Categories
alt-right anti-Semitism antifeminism creepy daily stormer empathy deficit entitled babies irony alert literal nazis men who should not ever be with imaginary women ever men who should not ever be with women ever MGTOW misogyny oppressed white men racism sexy robot ladies

Will Jews destroy civilization with sexy sex robots? One Nazi idiot says yes

Sexbot technology: Not quite perfected yet

The allegedly impending arrival of sexbots has been hailed by more than a few internet misogynists, who not only want to have sex with sexy robot ladies but also fantasize that the existence of such quasi-ladies will make flesh-and-blood ladies somehow obsolete.

But not all internet reactionaries think sex-having robots will be a good thing for mankind.

One writer for the neo-Nazi tip sheet The Daily Stormer, disturbed by news reports that a “robosexual” French woman is seeking to marry a life-size robot-looking doll that she 3-D printed for herself, worries that sexy robots may be part of an evil Jewish plot to undermine western civilization.

“I’m sure (((they))) would love to advance robot-human marriages,” Penarddun writes.

[I]magine how much further the fertility rate would drop. Especially when they get robots to a point where you can have actual intercourse with them … and women like the idea of not have to take contraception and being able to whore it up twenty four seven, with zero consequences.

In the comments to the post, someone calling himself Summert offers what he sees as proof that the evil Jews are behind this robo-plot. Pointing to a nine-year-old book on “Love and Sex With Robots” written by chess-obsessed artificial intelligence expert David Levy, Summert comments acidly:

Written by a jew. Is the old story: they plant the seed and the weak twisted minds of faggots and crazy lunatic women buy the idea. Soon, someone is news by actually marrying a robot.

Still, Daily Stormer commenters can’t quite decide whether a white woman marrying a robot is worse than a white woman marrying a black man.

“At least she’s not a mudshark,” writes one commenter who thinks robosexuality isn’t as bad as miscegenation. (“Mudshark” is a derogatory term racists like to use for white women who date or marry black men.)

But a fellow calling himself Hangman disagrees, for a rather novel reason.

In this case it would be better if she’s a mudshark since the robot isn’t killer robot she doesn’t have to pay the toll.

This may not make much sense until you realize that neo-Nazis think that white women dating black men will inevitably end up murdered by them. And that they deserve it.

Someone called Armoric offers an even more baffling objection:

It’s like seeing a White woman walk down the street holding hands with a Black man. She would like to think it’s the same as if she was with a White man, but it’s not. She could just as well be holding hands with a vacuum cleaning robot. In fact, she’s the one making her Black man or robot hold her hand. It’s an artificial situation. It’s a game of let’s pretend.

Er, what?

My thoughts exactly

Others find themselves feeling sorry for the robots. “That poor, poor machine,” writes a commenter called Zamasu.

So i guess this will be the reason the robots will take over the earth and overthrow us. They will have their revenge against us for letting our ugly rat-faced women rape them!

A dude called TheOutlander14, meanwhile, does his best to set forth the standard MGTOW (Men Going Their Own Way) argument for sexbots, realizing that his pro-robot stance may draw some criticism from his Nazi pals.

“I’m going to risk getting some flak here,” he writes.

Nobody on here disagrees that there is a major problem with women due to feminism. They have largely become useless and now exist as an extra boss whom you have to give money to for the rest of your life in exchange for sex. There is no romance to it.

[Sexbots] will disrupt the monopoly women have on sex and essentially render feminist woman useless. … Women will be forced to actually become feminine again and treat men with respect if they hope to have a meaningful relationship. 

Don’t tell any of these people about Westworld. I think it might make their puny human heads explode.

98 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Sinkable John : Pansy Ass Pinko, Regicidal Beast-of-Burden
Sinkable John : Pansy Ass Pinko, Regicidal Beast-of-Burden
5 years ago

@LindsayIrene

Yeah, that’s the one.

