth to it.
When women begin to grasp that men are no better OR worse than they are will we begin to get any sort of equality. When they can no longer demonize men as rapists and molestors, and themselves as the source of All Good Things, will we be getting anywhere near equality.
Unfortunately, i don’t see that happening anytime soon.
I don’t know, sounds pretty good to me. I don’t really care about the physical manifestations of aging in women, God knows I age too, but the bitterness. Personally, I would rather just rent a young woman on the occasional evening and have the rest of my life to myself. Be happy to rent an older woman, if she doesn’t have the bitterness going on.
PA Cat,
the knee jerk response of those trained by the left is to ALWAYS dilute something negative done by a woman by saying basically “oh, yeah, men do it too”.
that is to make it relative, which it generally isnt as they are not the same, and so the actions one takes may not (will not) be seen in the same light (especially when the copied behavior is often a characature).
its this trained behavior (and it is trained. you can guarantee that some will respond the ‘right’ way, and like lefty trolls, seem to be on script), that makes them more equal to a robot than human, and then makesa robot with a ‘better nature’ not exactly unattractive.
women do not generally see the almost equivalence of things as percieved on the male side (and they definitely listen to each other tell each other what men think to actually see another perspective if not dictated by the ladies that lead them).
they are appalled that a man might pay for sex, but they never notice that he pays for sex no matter what…. the terms are different, the costs are always different (guess which is cheaper), but he still pays.
the sad truth is that women are more objects now than they were in the period before liberation. they now all act more like what? their idea of creative endeavors is communist pap, and stuff like SCUM..
they dont really act more like men, but more like some hate filled lesbians concept of what she thinks men are (from a perspective of seething hatred that they naturally have access to what she wants)..
now the women are actually getting
“rooms of their own”
its what the leaders wanted, and what they supported and now they have…
robotic partners are just an extreme example of a much larger and less futuristic trend. or has any one missed the number of foreign wives marrying american men not deemed fun enough, rich enough, good enough, etc… for the local women who mistreat them. (heck sit outside a store and count the number of door holdings and who holds for what… )
belittled, berated, buffooned, and characatured… why would men want to be with people that think of them in such false ways? is it so odd that in the absence of company, they attach to an inanimate simalcrum.
when stranded on an island, we completely understood the idea of having a face on a volley ball and talking to it for companionship to stay sane in isolation.
yet here we laugh at a man who is just as isolated making his own volley ball.
it doesnt matter if there are 2 million available women in the city, it matters that a few of them want someone like him and they can meet.
wading through the other hateful ones, and the minefields of narcisism, financial wackery, and litigation… tends to blunt ones idea of whats possible.
the closer the simalcrums get to real humans the more creeped out those who have other options will be.
however with women writing articles stating and calling for the exterminatino of men… and or asexual reproduction from science… how is this response weirder?
“The proportion of men must be reduced to and maintained at approximately 10% of the human race.” — Sally Miller Gearhart, The Future – If There Is One – Is Female
“The institution of sexual intercourse is anti-feminist” — Ti-Grace Atkinson “Amazon Odyssey” (p. 86)
“I propose that the phenomenon of love is the psychological pivot in the persecution of women.” — Ti-Grace Atkinson, Radical Feminism and Love
“In order to raise children with equality, we must take them away from families and communally raise them” — Dr. Mary Jo Bane, feminist and assistant professor of education at Welleslry College and associate director of the school’s Center for Research on Woman
“No woman should be authorized to stay at home and raise her children. Society should be totally different. Women should not have that choice, precisely because if there is such a choice, too many women will make that one.” — Interview with Simone de Beauvoir, “Sex, Society, and the Female Dilemma,” Saturday Review, June 14, 1975, p.18
“The male is a domestic animal which, if treated with firmness…can be trained to do most things.” — Jilly Cooper, SCUM (Society For Cutting Up Men, started by Valerie Solanas)
now who would you rather spend your time with. women whose views and ideas whether they realize it or not, relfect the women they support, and the outcomes… or some simalcrum
the women are getting the outcomes they designed and wanted!!!!!!!!!
or rather they are getting what they asked for and finding out that it isnt what they wanted
“If life is to survive on this planet, there must be a decontamination of the Earth. I think this will be accompanied by an evolutionary process that will result in a drastic reduction of the population of males.” — Mary Daly, former Professor at Boston College, 2001
I believe it was Dennis Miller who once suggested that, the day you could sit in your Barcolounger with a Fosters’ in one hand and the TV clicker in the other and f*** Claudia Schiffer for US$19.95, civilization was doomed.
