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

Manosphere doofuses duped again by phony Canadian sexbot ban

NOTE: Don't buy this model. She's trouble.
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.

510 replies on “Manosphere doofuses duped again by phony Canadian sexbot ban”

Abnoy: 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

Is this where I get to whip out my cred?

Neil Gaiman has praised my writing.

But… and this is the important part, you are being a goalpost shifting moron.

When challenged on angels you whipped out irrelevant nonsense about the Catholic Church.

Then you reached up your ass to find some gibbering mess about demons, from some movie.

What Gaiman, etc. do (e.g. in American Gods, or subtextual elements in Zealazny’s first five Amber Novels) is build an internally coherent set of rules for the supernatural/deistic elements. You aren’t doing that. You are making shit up, because it gives you a stiffy.

And I’m shocked that despite being apparent agnostics/atheist, you people se[e]m

That sentence, right there, shows why you keep getting chewed up, and spat out. “you people”. There is no such beast here. The difference of opinion on the subjects discussed here is actually fairly wide. But you have a stick up your ass about what “Feminists” are, and so you stereotype the people you disagree with. It makes it easier for you to blather, but inhibits 1: actual communication, and therefore 2: any hope you have of persuasion.

It means what you do here is just public masturbation. Luckily we are used to that.

We point and laugh.

Kitteh’s: It’s from a metal recycling plant that caught fire in the heat (petrol still in a car wreck, apparently).

If petrol was the cause, it wasn’t the heat, per se. Gasoline requires a spark to ignite (one can douse a cigarette in it. The Movies lie).

So what probably happened was a car being crushed had the tank punctured, and a metal on metal spark set the fumes alight.

Rape. FGM. The ridiculously high murder rate of trans* women. A preemptive ban on sex-bots because it would threaten women’s control over the pussy market.

*sings “one of these things is not like the others”*

It would be amusing/horrifying/enlightening if David were to do a post on what search terms lead people here.

How did regulars find this blog? I think I came across it via Hoyden About Town; that, or when I was looking up what the hell MRA stood for. (I thought it was Male Rape Apologist, which is accurate if not official.)

Oh lord, that just prompted me to take a look at the Pervocracy. Cliff’s doing a takedown of Fifty Shades of Shit … and even with zir comments, I can’t read past the first few quotations from it. 😛

Leave a Reply

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

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.