Over on the MGTOW subreddit, the regulars are daydreaming about sexbots. And they can’t seem to decide what excites them more: the prospect of endless on-demand sex with robot super-hotties — or ruining the lives of non-robotic women who won’t be able to compete with the aforementioned robot super-hotties.
It’s really kind of adorable.
Let’s let the MGTOW Nostradamus who calls himself EnterPseudonym explain how it’s all going to go down when the sexbot revolution arrives at last.
Men will be ecstatic to finally have something they can put their penis into that doesn’t talk:
[I]magine that sexbots are a reality. They’re not too expensive maybe $5000. With a decent job and no girl friend you could save up that money within a year. Now you only have to pay electricity to keep her running and maintenance every so often.
Just don’t get her wet! Those things are known to short out.
You don’t have to pay to take her out. You don’t have listen to her nag or bore you with dull conversations. You don’t have to deal with her emotional swings. There are no pregnancy scares.
You should probably clean her once in a while, though.
How can an average woman, who requires tens of thousands of dollars and thousands of hours in time spent to maintain the relationship, compete against a downloadable Kate Upton who requires a quarter of the maintenance time and money?
But, wait, won’t women be able to buy themselves sexbots as well?
Well, yeah, but women aren’t going to want them, because sexbots can’t provide what women really want: money.
Sexbots aren’t appealing to women because a sexbot is only good for sex and won’t actually be able to provide for a woman.
After the sexbot revolution, the world will be filled with desperate women.
Sexbots will essentially collapse the already ruined market for sex. Women will lose much of their social power, and a social switch might happen where males who haven’t chosen to use sexbots are extremely rare.
And so women will start throwing themselves at any man who will have them.
When 90% of males have dropped out of the market, the 80% of women will be competing for whatever man they can find.
Men who’d been cruelly rejected by real-life women in pre-sexbot days will suddenly find themselves in very high demand.
A former sexbot user, could get tired of his sexbot and want to settle down. He enters a market which is deprived of sperm, and now a man that was ugly, overweight, and typically undesirable before the social collapse, is now part of the top 10% of males. He has his choice with almost any woman. Any woman would choose this “undesirable” man because in fact he is desirable.
They never get tired of this fantasy, do they?
Somehow, though, I suspect that even if 90% of straight men were to take themselves off the market EnterPseudonym would still have trouble convincing women that he was much of a catch.
Mrs Chad,
one of the many things I am is an enthusiastic consumer of fiction. Great that you have confirmed you are an enthusiastic producer of fiction. Yippee!
You have certainly created an interesting, complex protagonist in your first person narrative!
Blue collar linguist, 2nd wave feminist who enjoys reinforcing the bigotries of misogynists; tireless defender of your fellow women.
You recently discovered the manosphere, having missed noticing it even as you interacted with it, for the last decade or so because of your (plot twist!) intensive treatment for brain cancer.
[Congratulations on having kept your spirits up through this difficult period by continuing to enjoy your PUA-baiting hobby. I know myself how destructive to concentration, memory, and beliefs about what activities are worthy of one’s time cancer treatment can be, and I doubt I am the only one here who shares that misfortune with you. Sometimes just the smell of food or standing 10 minutes in the sun made me vomit for hours, so kudos to you for maintaining your responsiveness to your Arizonan PUA’s dick-pics under such conditions.]
But back to the plot: Naturally you realised that everyone you know was as uninformed about MRAs as you had been (since, as you have described, your female friends are a bunch of weak crybaby wives who don’t feminist proper and show up whining on your doorstep when they get beaten up), and heroically set forth on a quest to find links with which to educate them.
Predictably, you have now run into a challenge on your noble quest: A group who should have anointed you their rightful leader have turned out to be a duplicitous gatekeepery bunch of crones, and SJWs, and SJW crones [have you known that term for as short a period of time as you’ve known the terms ‘MRA’ and ‘manosphere’? The way you wield it is a credit to your studies as a linguist].
As a reader, I don’t at all mind seeing this classic Hero’s Journey play out yet again. You’ve thrown in a number of plot elements that look out of place now, but I’m especially disappointed we probably won’t get to hear now about how Helter Skelter fits into the story arc. Was this the most recent instance of mainly female group violence you could find? The most closely linked to feminism (so very very not very)? Otherwise, it looks like either a cynical attempt to distract attention from a plot-hole with sensational violence, or… a cynical attempt to distract attention from a plot-hole with sensational violence.
For me, one of the things that separates satisfying Hero’s Journey stories from unsatisfying ones is when transformation of the Hero occurs at all stages.
To date, the only fiction where I’ve seen that happen is where the other characters in the story are also portrayed as if they were people with concerns and motivations of their own, rather than as backdrop, reward, or threat to the Hero.
Mrs Chad: if your stories about the people in your life – your friends, their spouses, your PUAs, aren’t fiction, your portrayal of them is even more callous. Is anybody real to you?
I love how Charade says that nobody wants to be called a feminist anymore, when they themself used that label until making the sudden switch to anti-feminist earlier today. Hahaha.
It no longer matters. All of you have proven that I need to join the patriarchy.
I would much rather a patriarchy than an oligarchy.
You SJWs are too stupid to realize you are advocating for an oligarchy.
Men and women of ALL races think you are highly dangerous people.
Target acquired.
You will continue to be a target–forever.
Read 1984 by Orwell.
1/5th or so of the population of the U.S. identify as feminist. That’s hardly nobody.
So did I! And now I’m a 3rd wave feminist and I still read books. I guess you stopped reading books, since you put that in past tense? Huh, maybe that’s why you don’t seem to know the first thing about today’s feminism or which languages are germanic or how nonbinary pronouns work. You should pick up reading again.
@ Mrs Chad
I have read it; dozens of times. I’m not sure I grasp the point you’re trying to make.
Are you suggesting feminists should atom bomb Colchester?
Mrs Chad,
*yawn*
You don’t think anybody is actually buying this, do you?
You don’t actually think you’re intimidating, do you?
@Petal
Aww yeeeah!
http://i.imgur.com/qJIGuUc.gif
@Viscaria
OK 🙂
@Mrs Yadda Yadda
It’s not that white around here, is it? The rest of us exist, right?
I’ve read Animal Farm. Favorite book actually. Close enough?
Why do they make up fake lives, degrees and jobs?
What’s wrong with their real lives?
For people who hate us so much, they’re sure hellbent on impressing us.
That’s odd. I’ve never seen a woman made fun of for wearing dresses or liking boys on this forum. At least not by one of the regulars.
I also remember there being forty- or fifty-some-odd Germanic languages…I think most being in the Western branch. And the Northern branch, I specifically remember Norwegian, Swedish, Icelandic and Danish being members, but Finnish not (mostly because I had always lumped Norway, Sweden, and Finland together as a kid).
But hey, I just took Intro to Linguistics to round out my core general ed. requirements. I didn’t get a Master’s in the field! So glad to have Mrs. Rooster here to properly educate me (what was the title/subject of that thesis, again?).
And you can call my mind changed on social justice, now that I know that “cishet” is an insult, and that SJWs don’t read books. I don’t know what I’ve been doing all these years — I guess my eyes were just mindlessly scanning the words, while I was daydreaming about how to oppress hypocritically hyper-sensitive privileged people like Mrs. Rooster.
It turns out it was really easy. All I had to do was support my friend when zie started using zie to refer to zirself. Quite literally, fascism. I am so ashamed.
@ Diptych
I don’t know, but it’s certainly amusing.
@Diptych
Deception is a kind of attack, an attack on the reality contextualizing an interaction. In this case I would ask what purpose the behavior served for someone in that position. I don’t believe people do anything without reason and every feature is analyzable.
In general once someone has revealed themselves to be “the enemy” their actions will try to support that effort. An aggressor will textually puff themselves and/or their achievements up for effectiveness, and they will try to “puff down” their “enemy” and their achievements. It’s a display. What they choose to bring up and what they avoid from earlier are suggestive of things.
I see them defiantly asserting realities at supposed enemies without basis that involve groups opposing what they fear. That would serve to shore up beliefs that motivate them.
I see them going on about supposed linguistic skills and problems with language changes, when that was not part of the earlier deception. I suspect they got no value from the effort and are changing the subject from seeing what we would do with respect to ethically aggressing against predatory PUAs.
I see them humorously adding little things to “de puff” us in order to make our threat profile lower. But humor is meant to transform negative emotion and they are quite terrified of SJWs going as far as killing. For example…
I’m adding this exchange to my list for more analysis.
And guess what, you piece of shit, racist, imperialists:
I decided not to make babies a long time ago.
I am extremely narcissistic in that I do not find the other people in the world worthy of interacting with my offspring. Yes, I am that much of a failure and a selfish bitch. SELF RESPONSIBILITY.
I do not give a single fuck that society generally thinks I am supposed to make babies. I DON’T CARE!! I also understand that I have failed as a woman. I DON’T CARE!!! SELF RESPONSIBILITY!!
Fuck your making me validate your pronouns. I refused to procreate. Your pronouns are absolute insanity to me. Join me in NOT procreating.
Nobody cares about your gender rainbow. You can make a difference in the world by nixing your ability to procreate.
STOP reproducing!
That is the only power the proletariat has.
Fuck like crazy, just make sure you don’t reproduce.
If you want to fuck as some sort of gender you made up, I have no problem with that. If you want to rule the language I use to refer to the world–I HAVE A FUCKING PROBLEM WITH THAT!!!
Men and women all over the world are speaking about human rights.
Man = human
Woman = human
Don’t you dare make a man less than me, you 3rd wave, ridiculous cunts.
Waaah. I told Kupo I had 5 attempted rapes on me. That is the truth.
I have also told you guys that I am a raging slut who has no intention of reproducing.
I make my body the current and most sexually attractive version I can be at 43 years old.
SELF RESPONSIBILITY!!!
DO NOT take away my right to play the mating game with men. Just because you can’t play the game, it does not mean I need to wear a fucking helmet when dealing with men.
@ Mrs Chad
If there’s one place you’ll find people to support you in your view it’s here.
In my (admittedly limited) experience it’s feminists who tend to side with women who choose not to have children. It’s more your new patriarchal friends who see popping out kids as a woman’s rightful role.
http://img08.deviantart.net/0fa8/i/2016/226/0/f/nervous_fluttershy_by_masemj-dadxhfu.png
… wowwwww
Welp! I guess I shoulda seen that coming. (I sorta did, I expected that Mrs Chad wouldn’t take the critique well, just not this spectacularly bad). She may or may not be lying about the details of her life – there’s not enough to say for most of it – but I can pin a few things down.
I’ve met Masters who are utterly incompetent in their fields before. Have had the, er, pleasure of working with one, in fact. This said, they at least knew the fundamentals of the field. I could use the words “linked list” and get a passive nod.
But, seriously, including Finnish as a Germanic language? I’m not a linguist in the slightest, have only taken an introduction to the topic, and I know that Finnish is unrelated to the Germanics. You don’t even know the shape of the tree you’re supposed to be measuring, Mrs. Chad.
Croquembouche of patriarchy neatly skewered the other problems with a delightful bit of satire, thank you for that. Perhaps your Masters degree is in Makin’ Shit Up, Mrs Chad? Goes well with a Batchelors of Hubris.
As for your more recent, er, venting on SJWs and 3rd Wave Feminism and “making men less than women”, you apparently don’t know thing-one about third wave feminism. Shock and surprise, I guess!
Feel free to calm down if you’d like. Or continue telling us about how awesome you are, that’s fun too.
And now they bring up people expecting them to reproduce and their defiance of that, which we are not doing.
They then insert a claim that we are forcing them to validate pronouns, which we don’t have the power to do, and tie that to suggesting we not reproduce.
Then they turn this into a demand that we not reproduce, and that we stop using language in a way that implicitly acknowledges gender diversity.
Such an effort to make criticism and a contrast in language use look like we are dehumanizing them. The connections and transformations are fascinating.
Hol up! Let’s go back a second. Emself:
She says ’em’ is homophonic to the German word for him. The German words for him are ‘ihn’, ‘ihm’, and ‘sich’, depending on case. ‘Ihm’ is the closest to ’em’ but the former sounds like eem and the latter (I assume) like ehm. Is that even homophonic?
Also, himself, herself, itself, and themselves are all the same word in German: ‘sich’. Why would a new, gender neutral word be necessary in the 1st place? Unless she meant something different by her imperialism talk. None of that made any sorta sense
Some fuckin linguist she is…
Re: the most recent pair of screeds
I’m starting to tough my face, tense my fingers, and breathe weird. Malice. I’m done…
TIL: Respecting someone’s choice of pronoun to refer to themself and adding it to the language == ruling the language Mrs. Rooster uses to refer to the world. Fascism. Imperialism. Oppression. Has something to do with making men less than women.
Whereas, dictating to someone what pronoun they can use to refer to themself, and that “your” language can’t accomodate them == being totally pluralistic. Democratic. Respectful.
Man, “Mrs. Chad Skyboomrooster” would have been an awesome username if it wasn’t claimed by some troll.
Anybody want me to contact the boss, or are you still having fun batting them around?
Mrs. Chad, could you please enlighten us as to the connection between people choosing genderless pronouns and your choosing not to have children?
Also, no feminist in this space would consider you to have failed as a woman for any reason at all (we 3rd wavers have this funny idea that there’s no right or wrong way to be any gender), but especially we would never fault a person for their reproductive choices.
I’m not sure how using different pronouns is somehow an attack on you? We’re happy to use your preferred pronouns when referring to you. And probably the worst you’ll get if you continue to use he/her instead of they/Zie/etc. is an eye roll but more likely the misgendered person will just politely ignore it and feel uncomfortable. No one is going Manson Family on anyone over pronouns.
Maybe I’m wrong about the deception part, but it sure fits the pattern to me. I’ll choose to keep this one in the “evidence of deception” pile.
SELF RESPONSIBILITY
YOUTH PROBABILITY
KITE SPONTANEITY
BOAT LEVITY
http://media3.giphy.com/media/ApmVMk6n1hxug/giphy.gif
Aha
Figured that was the root of it. You’re upset that we think there might be something ethically problematic with your behaviour. Then, from that, apparently decided to think we’re implying you need to ‘wear a helmet when dealing with men’.
Mrs Chad, no one here wants you to “wear a helmet” with men around. Do what you want. But being a woman playing the same game as a man doesn’t protect you from the ethical consequences of playing that game.
That’s what feminism is, if you recall? Equal treatment? If we have serious moral problems with men using “game”, why in the Nine Worlds of Ygddrasil would you think you’d be able to skip free of them? Because of your target? We already told you – yeah, turnabout is fair play and all, but that sort of behaviour just forms bad thinking habits.
I see that those bad habits have already settled well in place, though.
Go ahead and keep throwing toys out of the pram, Mrs Chad.
Boaty McBoatface.
@Scildfreja
Nice catch. Now what are the odds she’s a PUA gotcha troll trying to get us to agree it’s okay for women so she can scream at us about hypocrisy?
The shark has been jumped. They’re just repeating the same word salad now