Like her transactions, I’m anonymous.
Look at her reading the Economist’s
H/T Cafe Hayek, who gets all the cool digital-currency music videos.
It’s International Women’s Day and artist aleXsandro Palombo has done a series called “What Kind Of Man Are You?” featuring images of well-known cartoon characters in scenes of domestic violence.
Characters include Prince Charming and Snow White, The Flintstones, and The Simpsons, among others. I’m not sure what kind of statement he’s trying to make beyond the equivalent of flying a ribbon from your car antenna, but I think he missed the target here. This image, for example…
…isn’t particularly striking, pardon the pun, since we’ve seen Homer do worse to Bart almost since Day One. If anything, Marge is getting off easy (and I seem to recall Maggie launching an unprovoked attack at Homer at one point).
As for the superhero images, they’re pretty tame (seriously, after being hit by Superman, Wonder Woman shouldn’t even have a head anymore). Even the Super Friends cartoon, which looks to be the inspiration here, was more dynamic and energetic. But more importantly, he didn’t need to come up with some new image to show Superman committing domestic violence – there’s tons upon tons of source material in the actual comics.
Those are way niftier ways of trying to murder the one you love, especially if you have super powers. Gotta put some style in your game. But I digress.
So it’s established that Supes was not very nice to his girlfriend. But domestic violence is not always one-sided. Often the woman is an aggressor as well. It’s not as well known because women are generally less likely to manage causing physical harm to the man, which is illuminated through the extreme situation of the Superman-Lois dynamic… what’s she gonna do to him without taking extreme measures?
Which she’s done. Repeatedly. It’s only fair to look at things from Superman’s side of the story and see how Lois has treated him.
Superman isn’t the only one to be the victim of his girlfriend turning on him. Batman’s crazy cat lady squeeze dropped a hurt on him something fierce.
Another aspect of domestic violence that is not often mentioned is that there are times when the woman starts the fight, provoking him into retaliating or sometimes even forcing the man into defending himself. With his greater strength, he is more likely to visibly injure the woman.
The unstated assumption here appears to be that those with power will abuse it unless shamed into restraining themselves. Delving into characters like these undermines the concept – comics and cartoons are loaded with Women Of Power. Aside from Superman, who is more powerful than Wonder Woman? In addition, unlike the caped Boy Scout, she was explicitly trained to fight and even kill. So should we expect a scene like this?
[Or: Allamagoosa Unleashed]
“I stun and amaze in my ability to harm myself” – Allie
Allamagoosa and I have long joked about her needing a leash so she doesn’t wander into traffic. A couple days ago, she was getting into my car and must not have ducked low enough because she banged her shoulder on the roof edge. Her right shoulder. Getting in the passenger side. Not quite sure just how she managed that one.
The leash is sounding less like a joke and more like a necessity. Even non-moving traffic is a risk.
The Programming Director here at Night Sky Radio has taken a sudden and urgent sabbatical, leaving only three pesos and a hastily scrawled note saying he’s going on a trip. The playlist for the night has disappeared, along with the contents of the hidden compartment in his bottom desk drawer. The News Director was the only one who answered the midnight phone call, and provided the following (to use the term loosely) “thoughts” on current affairs to fill the dead air between commercials, along with several swear words that no one would have thought he was familiar with.
A Biblical Feminist (huh?) critiques the show Girls. I tried to read it, but got so lost in the wandering pretzel logic trails that all I could do to escape was keep scrolling down in the hopes that the article would eventually end.
What I did get out of it – I think, I’m not really sure what she was trying to say – is that Girls is rooted in the Goddess concept, when the truth is actually the Divine Daughter Of God concept. I suppose it is a half-step more humble to merely be a “divinely empowered” (her words) than actually divine. I also got the idea that no matter what the creator of the show, Lena Dunham, says or does, she will be criticized by feminists for not going far enough (whether the writer actually intended to make this point or not is kinda fuzzy to me).
Following from the above… White Girl Feminism At Its Worst –
Lena Dunham won big at the Golden Globe Awards last night for Best Actress in a Comedy Series, and Best TV Comedy or Musical. In her acceptance speech she said, “This is for any women that’s felt like there wasn’t a space for her.”
Which women? The white millennial female who lives in New York? Dunham says she finally has a space for herself in creating the show but what about the other two-thirds of Brooklyn? The issues with HBO’s Girls have been discussed at length.
