Medical journal argues against use of sex robots - since they promote gender discrimination and advance distorted views of attractiveness that reduce female body confidence

Wisemanner · 2018-06-05T14:54:49+00:00

So, once again, it's how they affect women that's the deciding factor? B/S.

Splatriarchy · 2018-06-05T15:35:22+00:00

It's almost like they are scared to have men make money in the sex industry. It's almost like they want to make sure the supply of sex out there doesn't increase so they can maintain the demand for what they can provide.

Lethn · 2018-06-05T15:33:22+00:00

Is this a real medical journal? These sources are absolute shit, it looks like something written up by a 13 year old Tumblr girl.

thrway_1000 · 2018-06-05T15:46:14+00:00

Feminists are insane. They shouldn't even act like their doing real research.

tenchineuro · 2018-06-05T16:33:45+00:00

Currently, the ‘precautionary principle’ should reject the clinical use of sexbots until their postulated benefits, namely ’harm limitation' and ’therapy', have been tested empirically.

all this article is saying is not to prescribe the use of sex robots until we have some evidence that it is beneficial to treating a pathological disease

the article is a waste of space

v574v · 2018-06-05T15:41:44+00:00

‘Dag-gum! We will have to learn to make sandwiches again if we want to compete with these gawd darn sex robots! Consarn it!’

McFeely_Smackup · 2018-06-05T20:27:59+00:00

Same old thing.

Female sexuality:. Amazing, beautiful, sensual, no matter how it's expressed

Make sexuality: gross, disgusting, should probably be illegal

kartu3 · 2018-06-05T19:16:15+00:00

Guys, there are more women than men in this world, why is that there are so many men looking for sex, while women have no problems finding partners?

Putting "it's social" stuff aside, gay men have sex much more frequently than gay women.

That's where disparity comes from.

A lot of bending over backwards by men happens in pursuing, well, sex.

Sex robots could shatter the imbalance and are, hence, dangerous.

2018-06-05T19:58:26+00:00

So no more dildos and vibrates for women then

2018-06-06T06:15:58+00:00

So the article admitted there was no evidence that sexbots do any harm, but that we should still accept their hypothesis that it does?

Then it proceeds to attack straw man arguments.

This is what happens when science interacts with feminism—it becomes pseudoscience.

hixidom · 2018-06-06T05:06:00+00:00

For the record, any feminist talk of female body acceptance is directly related to the "incel" debate. Countless feminists are jumping on the bandwagon of pubicly telling incels that nobody is obligated to have sex with them under any circumstances. It's obviously true, but the hate that this message is usually infused with is cruel and we should be quick to reflect the message right back at them when they talk about women's entitlement to the sexual attraction of men.

hatefulreason · 2018-06-06T07:28:14+00:00

i'm sure male sexbots will not distort the views of attractiveness of women, since they can't see 50% of men anyway

Tedesche · 2018-06-05T21:12:56+00:00

LOL, no movement or organization has ever been able to stop the spread of porn or prostitution. No one gives a shit that scientists think sex robots objectify women.

Luchadorgreen · 2018-06-06T01:43:03+00:00

These robots can't possibly have anything to do with women because robots don't have genders. Checkmate.

Title	Medical journal argues against use of sex robots - since they promote gender discrimination and advance distorted views of attractiveness that reduce female body confidence
Author	patcomen
Upvotes	56
Comments	25
Date	June 5, 2018 2:13 PM UTC (8 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/8or4dw/medical_journal_argues_against_use_of_sex_robots/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/medical-journal-argues-against-use-of-sex-robots.900094 https://theredarchive.com/post/900094

Comments