There’s a lot of interesting SF out there regarding the overall concept and what it will wind up meaning to humanity. I think, like drugs, it’s going to just be another self-inflicted weeding mechanism for humans. Those who can resist it will survive, those which can’t will cancel out their genes.
I always thought the name ‘feminazi’ was somewhat extreme. But when I read the quotations of Artfldgr of prominent feminists, I must concede that this name is in many cases justified and accurate.
Simone de Beauvoir’s quote is especially illuminating.
This woman supported communist Russia and China against the West all of her life. In this quote you can see why: she was at heart a stone cold and malicious tyrant.
Not to be too difficult WD, but the jury is only out on schizophrenia among those who have no responsibility for people actually, y’know, getting better. It’s a cluster of brain illnesses, not a psychological disorder. There are psychoses that are not schizophrenia, however.
As to the guy with the robot, I think it seems harsh to blame feminists just because it fits a certain narrative. If this doll had been available a hundred years ago, some guys would have bought one if they could. It’s more than a little creepy, and I think male evolution explains it more fully than modern female attitudes.
If you think I am just blind and wrong about that, I ask: how will you test your hypothesis that female attitudes drive the creation of fembots?
I don’t have time for a long comment on this, but I have to say that (as in certain similar threads in the past, on this blog and others) I think those of you who consider that the bulk of women look down on and loathe men are generalizing from a very small subset. It is simply untrue of most women I know, and I know a great many. Quotes from ultraleft feminists are just that, and although there is certainly some small percentage (slightly larger among the younger set) of women who believe that stuff, most like men and don’t look down on them in some general manner. I’m really tired of the war on men and the war on women.
Wandriaan: As more and more biographical information comes out about Simone de Beauvoir, the picture gets more and more pernicious. She, and Sartre, were morally bankrupt exploiters of the people in their lives, in particular the young female students they mutually sexually exploited for their own amusement and power games. A terrible terrible couple, not only politically but personally.
I am reminded of some research I was once tasked–several years ago, now–to do on the U.S.S.R’s mail order bride scene, which was very illuminating and interesting. An hour long TV documentary I happened to see this month seems to indicate that the scene has not changed in any major respect since I investigated. My overriding impression–then, as now–was that this mail order bride business involved two people chasing two mirages, each one different, often with few points of contact between the two, and with perhaps more desperation and calculation involved in the process than much real love.
On the one side there were thousands, perhaps tens of thousands, of often strikingly beautiful young women from the U.S.S.R.–some with a high school or college education, the older women often with professional degrees in, say, Law, Engineering, Dentistry, Medicine or Economics–and all wanted desperately to escape their hellish situation in the U.S.S.R.
A large majority of the Russian men of marriageable age–these woman’s husbands and boyfriends–were drunks, were unemployed, could not really support their families, and were often physically abusive and/or cheated on their wives and girlfriends. These woman’s physical situation was often also abominable–typically bleak, cramped Stalinist apartment blocks set in the midst of often harsh climates, and a heavily polluted landscape, and little chance for advancement or adequate income for these women, the older of whom also often had a small child or two–a dire situation which left them with no avenue of escape; thus the mail order bride gambit to get away, anywhere with a more affluent culture, for a better life for themselves and their children.
The American men involved were usually men who were shy, unattractive and/or had no social skills or had jobs–like being a long haul trucker–that didn’t lend themselves to forming long-term relationships, and some of these men were apparently just looking for a sexual object that they could dominate.
Usually the women did not speak much or any English, and the men knew and spoke even less Russian; each knew little solid information, it seemed, about the other’s culture and history. The women wanted a good provider–preferably well off–who was kind, and not a drunk who would beat her or cheat on her, and they often said that they did not care how old (or, the implication was, how ill favored or even infirm) their rescuer might be, and the Russian women–who had to be realistic and pragmatic to survive the society they grew up in–still, it seemed, often had an idealized view of life in America.