LindsayIrene
5 years ago

Can’t remember how to, say, turn on the damn snowblower, but I can ID WHTM trolls on sight.

Sinkable John : Pansy Ass Pinko, Regicidal Beast-of-Burden
Sinkable John : Pansy Ass Pinko, Regicidal Beast-of-Burden
5 years ago

I was struggling to remember who this guy was until you mentioned that, to be fair.

What’s up with all the sad boners lately though ? Aren’t they supposed to be all happy now with their lord and savior president Pussy-Grabber ?

Where’s the enthusiasm ?

weirwoodtreehugger: chief manatee

Ohhhhhh. That’s who he is? I knew I recognized the name but couldn’t remember what his particular wank topic was.

Policy of Madness
Policy of Madness
5 years ago

I’m well-aware that women are human, and not sex objects…but sex is the only relevance that human beings have in my life.

You typed this out, looked at it, said to yourself, “Yep, no directly contradictory clauses in this sentence!” and hit Submit Comment.

Also, did you mean to imply that you’re pansexual?

Atom Ant
Atom Ant
5 years ago

If sex is the only relevance humans have in your life, does that mean you also go out of you way to minimise your contact with men too?

Yes. I have one male friend, and I last saw him fifteen years ago. I have no interest in men and minimal interest in women.

If so, why are you talking to us, Atom? We’re not even going to let you sex on us.

I’m just here to represent my beliefs, since they’re the subject matter of this particular blog.

You typed this out, looked at it, said to yourself, “Yep, no directly contradictory clauses in this sentence!” and hit Submit Comment.

Also, did you mean to imply that you’re pansexual?

I personally don’t think that it’s contradictory. It’s the same way that bosses look at employees, and that certain types of women look at wealthy men. They know that they’re human, but they’re only interested in them for very specific uses.

Also, no, I did not mean to imply that, but the implication doesn’t bother me, either. My lack of interest in relationships (and generally non-traditionally-masculine nature) has caused many women to think I’m gay, and I’ve never been offended by that.

What I mean by you wishing to control how women are, is that that is Classic behaviour for MGTOWs such as yourself.

The very reason they are GTOW is because women won’t submit and behave how MGTOW’s wish them to.

Huh. My view is that no one should change themselves just because someone else wants them to–and also that people have the right to walk away if they aren’t getting what they want from any sort of friendship or relationship. So, if a woman wants a relationship, and a man just wants sex, both parties should walk away from each other, and neither party should be shamed.

I have no interest in “submission” or anything else related to gender-dynamics-related power, as that’s rooted in tradition, and I’m about as anti-tradition as you can get.

Policy of Madness
Policy of Madness
5 years ago

I personally don’t think that it’s contradictory.

Your opinion on this matter is wrong.

It’s the same way that bosses look at employees, and that certain types of women look at wealthy men. They know that they’re human, but they’re only interested in them for very specific uses.

I’m going to just let this sit here for a while, and let it tell us all, over and over, what kind of person you are, and the traits that you think are so normal and ordinary that they are shared by everyone.

Viscaria, product of 20,000 evolution
Viscaria, product of 20,000 evolution
5 years ago

I’m still not sure why Atom Ant is taking the time to speak to us. Are we supposed to feel excited about the sexbot revolution taking him out of the dating pool? Are we supposed to pretend that we’re excited, while secretly mourning one more would-be husband lost to shiny metal seductresses? Or is he just trying to make us feel sorry for the women in customer service who have to interact with him when he is forced to leave his home? All I’m feeling is the last one.

Axecalibur: Middle Name Danger
Axecalibur: Middle Name Danger
5 years ago

Atom’s “just here to represent [his] beliefs”. No explanation on why he feels the need to “represent [his] beliefs”. To us. Here. And now. He just does. Apparently…

Imaginary Petal
Imaginary Petal
5 years ago

Dude, just wrap a bag of crushed ice around your boner until it goes down. Then you can go to sleep.

