Manosphere doofuses duped again by phony Canadian sexbot ban
NOTE: Don’t buy this model. She’s trouble.
So the Boobz are getting worked up – again – over some imaginary “proposed legislation” to ban sexbots. Vox Day, one of the esteemed elder statesmen of the right-wing of the manosphere, has resurrected an urban legend that first fooled his comrades about two years ago, reposting a “statement” of mysterious Canadian origin explaining that
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.
The main provision of this dastardly Femi-Canadian proposed legislation?
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.
You may wonder: Why didn’t I read anything in the papers about this Human-Robot Personal Relationship Act? Why haven’t I heard about this Ministry of Robots and Artificial Intelligence?
Well, you guessed it. Because neither of them exist. I looked into this two years ago when the story first, er, broke in the manosphere. There’s no vast feminist conspiracy to deny Canadian men (or, for that matter, women) their still-imaginary sexbots. The “statement” was evidently written as part of a law school class project on law and robotics taught by Prof. Ian Kerr at the University of Ottawa Law School.
If you Google “Human-Robot Personal Relationship Act” or “Ministry of Robots and Artificial Intelligence” you will find that literally the only people talking about this issue are MRAs and PUAs and conspiracy theorists. And some of the more gullible 4channers, though a few of them quickly figured out that the whole thing was fake. (As did the Real Doll enthusiasts.)
Vox Day, who has yet to come to this realization, draws some dire conclusions from this thing that isn’t real, declaring that the
This Canadian attempt to preemptively ban sexbots is an overt confession by feminists of both sexes concerning their belief that women have nothing significant to offer men but sexual services. Moreover, it is proof that their “pursuit for gender equality” is directly and fundamentally opposed to the most basic human freedom. …
One would think that even those only superficially acquainted with human history would realize that attempts to put the technological genie back in the bottle almost always fail, as do attempts to prevent men and women from pursuing pleasure in ways deemed illicit. But then, a near-complete ignorance of human history is required to either be a feminist or possess a genuine belief in the rainbow-tailed unicorn of equality.
Well, not so much. Though Vox proves yet again that there are few people on planet earth as gullible as the manosphere’s pompous philosophers.
NOTE: Vox isn’t the only manospherian up in arms about the evil imaginary sexbot ban; more on this tomorrow.
Like this:
Posted on January 14, 2013, in antifeminism, drama kings, facepalm, gullibility, men who should not ever be with women ever, misogyny, MRA, playing the victim, PUA, sex, sexy robot ladies, shit that never happened, straw feminists and tagged antifeminism, pick-up artists, pickup artists, PUA, sexbots. Bookmark the permalink. 466 Comments.
*minds, I give up, I’m just going to take up residence in the corner of shame
PennyDreadful — yeah I got that it was rhetorical, except the very nature of airing rhetorical questions like that is a fallacy. One that, in this case, is harmful and hurts people. For example, the rhetorical nature of it didn’t make it not grating for LBT, trying to use the rhetorical nature of the questions as cop out to that is, at best, a failure to own up to what you said and implied. At worst your ignoring that is a sign that you’re just fine with rating LBT (which btw, will make you a lot of enemies around here real fast)
As for “I’m not your enemy” — I’m not saying you are — but much like one’s orientation, that’s for everyone else to decide (ie, everyone here, as individuals gets to decide whether or not you’re their enemy)
I don’t see you as an enemy, but you asked the questions. If the answers are painful, well you asked the questions, in public, in response to other questions. They needed to be answered.
RE: PennyDreadful
I understand that you’re in a raw place right now, and that you may be feeling defensive. But these ‘rhetorical’ questions you mention are ones that I as a trans person have to deal with a LOT. They may be helpful for you, but they are not to me.
I re-emphasize that taking a break might be a good idea.
Penny, I really don’t want to do a piling-on sort of thing here, but please be wary of talking about someone’s attraction being fictional or whatever. Yes, a celebrity obsession is a problem if it leads to stalking or harassment or whatever, but otherwise, so what? I also don’t think that has anything to do with whether it’s an opposite-sex attraction, same-sex or anything else.