The men were hoping to find a “traditional” wife who was not yet contaminated by Western feminism, and would love and appreciate them and be a good, traditional wife. There was also, obviously, a strong sexual component for the U.S. men.
Neither side seemed to really know a lot of in depth information about where the other was coming from psychologically or in terms of their daily background. Thus, for instance, the fact that abortions were extremely common in the U.S.S.R. and that young women in their early 20’s might already have had one, two or three or, perhaps, more, did not seem to be common knowledge among the American clients of such mail order bride operations; operations which were trading in fantasy.
On one such mail order bride website, almost all the girls listed their aspiration as being to be a good wife, housewife and mother, and their upbringing as a traditional Orthodox Christian one–a highly unlikely situation to apply to all of them, I thought, but a good sales tactic.
Some Russian websites had relatively staid pictures, others featured provocative poses, more skin, and racy innuendos.
American men perused the listings, corresponded with their favorites by letter and phone (often with the agency translating for a fee), and, if interested, paid thousands of dollars to go to Russia and meet their favorite in an awkward meeting/introductory party at a hotel and perhaps to conduct a week or so whirlwind of getting to know the women and their families (and to “try out the product” in a fair number of cases, I’d bet), and then the men returned to the U.S. and had to decide whether to take more time to get to know their prospective mail order bride, or to bring their “bride” over to the U.S. on a 90 day fiancé visa i.e. if they did not marry within 90 days, the woman was deported back to Russia.
It just seemed to me to be a situation fraught with enormous room for miscommunication, lack of understanding, destroyed expectations and disappointment, and a process even less likely to produce an enormous number of real, loving, stable, long-lasting marriages than appearing on “The Bachelor” or “The Bachelorette” has been for U.S. women and men.
In some cases Russian women came over, got married, got U.S. citizenship, then promptly dumped their rescuer, in several cases the American men abused their new Russian wives, in at least one case an American man murdered his new young Russian wife. Many Russian women turned out to be much less “traditional” and much more materialistic than advertised, many American husbands less affluent or amiable than they let on; such are some of the distortions and “workarounds” that Feminism in America has called into being.
neo-neocon,
we dont agree that most women do not foster the full complex that the leaders do. but they certainly dont denounce them, throw them out, oppose them and remove them. etc… and so are irrelevent to the argument… ESPECIALLY when they also benifit from the not throwing out of the LEADERS. but that would mean losing the unfair advantage in court and relationships… the unfair advantage due to affirmative action (8A program, etc)… the unfair advantage in custody… and a huge list which includes the sympathy on tap for stories and exagerations and so on.
you have to catch them at it to really get it. just start a man bashing conversation subtly, then watch the people you thought thought something else show their retracted claws.
where are the hoards fighting to end the crap?
there arent any… they are generally for it, thinking that in some way they will get men who are some impossible combination of things.
i will stand that the small people who sit in their homes and do nothing, and side with, and comment on the side of, and so forth…
are not really pertinent, as they will end up living in the world that those LEADERS above are creating.
our thoughts, thought important to us, and in the local area, seem very important… are meaningless on the larger frame..
walk the halls of the labs where i work.. its over 65% female… with most not going to finish their careers… the men arent there any more… and the inventions and such are in serious decline.
womens equality of outcome has replaced meritocracy, and all that comes with it.
you can track the whole thing through the womens movement as the MAJOR force of re-educating children through parental abandonment caused by an artificially created social movement!!! (which is why you dont see that movement in the countries that the movement professes to represent!!!!)
this is its source, its history, and goals.
its exactly the same as other useful idiots enabling socialist leaders, or other groups… each group designed to pick up a huge mass and vote its power to one cause..
like haveing many different nets for different types.
and the MOST effective biggest sweeping net is feminism.
when you were a young girl, men were men, and not assholes… father knew best.
now the best example you have is homer simpson. and other jerks…
when the ladies change that and stop pushing it further… then maybe i would believe that they dont want what the leader says.
but the day you see the video the FOX did in nj where they had a woman assault a man on a park bench… took them several days to get someone to stop it, and they had TONS of footage of women chearing the abusiveness on.