…That’s the problem with white girl feminism. It is the belief that showing smart intelligent white women is somehow enough — that it should be applauded; that women everywhere should be proud that these types of characters are even on TV at all; that all women should be happy that there is a show based around intelligent college educated women. But that’s not enough for me.
It’s not enough because there are people who are alienated, who routinely experience erasure of their own experiences for the sake of a joke or to set up a plot. There are those that would say it is her own right to write about whatever she wants, to exhibit characters in whatever way she desires. That’s true. But if we don’t evaluate our own privilege as white females than what are doing? How do we move forward?
Strip out the polysyllabics and buzzwords and it says “Just because you have the Constitutional right to write whatever you want, it’s not good enough. You have to include PC-approved caricatures of every splinter group, down to the last lesbian eskimo midget left-handed ninja albino.”
My favorite line in the entire article is “If feminism isn’t intersectional, it means nothing.” I suppose she’s half right.
…I can look at you from inside as well… – The Vapors, “Turning Japanese”
After class one day, I went into the equipment store in the gymnasium to tidy up. The door had been left open, and when I looked inside, a male pupil and a female pupil had their faces close together and were kind of fumbling around. Could it be bullying? I wondered, but when I had a good look, the boy was licking the girl’s eye! Surprised, a shouted “What are you doing? Stop it at once!” and the two of them were so shocked they jumped apart. The girl burst into tears, and the boy just went bright red and was shaken up. At any rate, to try to calm them down I took them to the janitor’s room and listened to their story.
On questioning, the two students revealed that eyeball licking is basically like second base – what you graduate to after Frenching.
Mr. Y immediately told the school staff the story. A classroom assembly for the year 6 students was held, and when each homeroom teacher questioned the students, it was revealed that a surprising one third of the kids had done “eyeball licking”, or had had their eyeballs licked.
Lest you think this is just cod moralising from a squicked out adult, eyeball licking is a great way of spreading trachoma (eye chlamydia) and conjunctivitis/pink-eye.
One potential inspiration for the eyeball licking trend is this video from Japanese band Born, in which the lead singer gets his eyeball licked by a knife-wielding woman (around 3:35, warning video contains terrible emo rock):
The last 20 seconds of that song sound like a cross between Drowning Pool’s “Bodies” and “Diva Fever” by Spinal Tap.
Lastly, someone alert da GBFM that Ben Bernanke made a joke.
Even the guy’s humor is hopelessly Bernankified. You’d think all that fiat money could afford him a better speechwriter.
To commemorate this day of love and violent gangster killings –
This post gets very surreal and twisted. So don’t blame me when you have to run heaving to the john.A discussion was going on at The Woman And The Dragon about men having so much difficulty with women when the discussion turned, as so many conversations do, to the topic of sexbots. Several people noted the squick factor in such things, and stated that women would never date a guy who she knew to own one of these things. A rebuttal was issued saying these guys aren’t getting dates anyway. My response was simply “I for one welcome our Real Doll overlords! The more men who have them, the fewer dates they’ll get, leaving more women available for me.” Whether any men on the site came to a similar conclusion is unclear at present.
The thread continued on its original topic, but the Real Doll theme kept appearing. A commenter wrote
A fully functional, semi-autonmous sex doll is probably only 10 to 15 years in the future. They’re very much going to be a reality. (Especially when you realize the Japanese already have guys marrying their pillows.)
Or their video games.
Soon after, site owner Sunshine Mary posted this entry about sexbots. She posited a dark future where men turn to clockwork women because they cannot succeed with real women, and the consquences thereof. I’m not usually one to try predicting the future – there are too many Black Swans in the water.* I do think some general trends could emerge, if society doesn’t change tracks soon. But let’s catch this train before it leaves the station.
As soon as her post hit the ether, the comments ran rampant. Almost immediately, someone pointed out the Uncanny Valley Effect. This is where something is very close to appearing human but something just isn’t right. The closer a robot gets to seeming 100% human without actually reaching it, the more intense the effect is.
It’s much like approaching the speed of light – the closer an object gets to lightspeed, the more massive it becomes, and the more resistance there is to increasing speed any further. The closer a robot gets to mimicking a human, the more resistance there is to being accepted by humans.