I’m side-eyeing this part a little (not in the sense of being hurt, though) because I’ve copped a bit of this sort of “you’re living in a fantasy/ you’re delusional” shit. Mr K passed over more than 300 years ago, but that doesn’t change the fact that he is real, alive and we are very much in a married relationship. I leave it to your imagination how shitstains like to react to that, usually with internet diagnoses of mental illness. (Totally the opposite of the reaction of actual mental health professionals, I might add.) There was even a bizarre drive-by troll a couple of weeks back who thought he could needle me by saying my relationship with Mr K was necrophilia - quite how that works without a, you know, corpse being involved I have no idea - or something to do with rape culture.
He got royally taken down.
If you want to see what our relationship really is [shameless self promotion] take a look at my blog [/shameless self promotion].
Anyways we all stuff up, I did just before with the IQ stuff. I’ve learned a lot I had no idea about before I started posting here and it’s helping me reassess some assumptions, including ones about myself.
@LBT - re: IQ jokes: gotcha. I like what you said about being understaffed and everything going to shit - oy, does it ever! Been there too many times.
And what Argenti said about “treatment” trying to get rid of Mac and leave Rogan behind - there’s a word for that, it’s murder.
And WHOOT about doing a web comic! Let us know when it’s up, please?
@Argenti - “kiss of awesome” was more like Pedestal of Greatness than Corner of Shame!
RE: Argenti and Kittehs
Sure! Right now, the issue is pretty much scannage, and teching. (Which unfortunately, I am unlikely to get to today.) The strips are all here, it’s just putting them online.
Also a weeding process; I started the comic because I injured my knee and needed SOMETHING I could do sedentary before losing my mind, but that means a few might pull people I know into the comic that don’t want to be. So some will get dumped.
Still, I’m so excited!
OMG there’s a Dickie Knee epidemic! Mine’s stuffed, one of the guys at work stuffed his playing soccer yest, now I hear you have …
HOBBLE FOR YOUR LIVES!
ABNOY — wtf makes you think we’ve all seen Wreck-It Ralph? And what in the everloving fuck is the relevance of this?
Abnoy, would you do me a favor and take your wanking fantasies elsewhere? I really don’t give a shit what your boner likes.
Kitteh — lol, ok
*goes to pedestal of greatness*
Wreck-It Ralph hasn’t even opened here yet as far as I know, and guess what, I ain’t going to see it anyway.
Assuming “stuffed” is Aussie for “ruined,” I stuffed mine on Saturday while hall monitoring. Turns out there’s a strict limit to how many times I can go down stairs.
Ouch!
Stuffed is definitely ruined. Stairs are an absolute bastard when your knees are playing up.
So, it’s not just an epidemic, it’s a pandemic!
I’m getting in on the knee-hurt party. I sit cross-legged when I work. It’s not a good idea to do that for 8+ hours a day :/
Ouch again! Closest I can come to sitting cross-legged at all is doing glutes-stretching exercises in the morning. Oh the joys of age.
“As for “I’m not your enemy” — I’m not saying you are — but much like one’s orientation, that’s for everyone else to decide (ie, everyone here, as individuals gets to decide whether or not you’re their enemy)”
@Argenti, you just decided my orientation. You’ve decided I’m oriented toward being your enemy, which is far from the case. You can only decide whether you are *mine* or not, not how I feel towards you or anyone else here. You have also decided I am transphobic, which is completely untrue, even by anything I have posted here. Not being familiar, not understanding, not being aware of the social norm of a community (or thread), does not make one a bigot or ignorant or irrationally afraid. It just makes them awkward and pre-informed. Unintentional lack of etiquette on a public forum may make one unwelcome, but does not equate to prejudice. I can completely understand that those of you here who are regulars have become very protective of one another; be careful, when part of a group, to not assume everyone who doesn’t ease into that group without faux pas is an alien with ill intent.