no… maybe the image is that they dont want this, but they have the underhatred that stops them from acting on a morally reprehensible situation, and instead cheer it.
try dating one of these “ladies” and see if you have the same opinion… its one thing to be friends and have an image, its another thing to be on the other side of the mask that her friends never see (and to which no one believes she has, and so has a weapon).
after over 20 years of big time bs, courts, and all manner of wackaloon stuff for doing nothing!!!! i finally have a happy life without all that crap.
wish i knew that before i tried the left liberal date a feminist cause they are better at everything, and are much better partners. they arent partners…
Look around at our society…
it wouldnt have crumbled if so many children werent removed from the fathers and parents that would have taught them…
to read the leaders is to hear them state the goals in their terms.
to see reasoning that accomplishes the same end without informing of those quotes, is how you get useful idiots to sign on to a movement to accomplish a goal…
self pruning of the middle classes genetic trees to create a IQ ability moat between the elite and the common man who SERVE them..
the women fear the men becaus the men once fed up, could use FORCE to change it back and make it more equitable… and so they wish to limit the number of men in their ideology to prevent the same falling back counter revolution…
Valery solanas writes weekly for times and other things, she is regular on bill mawr…
the founder of the society to cut up men is a hero to the women…
when i see you and others stand up against a person like that, and make a change then i will believe that those masses of other thinking women exist and even care..
until then… we wont agree..
because you see them as good
and i see them as very bad people tricking people who might be good, into being bad and proud of it
by the way, visit enough mens sites where they discuss this thing, and they ahve the arguments down to scripting.
the one neo brings up is coded, but none of the X i know are like those X’s
there are tons of them… including saying that one cant get a date, and lots of other shaming forms.
many many use them and dont even realize that they are parroting half true reflex arguments they have heard hundreds of times applied.
the fact that the ideologies followers have fractured the whole thing to the point of meaninglessness.. and that xfers complete power to the leaders (as any one that doesnt tow their line, like palin, gets slammed), is usually missed.
or that they are taking credit for womens own actions and desires… feminism didnt give them to you or make them happen… it often stood in the way, and sold women down the river to something worse.
you hate the war between men and women..
and you forget that the only one that declared war was the women.
the men never declared the war and fought that battle… how can you call a truce to a war you have no control of? the ones fighting the war have to stop for war to stop. no?
they wont stop till they win…
and when they do, we all lose..
prior to them people would be appalled at the idea of a simalcrum… the way old men talk of their wives is one where there would be no contemplation… the way young divorcee males talk, many would say it would have been better to be with a realdoll…
http://www.realdoll.com/
if you think the man with the doll above is creepy… his is benign and would have been judged more normal in times passed than real doll.
real dolls are creepy realistic looking… but they are not yet animate (or maybe they are?).
given that they go for 5k… and more…
the market for those that will move and act will be there and will foster the market till they are cheaper.
the men who buy the top of the line stuff are not poor… they generally have quite a lot of money… as a friend who dominated wall street execs for a living put it… they have no problem finding women, they have a problem finding a person that isnt an enemy in their own home, that wouldnt use who they are or what they like against them later when they decide to divorce.
right now we are entering a period where the most women in history are barren… this will only get worse as time goes by and the children grow up in single homes where they dont learn to integrate with members of the opposite sex. and they dont have enough examples outside their family to support that.
the general love and respect that family members had towards each other has been replaced with pain and confusion, violence, revenge, law, and other sundry things…
broken families are now the norm..
and eventually the cure will be to turn the kids over to the state, and fancy that, thats one of those crazy leaders goals..
who is opposing this? not many at all
very few women…
its a real shame…
since most of us want similar things in mates, and those things are not what the leaders are dictating to us to have through many pipes, feminism one of them.
we will never be one nation again if we cant abandon all these arbitrary divisions.
if we cant abolish feminism, the war between men and women will never end until it ends up one of the leaders ways (asexual, laboratory birth, no/low males, etc)…
abolishing feminism has nothing to do with abolishing the values they take false credit for and abuse to get their way, while pretending to move things the way most women want.
we are not so far apart in agreement, i just dont give a free pass to those who are not part of a solution and in many ways, support the problem and dont know it.