[Bonus round – the article linked above contains the following passage: “The idea of a carousel spinning at the speed of light, and its time-stopping effect on someone riding it, has merit. To a carousel rider looking out, days would go by extremely quickly.” Have fun with that one.]
When your sexbot is delivered with Some Assembly Required, the effect may be even worse. Not to mention trying to figure out what the hell these Korean instructions mean.
I almost expect that to bust out with some breakdancing, Herbie Hancock Rockit! style.
The first – and most obvious – obstacle is skin. If it don’t feel good, don’t do it. Pleasing tactile sensation is absolutely essential. And it may almost be here already. Self-healing synthetic skin has already been invented, if not perfected.
Satan is in your self-healing phone!
Societal Impact – Women are skeeved by this, but other than shrieky radical femininsts who want it banned or at least taxed, they largely dismiss it. Only losers and nerds would ever buy such things, and we’re better off without them bothering us.
The discussion sped along the track of men having sex with dolls or robots, when a commenter wrote
I would prefer a companion bot someone to do housework and be a second pair of hands. Don’t see the charm in an ambulatory sex toy, I mean that’s what hands are for. But having something like Data would be very cool.”
Well, didn’t his just open a few new cans of worms? I can easily picture robot maids. We already have Roombas running around cleaning up messes. But then a commenter chimed in
I imagine a guy would be able to plug in a self-assembled vag-module into his perfectly legal maid-o-tron, download an illegal behavioural program from the internet and continue on his merry way.
Why not combine the two from the beginning? Create a female robot that cooks and cleans, does the laundry, feeds the cat, and has sex with the owner. The ConcuBot. But it could never replace a real woman, right? It’s all rote programming. Great for sex and housework, but no spark of life, right? It’s just an assembled machine that executes a series of rigid, pre-programmed routines, no matter how complex some of those routines may be.
As shown above, voice recognition and synthesizing is already here. It’s just a matter of fine tuning. Literally.
A clip further up showed that the robots had cameras in their eyes. Barry has just given inspiration for further developing – and possibly monetizing – that feature. You figure it out.
Another possibility – I would not be surprised in the least little bit if Japan was the first to unveil sexbot arcades. Instead of Space Invaders and Pac-Man, they have coin-op sexbots. Knowing Japan, they would all be dressed like schoolgirls.
I got a pocket full of quarters, and I’m headed to the arcade
I don’t have a lot of money, but I’m bringing ev’rything I made
I’ve got a callus on my phallus, and my tongue is hurting too
I’m gonna sex them all up, just as soon as they reboot
‘Cause I’ve got Sex Bot fever
It’s driving me crazy
(Making me lazy)
I’ve got Sex Bot fever
I’m going out of my mind
(She’s got such fine behind)
Societal Impact – Women start to get a little nervous. Feminists, radical and otherwise, apply social pressure and make tentative attempts to have the government step in. A handful of feministas claim sexbots are actually taking choice away from women, by denying them the opportunity to become stay-at-home wives and mothers. Where have all the fair-to-middling men gone?
The physical challenges will eventually be met. Syntha-skin that responds to touch and temperature will be perfected. Coding to trigger appropriate responses to tactile stimuli will be written. Software storage space will not be an issue – even if Moore’s Law is repealed, there will still be enormous advances in processing power. Microscopically calibrated motors and contact-sensitive epidermis tell the simulacrum where to move, how much pressure to apply, the entire body acting in concert with an exacting precision that would make the finest symphony orchestra cry “Impossible!”
[I admit it, I just wanted to throw that one in there. Those girls got their s#!t down]
The problem remains: no matter how many preprogrammed routines, no matter the thousands of moves flawlessly executed down to the millimeter, there’s no spontaneity in any of it. It’s too measured. Too prefab. Too canned.
There’s no romance. Turn it on and it turns you on, but that’s it. Instead of pump-n-dump, it’s pump-and-powerdown. How to add a little flair to the proceedings, whether twist of the hips in bed or a flip of the hair at a random (and appropriate) moment?
Some years ago, I read an article on “Darwin Chips,” computer chips that would literally evolve to adapt to new challenges.