I have not said one thing in this or any thread with the intention of hurting, insulting, offending or “rating” (I don’t know what that means, but if it’s “dismissing, insulting, marginalizing, invalidating, and mocking” then you are extremely mistaken) any of the regulars here. Lack of education or information is not ignorance; disagreement or difference of opinion or experience is not insult or lack of respect.
@Kitteh’s: thank you for the blog link, I’m looking forward to learning your story.
Peace out.
You’re welcome, Penny.
*Has seen (and loved) Wreck-it Ralph. Remains as confused as those who haven’t*
I, too, have seen and loved W. I. R., and I would recommend it to anyone (there is a moment near the end where someone is carried off against his will), but I’m not going to insist.
“@Argenti, you just decided my orientation. You’ve decided I’m oriented toward being your enemy, which is far from the case. You can only decide whether you are *mine* or not, not how I feel towards you or anyone else here.”
Congrats, I hadn’t yet decided whether I saw you as an enemy, that right there? Now I’ve decided. Me, or anyone else here, seeing you as an enemy is nothing at all like deciding someone else’s sexual orientation. For starters, whether you’re “oriented towards being [my]” enemy is rather irrelevant to whether I see you as my enemy (I’ll get back to the nature of intent). For finishers, whether you see me as an enemy, and whether I see you as an enemy? Not the same thing, not seeing me as your enemy doesn’t magically get you out of having pissed me of.
“You have also decided I am transphobic, which is completely untrue, even by anything I have posted here.”
Actually, I said that focusing on chromosomes was transphobic, which since it was a rhetorical question, I had no way of knowing whether that was a factor in your partner selection, just that questioning chromosomes is failing Transphobia Avoidance 101.
“I have not said one thing in this or any thread with the intention of hurting, insulting, offending or “rating” (I don’t know what that means, but if it’s “dismissing, insulting, marginalizing, invalidating, and mocking” then you are extremely mistaken) any of the regulars here.”
It means I’m posting from my iPad and typo’ed ranting, which means exactly what it sounds like. That aside, intent, it’s fucking magic. That you continue to ignore that your questions grated on LBT’s (trans*) nerves, well, it isn’t helping make your case that your problem comes from simple naïveté.
You want to make friends here? Take the advice to take a break and come back to reply later (if at all). And for the love of all the gods, consider wtf you’re doing by ignoring inquiries into the transphobic nature of your questions coming from trans* and genderqueer people.
Dafuq?
That’s basically the one word version of my response to that, yes.
Dafuq sounds like the name of an obscure desert kingdom on the Discworld …
This is so ‘splainy and assy. It’s true enough on it’s face, but you’re not exactly making it easy to like you. You’ve been assumptive, patronizing, and rude.
I highly recommend you dial it back a notch, go read old threads, and learn some 101 stuff elsewhere.
Dafuq is a city on FAQ — http://www.erfworld.com/wiki/index.php/FAQ
“Pre-informed” may be the best euphemism for “ignorant” that I’ve ever heard, and I hear a lot of dumb euphemistic buzzwords at work.
LOL Argenti, that page left me totally in the dark, since I’ve never heard of Erfworld or anything to do with it! Glad to see the name gets some use, though.
“Misinformed” would be a better choice than “pre-informed” - the latter isn’t a word afaik, and implies the person has prior knowledge rather than assumptions.
Erfworld’s a comic strip, with a bunch of puns (including the title). The kingdom of FAQ being one such pun, though the ORLY? owls might be my favorite. (I’d like to set a few loose on this thread actually, because O RLY?)
Owls are always good!
You Obviously Like Owls.
Cuuuute!
I never gave owls (well, except Hedwig) much of a thought before I started reading here, but omcc those videos of owls enjoying being patted …
OK, time for me to go out into the horrid hot heat - later!