Artfldgr: It’s too bad you and others have had bad experiences with extreme feminists, but they are not the norm. As far as condemning someone like Solanas goes—she is extremely marginal to most women’s lives and attitudes. No doubt she has plenty of followers, just as David Duke has plenty of followers, but not many as a percentage of the whole. And just as I don’t choose to spend my time tearing down marginal and extreme neo-Nazis, similarly I don’t choose to spend my time disagreeing with marginal and extreme feminists. But I am very very tired of people insinuating that most women (or men, for that matter) hold the views of these very extreme people.
However, the extreme leftist, radical, progressive views, from all corners, are the ones that continue to make headway into our very existence.
There’s no validity to the argument that radical feminists have declared war on men, while men have never declared war on women. Throughout history there have been plenty of gender terrorists on both sides. Religion, economic forces and political scheming have also played parts in the subjugation of women – and men.
My work with family law legislation brought me into daily contact with both male and female haters of the “other”. It was never easy to get their thumbs off the nuclear trigger. The one common thread was that they didn’t have, or had driven or given away, children.
And there. really, is the self-contained solution to the problem. Men so dysfunctional they can’t form lasting relationships with women don’t father many children, and when they do, they almost always do the kids a favor and disappear.
The same is true of women. Rabid man-haters are notorious non-breeders. Let the loner men masturbate with dolls while the bitter shrews hang out with their cats, ugly friends and escapist intellectual games; those of us who adore the opposite sex will populate the world with more of our kind. The misfits are interesting, but only as examples of evolutionary dead-ends and cultural collateral damage.
I am sure it was not lost on Antonio Gramsci and his acolytes and successors that the structures of bourgeois societies rested on the foundation of the family, and that someone who had a strong, loving, supportive family, had a reasonably happy home and sex life and was content, would be much less receptive and willing to go along with the radical changes and upheavals that Marxism disguised as Postmodernism called for.
So, one of the chief points of attack for Postmodernist thought in bourgeois societies was the family and the relationship between men and women; if the traditional “war between the sexes” could be raised to a fever pitch, if the structure of the family could be destroyed, then the dazed, wounded and embittered refuges from the destroyed traditional–if uneasy and shifting–comity between the sexes, shattered families, and wrecked traditional family life would be much more receptive and willing converts to doctrines that held out the promise of guilt free polymorphous sex with no commitments, open marriage, etc., etc.
Two of the far Left’s most effective and influential cultural commandos and assassins of the family in this effort were “Dr.” Alfred Kinsey” and Dr. Margaret Mead.
Recent investigations by people who have taken the time to investigate–unblinkered by ideology, PC and hagiography (see, for instance, the work of Derek Freeman (http://www.amazon.com/Margaret-Mead-Samoa-Unmaking-Anthropological/dp/0140225552/ref=ntt_at_ep_dpt_1)–report that the young, bisexual, sexually voracious Mead–disciple of Columbia’s Franz Boas and, and Mead’s lover Ruth Benedict–violated the basic rules of Anthropology when she did not learn Samoan, but stayed in her comfortable cabin and primarily relied for her information about Samoan culture and sexuality on two “informants,” young native Samoan women who spoke English, and used what they told her in Mead’s few months in Samoa to weave a totally fraudulent fantasy that justified Meade’s appetites, and confirmed Boaz and Benedict’s theories that sexuality was “absolutely culturally determined”; no study of the Samoan language to understand it and Samoans and their culture, no long months of field work living among and with the Samoans and observing them, no talks with the adults and elders, no cross checking of information between many different and differently placed informants of different ages, not any of the usual tools of good anthropology learned in Anthro 101. As Mead was quoted as saying, “I think the nuclear family is an abomination,” and she crafted her conclusions to prove it.
Unsurprisingly, adolescent Samoans in her enormously influential book, “Coming of Age in Samoa,” indulged in copious, happy, guilt-free sexual experimentation and sex with both males and females, and emerged to form very happy, stable, contented, ideal, stress-and guilt free families, which Mead contrasted with what she portrayed as the cold, joyless, guilt-ridden, constricted, unsatisfactory sex life in bourgeois society, and the strains and strictures of the equally unsatisfactory traditional family. Her message that copious, wide open, guilt and consequence free sex was modern, was liberated, was the natural way, was good for you and would result in happier, more stable, more contented families was widely accepted.