…[Adrian] Thompson has been playing with computers in which the hardware evolves to solve problems, rather the way our own neurons evolved to solve problems and to contemplate ourselves. He is one of the founding members of a field of research known as evolvable hardware or evolutionary electronics. Thompson uses a type of silicon processor that can change its wiring in a few billionths of a second, taking on a new configuration. He gives the processor a task to solve: for instance, distinguishing between a human voice saying stop or go. Each configuration of the wiring is graded on how well it did, and then those configurations that scored high are mated together to form new circuit configurations. Since all this manipulation is carried out electronically, the wiring of the processor can evolve for thousands of generations, eventually becoming a circuit that Thompson describes as flabbergastingly efficient at solving the task.
Amusingly, the term “fitness test” shows up soon after, not all that dissimilar from it’s usage in the manosphere.
I don’t know the current status of evolving chips, but I have no doubt that they could well be used in A.I. in our lifetimes. Imagine a sexbot/maid/partner that adapts to its surroundings as well as your preferences. It watches you and learns, rewriting its programming as necessary to adapt.
This was essentially Commander Data’s method on Star Trek: The Next Generation. He studied human behaviors and through trial and error rewrote his programming, often writing brand new programs along the way, more or less evolving himself until he was better able to smoothly interact with living people.
ConcuBot (“Connie”) reads subtle cues in your behavior and makes the dinner you’re in the mood for. It listens when you need to talk, and occupies itself elsewhere when you’re just in the mood to smash enemy spaceships online (making sure to do the dusting in the process – no sitting on the couch with bon-bons watching Oprah). It knows when you want a BJ and when you want the full court press. Apps can be written and installed as needed. And it never complains.
And it – or “she,” as you’ve been calling it for months now – knows when to add a little spice. For dinner, and for after.
Societal Impact – Smarter women start making changes in their behavior. There literally aren’t enough alpha males to go around. The beta orbiters that used to get them past the dry spells no longer “Like” them on FaceBook. New company Pandora’s Bots rockets to the top of the Dow and NASDAQ, boosted by its slyly clever promotional slogan “It’s The World That’s Coming!” spurring further calls for criminalization of sexbots. The American birth rate is at its lowest ever. A few canny investors make billions on cat food and toys.
A couple years ago, the Wall Street Journal featured a story on Japanese men dating and renting hotel rooms with virtual girlfriends.
Love Plus+ re-creates the experience of an adolescent romance. The goal isn’t just to get the girl but to maintain a relationship with her… If the real-life Romeo earns enough “boyfriend power” points—by completing game tasks like homework or exercise to become smarter and more buff—the reward is a virtual trip to Atami.
The Boyfriend Power Points app. Get smarter. Get more buff. Get rewards. Now the buyer begins to really invest in his WifeBot. Might as well call it that, because at this point the buyer is finally, actually treating it as a wife. He is not only financially invested in a utility (purchase cost, upkeep, oil changes, app purchases), but now he has the emotional investment and attendant returns that he doesn’t get from real women.
Wifebot 6900 acts perfectly feminine, doesn’t complain unless there is a legitimate need to do so (My battery is running low, and my follicle seeders need replenishing), and even makes teasing comments on occasion, bringing a precisely measured and calculated amount of frisson to the daily routine. The traditional housewife, if you ignore her occasionally plugging herself into the wall outlet for recharging.
But what’s a potato peeler without a set of Ginsu knives? Why stop at the wifebot?
A commenter wondered
You know what would really be disturbing though? Designer Robot Children.
I once read that Japanese businessmen didn’t have time to start families (seems like it’s always the Japanese, doesn’t it?). So they rented one for weekends. A woman and her children would earn money as a substitute family for a single man.
Why rent on weekends and pay all that money for things like food and toys when you can outright buy a KidBot?
Societal Impact – Difficult to predict, even in terms of wider general trends. Much of it hinges on whether KidBots can be designed to realistically “grow,” as well as the lack of even intangible returns on android children, as opposed to an android wife. But a perpetual 10-year old or three could be fun to have around on the weekends. Women may return to past models of femininity, but if activists are successful in getting WifeBots banned, society could regress to Carousel riding as the non-alpha men have no recourse. In this case, a successful (and extremely violent) black market could emerge.
A robot, or android, that manages that 100% human appearance well enough to pass for one does not spook people. Think of the Replicants in Blade Runner. They seemed exactly like ordinary people until one was smoked out as a machine, which was not an easy process unless you, say, shot it, which was not advisable if you wanted your face to continue appearing human too.