Owl: fuck you, I’m looking at something
Just because a person is a designated Bad Guy doesn’t mean they’re a bad person per se. Similarly, just because an entity is called a Demon doesn’t mean that it’s evil per se. Don’t you remember the moral lesson of that movie?
For the 6th+ time, media =/= real life, not anime, not movies, not TV, nor books. That aside, demons =/= bad guys, they are, by fucking definition, evil entities. Cute how you’re claiming that that’s bigotry though!
de·mon noun \ˈdē-mən\
Definition of DEMON
1a: an evil spirit
1b: a source or agent of evil, harm, distress, or ruin
2 usually daemon : an attendant power or spirit : genius
3 usually daemon : a supernatural being of Greek mythology intermediate between gods and men
4: one that has exceptional enthusiasm, drive, or effectiveness
Unless you’ve decided to use the Greek definition, evil is an inherent part of the word demon.
“In religions worldwide, any of various evil spirits that mediate between the supernatural and human realms. The term comes from the Greek word daimon, a divine or semidivine power that determined a person’s fate. Zoroastrianism had a hierarchy of demons, which were in constant battle with Ahura Mazda. In Judaism it was believed that demons inhabited desert wastes, ruins, and graves and inflicted physical and spiritual disorders on humankind. Christianity placed Satan or Beelzebub at the head of the ranks of demons, and Islam designated Iblis or Satan as the leader of a host of evil jinn. Hinduism has many demons, called asuras, who oppose the devas (gods). In Buddhism demons are seen as tempters who prevent the achievement of nirvana.”
In exactly zero cases are they anything you want to fuck around with.
…how the fuck did that decide I had a link?!
Not to mention that succubi feed off the life force/spiritual energy of their victims and leave behind a corruption that assures the victim a place in Hell. But hey! That there Pope became immensly wealthy and powerful! Who cares that he was damned…
Has anyone else noticed that Abnoyance writes a lot like Steele?
clairedamnit — yeah, I asked that not long ago, apparently Mr. Al didn’t start socking ’til he was banned and ABNOY’s been around since before that.
pillow in hell — hey now, eternal damnation is totally worth it for earthly riches…oh wait, I think that’s 180° from the moral of the story…
Hey now! The Pope had a few measly decades of living the high life before eternal damnation.
BUT HE GOT LAID GUYZZ!!
Is there a Muse for embroidery? Because if there is… I’d like to take up her sense of timing inspirations.
Its past midnight, and all I want to do is stitch despite the fact that my eyelids don’t want to stay open.
Hey hellkell, this made me smile, for whatever reason:
“This is so ‘splainy and assy.”
Abnoy: You choose angels by one set of rule (the Catholic Church) and demons by another (movies,and TV shows).
Conveniently both get you what you want from the subject. It’s like you make it up as you go along.
“Similarly, just because an entity is called a Demon doesn’t mean that it’s evil per se. Don’t you remember the moral lesson of that movie?”
Wait, what fucking movie? Are you still on WIR, abby? Angels are good — in a system that says demons are bad. But your references are so random. Sure, there were daimons of ancient Greece — Socrates spoke of them. “The favor of the gods,” said Socrates, “has given me a marvelous gift, which has never left me since my childhood. It is a voice which, when it makes itself heard, deters me from what I am about to do and never urges me on.”
But I don’t think you meant that either. I think you are thinking of the sexy hipster demon chicks from “Scott Pilgrim versus the World.”
Hah,obviously you people are not fans of Marvel Comics or Vertigo or even fantasy writers like Neil Gaiman, then you’d realize that different mythological pantheons can co-exist together :p And I’m shocked that despite being apparent agnostics/atheist, you people sem to stick to a Judeo-Christian worldview that condemns everything else not sanctioned by the Church as being already necessarily evil. For argument’s sake, if the supernatural realms do in fact exist, who’s to day that the bad press of one religion, Judeo-Christianity, towards other religions is even accurate at all? That’s the cultural imperialism of the Inquisition!
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/DarkIsNotEvil