Mead–showered with accolades and honors–a legend, it seemed, in her own mind, bestrode the world of Anthropology like a Mother Goddess, leaning on her trademark staff of authority–and “Coming of Age in Samoa”–which has done incalculable damage by its undermining of traditional sexual morality, behavior and the family–is still required reading in most high school and college curriculums.
Then there was “Dr” Alfred C. Kinsey, a “Doctor” of course, but not of Medicine, or of Psychology but of Entomology, and an expert on the American Gall Wasp. Kinsey’s enormously influential books, “Sexual Behavior in the Human Male” and “Sexual Behavior in the Human Female” replete with an academic tone and multiple charts and graphs, were supposedly based on the latest and most rigorous scientific and statistical methods. But, again, recent research by serious investigators brave enough to dig a little reveals that, among many other things (see, for instance James H Jones biography http://www.amazon.com/Alfred-C-Kinsey-James-Jones/dp/0393327248/ref=sr_1_4?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1262276717&sr=1-4), Kinsey was a homosexual of enormous appetite, a voyeur, and an extreme sado-masochist, who circumcised himself without anesthesia, and routinely practiced the most violent and perverted forms of Masochism on himself–eventually dying from a massive genital-based infection, caused by his repeated and savage abuse of himself with rope and toothbrush. Today, I would think, he might possibly be a heavily medicated patient in a mental institution somewhere.
The “objective” and “scientific” Dr. Kinsey–white lab coat, glasses and all–who said that man was “pansexual,” that homosexuality and pedophilia were normal, and that he wanted to smash Victorian sexual repression, required that all staff members at his Institute, founded in 1947 and currently called the Kinsey Institute for Research in Sex, Gender and Reproduction, housed at Indiana University, submit to being filmed committing every variety of sex act and sexual perversion imaginable solo, and with their husbands and wives (Kinsey’s wife included), and were also required to have sex on film with their co-workers of both sexes, and reportedly Kinsey’s homosexual partners too, as a condition of employment; tell me, does this seem to you like it meets any kind of reasonable research need? Films added to their enormous collection of pornography of all sorts–collected–of course–for scientific purposes only (and great for blackmail, too).
As for Kinsey’s rigorous data collection methods and statistical tables, researchers discovered that his surveys of “average Americans” consisted mostly of Kinsey & Co. trolling gay bars (the bonus here for Kinsey was in picking up more sex partners), interviewing inmates jailed for sex crimes, prostitutes, and Kinsey’s heavy reliance on the meticulous records of the reactions of children, kept by a monstrous pedophile who raped 800 children–some babies as young as six months old–had sex with 33 family members including his father, and quite a few animals (see http://ignatiusinsight.com/features/bwiker_kinsey_nov04.asp); these were Kinsey’s “average Americans.”
As for his statistics and standard, scientific interview forms, there were none. He made up his own, “proprietary” interview dialog, questions and answers that were never actually written down in any standard, decipherable form, and he later recorded the “results” of such interviews–no independent verification or the possibility of such, no cross-checks, no real data–so he completely fabricated his data; data taken, in any case, from the extremely unrepresentative subculture of rapists, homosexuals, prostitutes and pedophiles. All this he represented as a rigorous scientific study of “average Americans,” telling Americans that, in reality, their sexual behavior was far different than they had been told it was or imagined, and that all they had been told was perverse, abnormal and destructive, was, in actuality, perfectly normal. Thus did Kinsey, like Mead, “scientifically prove” that his deviance was absolutely normal.
Kinsey was as widely influential as Mead, and his work is Gospel still today, and the virtually unquestioned foundation of our contemporary view of sexuality, gender and reproductive behavior and, in fact, only a few years ago a hagiographic biographical film starring Liam Neeson was released, heavy on the violins, but stepping lightly over many inconvenient facts, and glorifying scientific pioneer Kinsey for his monumental achievements.