If this level of verisimilitude is ever achieved, the Stepford WifeBots could easily pass as real women. An underground hacker culture could coalesce forging and embedding fictional records of women who never existed. Everyone would know there are too many women around (although this may level off as women who lose hope may consider suicide), but no one could ever be sure which are real and which are not. Without a receipt.
The only reason to have a woman around is to have a baby. WifeBot sales may stall out somewhat as men pair off with women to have babies – they may bond to each other during sex. Birth rates would go back up in this scenario.
Until artificial wombs become affordable. At this point, FemBots are utterly indistinguishable from biological women.
Some men will always prefer “natural beauties.” Some will always be rapt in the possibilities of a WifeBot that no human woman could keep up with. Some men may have both (which would be the mistress(es)?. But from this point on, women will have to be on their best behavior, or it’s out the door in favor of Suzie WatchMaker.
At least, until someone invents a HusBot.
NOW STREAMING – Vox Day‘s take on it.
NOW STREAMING – The Red Pill Room explains why laws banning sexbots may contradict already existing laws.
NOW STREAMING – Goodstuff asks “Is sex with a robot cheating?” Plus info about the first synthetic celebrity (it wasn’t the Monkees), fun with Nazi sex dolls, and vending machine abuse.
* This is going to be my go-to answer for any questions I get involving future events from now on. Do you think gold prices will go up? Too many Black Swans in the water. Will the Yankees win the Pennant? Too many Black Swans in the water (but the Cubs will lose). Do you think we need extra cheese on this pizza? Too many Black Swans in the water.
I briefly dated this one woman back in the 90s. Things quickly degenerated into some kind of bizarre power struggles. I always seemed to be walking the razor’s edge in some way I couldn’t articulate. Accommodating but never quite capitulating.
One day I wasn’t jumping through the hoops like I was supposed to. I tried to be calm and reasonable as she got more and more emotional. I don’t remember what it was about, or any of the things we said except for one. At one point during her not-quite-yelling spiel she said “I could be going out with other men and you would never know!”
I was pretty much done with her after that. The stupid thing is that it took me another week or two – and still more crap – before I finally ended it.
I just heard this on the radio.
When it comes to social status, most women are still looking for a man who is their equal or better, according to a new survey by dating service It’s Just Lunch. The company received more than 1600 responses to its latest online survey, which includes questions about career, education and income.
On the topic of money, 79% of women said it’s a concern and could potentially be a deal breaker if the person they’re dating makes significantly less money than they do. On the other hand, 68% of men say it’s not an issue at all.
I doubt this comes as a surprise to most people. The rest of the piece is fun reading, though.
24% of women but only 5% of men say “It’s concerning, and I should probe further about life goals.” 47% of the women and 26% of the men are mostly positive—but still find the economic difference worrisome, answering that “It’s a bit of a concern, but I’m not going to worry about it and simply continue to have fun.” But 9% of the women and 1 % of the men believe it’s an instant deal breaker, saying “While I’ve had fun, I just don’t think another date is in the cards.
“Continue to have fun” = keep screwing the guy until she gets tired of him. “While I’ve had fun, I just don’t think another date is in the cards.” = Done with this broke-ass thug. Hopefully it means she’s looking for a decent guy to marry, but I wouldn’t take odds on it in Vegas.
Lawyer and blogger Chaton Turner disagrees. She says, “I think that it comes from conditioning as opposed to genetics.” She adds that she has always bucked the trend. “I have dated everybody, at least in terms of type. I have dated the older and richer, the younger and poorer, the tall and the short. Currently, I am engaged to a man who is younger and makes less money.”
Keyword is lawyer. Disagreeing is what lawyers do. Is it conditioning or genetics that compels lawyers to always disagree? Bets on whether the wedding actually happens or not?
LaCota says that, though the topic is fascinating, on a practical level it doesn’t matter whether we’re more influenced by genetics or the environment—or even if we’re influenced at all. “Ultimately, as human beings, with the right chemistry and the right timing,” she says, “the human heart is flexible enough for any two people to fall in love.”
I love the blanket statement with qualifiers. “Anyone could be hit by a bus – if they’re standing in the middle of the street, on a bus route, during the day, the driver doesn’t try to stop, and Venus is aligned with Saturn.” I’m nitpicking l little now.
It’s amusing how a site broadcasts the results of a survey as Shocking New Information, then spends over half of the article trying to explain away said conclusion.