Instagram and Sex Robots - How Technology is Changing Male/Female Interactions...

Red-Curious · 2019-01-09T16:22:51+00:00

This is certainly an interesting write-up. I like it. Here are a few things that came to mind while reading:

females have always had to survive in history by interacting with the group

Rather than a psycho-historical perspective on the feminine social matrix, I prefer what the Bible says. Men were created with a mission. They look at what needs to be done. Women were created to be helpers. They look at other people who may need help. While God may have put the desire to be with a woman in man, biblically, it is always secondary to his mission. For women, their interaction with others IS the exact reason for their creation, which is why they're drawn to social interaction. "It is not good for man to be alone," but he can do it - he doesn't need women, especially in a post-Gospel world, Paul being the prime example. Women, on the other hand, were created expressly for interpersonal interaction, which is why even in the post-Gospel world Paul encourages the young widows to remarry, despite his general advice in 1 Cor. 7 to remain in whatever position you are.

they are competing with false versions of other women

A nice addition to my 107 post on the comparison game.

The state after marraige says, do whatever you want and you still get half of this man's resources for a decade or more. If you have kids? basically 2 decades.

This is an alarmist way of putting it. The only resources split are those acquired during the marriage. If a man is dumb enough not to maintain records of what he had going into the marriage, that's his own idiocy. Most states in the US will not impose indefinite spousal support until you've been married for 25+ years - and even then my dad divorced after 26 and only had to pay for 7 years. And child support is not half your assets or income. It's usually closer to 20%. For example, guy in my state who earns $100k, assuming the wife is at minimum wage, may have to pay around $20k/yr in child support, less if the wife makes more. And the reverse does apply if the woman is the heavier earner. At least in my state, the law used to be anti-male (divorce 2.0), and then they retracted some things and now it's anti-high-earners (divorce 1.5), which still has a disparate impact on men because most men are higher earners, but they argue that it's still gender neutral because if the woman earns more then she is subject to the same obligations - and I have seen this reverse scenario play out in court many times as well. So, the law is not against men ... it just happens to be that most higher-earners are men (and not because of the mythical wage gap), so men bear the brunt of that law more often.

It literally cost the cystic fibrosis guy 4 million and raising another man's children for decades.

Let's be clear on this: the 4m pounds came from his internet business and not child support. That's something he would have had to pay even if they never had kids. The kids had nothing to do with that bit.

As for the kids, I calculate his total post-divorce to be around $300,000 between child support and school tuition, plus whatever he voluntarily paid during his parenting time. As for pre-divorce, in those days the cost to raise a child was around $11k annually, which is $33k for 3 kids, over an average of 9 years per kid = another $300,000. So, altogether he's out $600k for these kids. Accounting for the $250k payback, he's out $350k. But even at that, he settled this case rather than taking it to trial. Could he have gotten the full $600k or more? Possibly. Who knows - certainly not him, because he settled. He agreed to take this instead of fighting for a better share.

Why would he do that? Well, because he still loves the kids and wants a relationship with them (even though 2 aren't speaking to him right now - but that will almost certainly die down). Also, there's a high probability that if he had known, he would have adopted children anyway, and thus ended up raising another man's kids anyway - just under less nefarious terms. Or there could be any other number of reasons that rationalize the dollars ... things that made sense in his situation to make him feel right and whole with that settlement that we don't get to consider when we see that "he only got $250,000!" as is the typical reaction to something like this.

My assumption is that we are talking about higher level men who are able to get women

That's the thing though: my personal experience in interacting with these high level men tells me quite the opposite. They're more likely to pay for prostitutes, sex toys, and high-end pornography than the lower or middle class people I represent. High-end men tend to monetize everything. So, if they want sex, they will pay money to get it rather than go through the relational hassles. Money makes sense to them. Trying to win in the SMP doesn't - because that takes effort, even for a man of high status, whereas money takes none. Sure, they are "able to get women," but even a multi-millionaire still has to work for her attention and attraction. Not so with porn or a prostitute ... or a sex doll.

what about the incels who are in the bottom 20% - something like this allows them to pay their way into a woman who looks like a 10 without all the problems reality brings

You've got this backwards. The incels would probably use these, but they would still be seeking relationships with real women rather than exchanging them for sex robots. The robots would be a mere way to placate sexual desire, but their blue pill fantasies would still compel them to look for validation from women. A sex robot cannot give that, and thus they will continually be unsatisfied and disappointed and still longing for female attention.

You appropriately give good references to u/Rollo-Tomassi's content on point, but another thing he talks about is validational sex, which is what most betas are really seeking. A true alpha could use a sex robot and be just fine - because he doesn't need that validation. He knows he can get it when he wants it, so sex is just about his own enjoyment at that point. If he feels like doing it with a doll, he'll do it with a doll. If he feels like bagging an actual woman, he'll go out and get her and take her home for the night or a quickie in a closet or whatever. The robot is satisfying to him because it gives him exactly what he wants: sexual gratification. The robot will never be satisfying to the beta because it cannot give them what they want: validation.

I do believe that technology has been able to provide women what they want most - loads of attention

But again: this is artificial attention. They don't know if the person behind the screen is really what his profile picture shows. The fantasizes - and women are just as good at living in fantasy worlds as men - but in the back of her head she knows it might not be real. Women are the true validation-seekers, and rightfully so in light of their biblical purpose for creation. Paul as much as says that men should look to God for their validation and women should look to men. That's why it's so off-base for me to see a beta mindset in a Christian man: because men should not be looking for validation from other men or women - only from God. But for the woman this is different. That validation is part of her created design. But artificial validation will only go so far because hypergamy will compel her toward the AF and the BB. She can't get either of those from a man online who clicks the like button. It inflates her self-esteem, but does nothing to satisfy her actual needs. That guy on the internet isn't going to pay her mortgage. He isn't going to screw her brains out while she's ovulating - and she might not want him to either, if she knew who he really was.

While attention may be something women strongly crave, I don't think it's accurate to say that's what they want most. What they want most is the attention of a high-value man. And they cannot assess a man's value if their interactions only remain online - which is actually an indicator of low value, if he is not willing to step out in the real world to meet her, or doesn't have the resources to make that a viable option. But the artificial validation does placate women until they can find that man in real life, just as the sex doll doesn't give the beta what he really needs, but it does placate his sexuality until he finds someone who he mistakenly believes will give him that validation.

Same_Letter · 2019-01-09T14:16:36+00:00

Know Anthony Dream Johnson? Watch his video on his ex-wife, not specifically for that story, while it’s interesting in itself as well, but he mentions in it, *private marriage, which should be the golden standard among any rational man. While he explains the legal benefits compared to the state marriage, he probably also has more presentations explaining it.

The channel is 21 Convention. Watch it.

Last thread on RP Christians mentioned a girl accusing a random guy she met for the abortion she was willing to execute. I defend the position of putting it all out there for all to see. Johnson also does this in his story of his ex wife. He could have never told anyone, and pretend he was not hurt, and was not emotionally castrated by his ex. Like some of us stoicly seem to be. But he didn’t. He laid out an objective case, with proof and reasons for her behaviour, and all that it implicates. He did a wonderful job, which shows the plain effectiveness of bringing truth out there. Again I will say, we should not be participators of hiding the the cruelty and disgustingly pathetic and despicable behaviour of certain women, lest we be partakers in it. We don’t tell it because it because we need people to feel sorry, we tell it because it’s undeniable, and we won’t care less about anothers opinion. We care about ourselves. Would you conveniantly hide the the true identity of Hitler to the people, so they all will be misled? Because you feel sorry for his feelings? (Or the coming anti-christ maybe?) Would that be loving? Or would that be taking part in the destruction of anything good? This apostle John speaking ‘If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not receive him into your house or give him any greeting,’ does not bring this teaching? Well let alone a girl that comes to you, assuming authority to claim your guilt on a thing not even remotely connected to you. It’s not even worth mentioning, it’s *that obvious that she should learn how to behave. The video of Anthony is worth the watch, takes about 110 minutes. Let alone someone else fell in love with Johnsons ex, and he wouldn’t know about it all. Would you not want to warn that person to ‘Dovanything you want but never ever start a relationship with her’, ‘Why?’ ,‘Look.’ We want to have the truth available, and not be part of deception. We want choices made not on lies. We want choices on the basis of evidence and truth.

I don’t need to mention, that you’re the head, you’ll decide what your family needs. We don’t allow our wives to be seduced by evil government benefits (which we, the private laborer, and our grandfathers were fully forced and or misled, to pay for to implement, we’ll talk about this another time) when her emotion is not, what she would wish it to be.

So read up on private marriage, it’s essence and qualities, and serve yourself as you would serve another.

Title	Instagram and Sex Robots - How Technology is Changing Male/Female Interactions...
Author	RPRedemption
Upvotes	7
Comments	10
Date	January 9, 2019 1:08 PM UTC (5 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/RPChristians
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/RPChristians/comments/ae6nz8/instagram_and_sex_robots_how_technology_is/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/RPChristians/instagram-and-sex-robots-how-technology-is.301503 https://theredarchive.com/post/301503