This thread is probably dead but The Futurist has an excellent article, The Misandry Bubble:
Executive Summary : The Western World has quietly become a civilization that undervalues men and overvalues women, where the state forcibly transfers resources from men to women creating various perverse incentives for otherwise good women to conduct great evil against men and children, and where male nature is vilified but female nature is celebrated. This is unfair to both genders, and is a recipe for a rapid civilizational decline and displacement, the costs of which will ultimately be borne by a subsequent generation of innocent women, rather than men.
The article does mention fembots and erotic virtual reality which will absorb larger and larger percentages of beta males while females pursue alpha males.
The Futurist only posts an article about once a month but its articles are among the best and most thought-provoking I encounter on the web.
i have been through the court after the women ahve worked it, and have had a judge (not a feminist) tell me that i have no rights. any one know how many judges go into that area as advocates to change law from the bench?
these are not fringe people neo.
you and the others are fringe
as far as power is concerned you all dont exist
but as far as power is concerned the fruitbat extremists TALK FOR THE OTHERS…
which is why those who are extreme are on tv and news every day… while those who are not, are not even known.
talk about inverting the personal world to be the whole world, and the whole world to be the personal.
walla dabbo has the same kind of stuff that i know that plebs never get. that this is the leaders using people
that is, the radical leaders ARE the movement as they speak, write, make policy, change policy, etc.
i would say that to disconnect yourself from the feminist bind is even harder than to do that for the neo liberal socialist bind!
however, failure to do that is failure
they HAVE succeeded…
McKinnon changes constitutional law…
women selected men by their competency with the world (nor fear of it). their ability to master it is what women selected for. men did not select women for this.
and so the woen sided with a few evil men…
and did a devils deal that if they make the place communist, they would get what they wanted.
power and control…
but they only have that in transition.
even the leaders who are users are being used by others.
franz boas turned out to be a soviet spy..
his taping meade, and others… (like naiomi goldstein – betty freidan) was purposed to destroy the family.
the fact that heterosexual normal families represent only about 30% of the families now..
this down from 98% when i was a kid…
Another CPUSA front, the John Reed Clubs, in 1930, listed several very interesting names (some of whom probably were Communist dupes, enamored of the new Soviet Union before learning of the infamous slaughter of the White Russians, the genocide-like Ukrainian famine, and the show trials of the late 1930s. Among these members were socialist anthropologist Franz Boas, scholar Carl Van Doren, writer John Dos Passos (who officially broke with the CPUSA and later wrote about their treachery), Arthur Garfield Hays (a dedicated Marxist despite his family heritage), H. L. Mencken (the famous writer), the socialist writer Upton Sinclair (The Jungle), Carlo Tresca (later an anti-communist labor leader whom the Reds murdered. This murder might, someday, directly implicate the late leftist Sen. Alan Cranston (D-Calif.). His name also appears in SCUA hearings on the OWI (Office of War Information) and his role in hiring not only CPUSA members but also identified Soviet agents for it. This writer later met members of this front while undercover in another CPUSA front, the National Committee to Abolish HUAC, in 1969.
the whol nurture nature argument is a testiment and a monument to the effectiveness of the people that neo refers to as fringe and unimportant.
anyone notice that there are a bunch of those fringe and unimportant people tearing the constituition apart from their positions in state?
walla shows that the basis of the science that feminism and boas and others used was the same as global warming.
a farce
but unlike agw, a successfulo farce that we are still working under.
which is why we have screwed and skewed colleges
Kinsey is the most quoted “dr” in law and proceedings
kinsey was normal…
or rather, kinsey was abnormal, and so was meade, but after they did their work, hiding themselves, they made abnormal norma, and normal abnormal.
inversion is how you untie society.
Normalize – in IT its to remove redundant data
eerywhere else it was a term invented by stalin to denote the process of making the abnormal normal by subverting enemies (the people are the enemy of the state and so have to be subverted)
they have been so good at it, they now have fisting as normal.
and yet, neo can declare that these fringe peopel dont count. and so we are to ignore them..
we now think homosexuality is normal, pedophilism is to be made normal too (for if a child was propery brought up they would want ot have sex with adults, or liberal adults), pederasty, drug addiction, single parent homes, redistribution, and more.
once again, for a bunch of crazy people we should discount, doing so renders us losers adn the crazies winners.