PeeVee the (Noice) Sarcastic
PeeVee the (Noice) Sarcastic
5 years ago

Atom, you do realize that pretending to eschew people while begging for attention on this blog is not “representing” very well, right?

Literally nobody here cares about you or the notes from your boner. Really. Go your own way. Buh bye, now.

weirwoodtreehugger: chief manatee

Atom, you do realize that pretending to eschew people while begging for attention on this blog is not “representing” very well, right?

Claiming to be going away while staying around? Saying he doesn’t need or want women and doesn’t care about women while obsessively talking about women and sex with women? Sad boner whines? Enthusiasm for a sexbot revolution that will supposedly cause evil feeemaaales to finally be sorry?

Sounds like a pretty good representative of MGTOW to me!

PeeVee the (Noice) Sarcastic
PeeVee the (Noice) Sarcastic
5 years ago

I wonder why he thinks anyone would give a shit about his beliefs, though, WWTH.

He’d be much better off at a MGTOW circle-jerk dungeon/forum collecting upvotes that he seems to crave.

Steph
Steph
5 years ago

I still don’t get why @Atom Ant is here.

If you wish to minimise your interaction with humans do so. Go away.

Otherwise it looks suspiciously like bullshit on your part.

Steph
Steph
5 years ago

“I personally don’t think that it’s contradictory. It’s the same way that bosses look at employees, and that certain types of women look at wealthy men. They know that they’re human, but they’re only interested in them for very specific uses.”

This says nothing about other people but a lot about you.

Steampunked
Steampunked
5 years ago

I ain’t from America, though for some reason I had the idea that the birth rate there was higher than here.

Steph
Steph
5 years ago

@steampunked where are you? It may well be.

People worry about the birth rate but isn’t it just a natural result of contraception. Now people choose to have children and how big their families will be.

Not to long ago it wasn’t really a choice if you were sexually active.

Policy of Madness
Policy of Madness
5 years ago

The capitalist economic model depends upon growth, which requires growth of population. Constant growth is not sustainable, so a reduced birthrate is a good thing overall, but bad for capitalism. I reckon we’ll see what happens when capitalism inevitably collapses when birthrates begin to decline everywhere, rather than just in developed countries where contraception is common, as today. Right now developed countries depend upon immigration from less-developed, higher-birthrate countries for their population growth, but that won’t be an option forever.

opposablethumbs
opposablethumbs
5 years ago

when capitalism inevitably collapses

A post-capitalist world would be a fascinating thing to see – could it go the way of universal income, stable population and a much smaller inequality gap …? Or maybe capitalism burns itself out and takes most of human society with it, with near-total depletion of resources and with life very very nasty, brutish and short for the vast majority all over the world 🙁
(chances are, it probably won’t be clear in any of our lifetimes whether there’s a decent chance of the former, even though some of us are very young – I can envisage it being possible eventually, but capitalism seems to be very resilient)

Atom Ant
Atom Ant
5 years ago

I’m sorry for the lack of replies, everyone–between college football and the Breaking Bad marathon, I’ve been a little distracted.

For the record, “going your own way” doesn’t necessarily equal “going away” period. I can generally avoid people and spend a few minutes each day voicing my opinions, supporting things I believe in, etc. Also, a little advice: if you don’t want certain types of men to come around “begging for attention,” maybe you shouldn’t have a blog devoted to us.

Anyway, thanks for the dialogue, I greatly enjoyed it.

Steph
Steph
5 years ago
Reply to  Atom Ant

@atom Ant.

The blog is dedicated to misogyny.

So you appear to admit that’s what you are (a misogynist.)

Good to know. But it’s still odd that for somebody who claims to want not to interact with others beyond sex, that you keep coming back to interact.

Like you were making it up.

LindsayIrene
5 years ago

Wait, I thought this blog was about meeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee!

(I’m a mammoth.)

%d bloggers like this: