alex [3:37 PM]
Thoughts? https://www.theroot.com/sex-dolls-for-the-emotionally-and-sexually-lazy-man-wh-1822315097 (edited)


petoux [4:06 PM]
Can't say I disagree with her viewpoint.

Today

----- January 26th -----

alex [7:50 AM]
I do. I think it's very telling that this author is against sex shaming for women, but immediately resorts to tired insults about being sexually inadequate/unable to satisfy a \~\*\~ReAl WoMaN\~\*\~ when it comes to men who choose to drop out of what is a pretty hostile environment. It's so petty and sad, to attack people who are already essentially at the lowest possible social rung of the ladder: men who are (for any number of reasons) unable to connect with human women and maintain a healthy relationship. Just let them have their fucking sex doll and leave them alone for christs' sake. (edited)


petoux [7:51 AM]
Well, if the sentiment is "replacing women, who needs them LOL" because of the existence of a sex doll, that's pretty gross sentiment

[7:52 AM]
I don't have a problem with the doll, or people using them, I do have a problem with the idea that the doll is somehow more ideal than an actual woman because women are so "hard to deal with"

[7:52 AM]
As if we're just a collection of fun parts and it's unfortunate we talk and shit


alex [7:52 AM]
If so, "you couldnt' get a real woman anyway LOL" is a pretty gross counterargument


petoux [7:52 AM]
I agree, that's not necessary


alex [7:55 AM]
You don't want to date someone who just thinks you're a collection of fun parts anyway, I assume, so let them self-select out. They don't want to deal with you any more than you want to deal with them


petoux [7:55 AM]
I don't think it's healthy and it makes me uncomfortable but it doesn't directly affect me, so whatever. If someone prefers the company of the doll for whatever reason over a real live person, and is generally a decent person otherwise, I don't care what they do, that's their business.


alex [7:58 AM]
I say even if they're a person you really hate, if they're super misogynistic and are having sex with a doll purely out of spite, that's all the more reason to leave them alone and let them do their thing

[7:58 AM]
Not write little snippy articles about how they're losers


petoux [7:58 AM]
I dunno, that's her right


alex [7:58 AM]
It's not like they're having kids :stuck_out_tongue:


petoux [7:58 AM]
Just as much as it's their right to say the dolls are gonna replace live women

[7:59 AM]
People say and write things you may not agree with.

[8:01 AM]
My problem would be if folks actively tried to expose people using/owning these dolls. That's drawing the line. But The Root isn't exactly a publication that holds its punches.

[8:04 AM]
Also, Alex, there's the problem of this self-sustaining idea about women that's toxic. Some of these folks that are using the doll have really nasty ideas about women's rights/human rights. They're voting, they're participating in society in some way, by being able to further recede from said society instead of having interaction outside of their echo chamber, it's kinda dangerous in the long run, no?

[8:04 AM]
i.e.: MRAs, incels (some sections of that group), etc. (edited)

[8:07 AM]
If a person genuinely has troubles/anxieties about human interaction, fine. But if this person is convinced that the doll is superior to woman because he has been drinking some MRA bullshit koolaid or refusing to self-reflect, etc etc... it's not that I'm upset or jaded that he's no longer in the dating pool, or that I care whether I feel like he has the "right" or is "good enough" for a REAL LIVE WOMAN anyway - it's that he's likely fueling the fires of misogyny in his posting/voting habits.


glibbygibby [8:23 AM]
I was going to reference other man-centric subcultures, like Wizards and I was going to double check some definitions

[8:23 AM]
Rationalwiki as always is a good, if very snarky resource

[8:24 AM]
https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Manosphere_glossary


alex [9:34 AM]
>Also, Alex, there's the problem of this self-sustaining idea about women that's toxic. Some of these folks that are using the doll have really nasty ideas about women's rights/human rights. They're voting, they're participating in society in some way, by being able to further recede from said society instead of having interaction outside of their echo chamber, it's kinda dangerous in the long run, no?


People may vote in ways you don't agree with. if that sounds like a flippant response I hope you understand what I meant with my initial statement (that articles like the Root one should not be written) was that there is a cost to bashing on incels, MRAs, and other people who voice opinions dissenting from the current cultrual zeitgeist

[9:38 AM]
I have a great deal of sympathy for men who don't want to get involved with relationships. If/when my current one fails I could conceive doing the same. Dropping out entirely. The cost/benefit ratio is not great for someone with my value system.


petoux [9:38 AM]
Voting and writing an article are completely different


alex [9:39 AM]
I agree but for the opposite reason: writing an article is far more influential than voting.

[9:39 AM]
Contributing to the culture war and widening the gap between groups is more damaging than any single voter can vote.

[9:41 AM]
These men exist *because* of articles like that, belief systems like hers. Expanding them and circulating them to a wider audience is damaging far beyond one more GOP vote. She reached untold numbers of people.


petoux [9:42 AM]
The fact that you're saying there's a "culture war" when some men literally don't think women deserve human rights, and some men would prefer these dolls over actual interaction, and these are the men that the article is specifically targeting... then - yeah, call those fuckers out

[9:42 AM]
You think that folks that hold this mindset shouldn't be shamed? When they're literally part of groups that would deny the rights to other human beings, and would vote to such ends, and that's the same as an author poking fun at some reddit underbelly?

[9:44 AM]
I don't like how she blanketed people who would use this product at points in her article, but I don't have any sympathy for anyone who thinks my life holds less value than a collection of silicone.


petoux [9:49 AM]
Here's the thing, men are not being oppressed

[9:50 AM]
Even the ones that have whatever issues that would have them consume this product, they are not oppressed and still operate under the privilege of their male-ness.

[9:52 AM]
An article written on The Root doesn't take that away from them. But you asking for that article not to be written because it hurts some feelings is kinda fucked.

[9:52 AM]
I don't LIKE the fact that there are forums, sites, "news" outlets that publish bullshit, hell, I can even go comment on these sites or choose not to read them, but they exist


alex [9:54 AM]
I'm not interested in the 1% extreme ends of either spectrum. The ones who get upvoted to the top of /r/inceltears or cringepics do not represent the majority of men who feel the need to drop out of sexual relationships. That's a reductionist viewpoint and handwaves away legitimate complaints about the current expectations of men and women in relationships. Yes, there are definitely people who think all women should be culled and the future should just be men and their various fuckhole plastic toys. But that's such a simplistic and silly viewpoint it's not really worth talking about, and it's a distraction from what is more interesting and more pressing.

[9:55 AM]
Do you actually think what I'm saying is that men are oppressed and that the article shouldn't be written because it hurts feelings? Or are you doing the reductionist handwaving that I am talking about?


petoux [9:56 AM]
Not waving any hands here.

[9:56 AM]
"These men exist *because* of articles like that, belief systems like hers. Expanding them and circulating them to a wider audience is damaging far beyond one more GOP vote. She reached untold numbers of people."

[9:57 AM]
This author did not make those men

[9:57 AM]
Men made those men


alex [9:57 AM]
Completely disagree.

[9:57 AM]
Women made those men


petoux [9:57 AM]
Really?

[9:57 AM]
How?


kautzman [9:59 AM]
This requires a lot more than I'm currently typing, but the ultra short answer is:  The Economy Of Dating™


alex [9:59 AM]
^


kautzman [10:00 AM]
Or so is my interpretation as someone who does not engage, so grain of salt and all


petoux [10:00 AM]
And what the fuck is that?


alex [10:01 AM]
This is a huge topic but the short version is: women expect much more out of men than vice versa.

https://theblog.okcupid.com/your-looks-and-your-inbox-8715c0f1561e
>As you can see from the gray line, women rate an incredible 80% of guys as worse-looking than medium.


petoux [10:01 AM]
That's a really poor explanation

[10:03 AM]
Are there other dating sites where this study was done?


alex [10:03 AM]
Because it's a large and complicated issue and I'm still not entirely sure if you're receptive to listening about it. If you're going to reply "men aren't systematically oppressed" (which is true) to my unrelated point, I'm not going to bother typing up an essay on how the ever-expanding expectations of women for men cause men to eventually decide the balance is not worth it, and just buy a sex doll

[10:04 AM]
How about Tinder? https://www.elitedaily.com/social-news/men-women-tinder-experiment/1310866

[10:05 AM]
Or society as a whole, lol


petoux [10:05 AM]
Hm, that's kinda interesting but not really shocking


alex [10:05 AM]
Why is it not shocking?


petoux [10:05 AM]
And I guess nothing I've ever heard myself or my straight girlfriends talk about

[10:06 AM]
Because of the visual medium of both

[10:07 AM]
I wonder what it is this pool of women is judging


alex [10:07 AM]
I don't understand why that would matter. Both men and women have eyes and preferences for the opposite gender.


petoux [10:08 AM]
I dunno, I don't have an explanation for this

[10:08 AM]
Especially because it's never been my mindset, so this concept is completely foreign to me


kautzman [10:09 AM]
I would say that the explanation is that the social and emotional expectations are not the same across genders when it comes to dating.


alex [10:09 AM]
If you admit you have never even thought about it why do you reject my worldview out of hand?


petoux [10:09 AM]
It makes me wonder where the disconnect is


alex [10:09 AM]
This is not just something I 'think about' but it is literally my entire social life

[10:09 AM]
That I live every day


petoux [10:09 AM]
Sorry, Alex, haven't read your book?


kautzman [10:10 AM]
And the sneaky part of is that unless you actively date on each side of the coin, and in each piece of the 'Gradient of Attractiveness™', you'd never see it without data.


alex [10:10 AM]
So you can understand me getting A LITTLE DEFENSIVE REEEE when people say "well you're not systematically oppressed"


kautzman [10:10 AM]
how do we not have :reeeeee:


petoux [10:12 AM]
Ok, so you're taking the article personally? As an attack on your worldview?

1 reply


glibbygibby [10:12 AM]
The Economy of Dating is a weird concept and attempts to frame it in economic theories produce some rather weird "logical" results


kautzman [10:12 AM]
It's a very useful framework to think about it in.


petoux [10:13 AM]
Like I can see why people may just choose not to date or whatever, and that's fine, but I don't get why calling out misogyny is a problem?


kautzman [10:13 AM]
I mean, OKC and Tinder both are working with massive datasets


glibbygibby [10:13 AM]
The Rationalwiki roundup of Men's Culture (TM) mentions that sexbots and related concepts are a welcome development because they will suppress market demand for women and reduce their "value" similar to how declining market demand increases the availability and reduces the price of any other commodity

[10:14 AM]
They're also biased datasets

[10:14 AM]
As large as they are


kautzman [10:14 AM]
The only population they are actively selecting for is computer literacy


2 replies


petoux [10:15 AM]
Maybe I'm just ignorant, I didn't read the article like that... I never even thought of people who would just choose a doll because of whatever thought-out-conclusion, I was specifically thinking of MRAs and shit


kautzman [10:16 AM]
and while that is still a selection, the dataset isn't ambiguous.  The confidence interval in these datasets is tight.  Resolving that against data this large with selection criteria this general is...challanging.


glibbygibby [10:19 AM]
There is an economy of dating but you can "logically" extend it in nonsense ways by reducing people wholly to a sexual commodity, i.e. sexbots/dolls are a 1:1 replacement of women. That's a very unhealthy way to look at it if you want to use them as a market manipulation force, as the people criticized in the article appear to be proposing


kautzman [10:23 AM]
While it's weird and 'dehumanizing' to think of dating as a system of economics, that doesn't make the analysis less valid.  I don't think anyone who seriously talks about the implication of such a system factors in dolls, rather, dolls are just the end result of some subset of the data set under certain conditions that aren't relevant to the economic analysis.  You don't have to think about your dating experience as a 'transaction' on an individual level either.  Dating can be very personal and exciting and fun!  However, "unhealthy" or not, their is overwhelming amounts of data to suggest that these are the trends on a macro-level scale and there is a great deal of support for this structure.  If you'd disagree with such a structure, you'd need to bring a different framework to the table.

[10:28 AM]
Finally, this structure also goes a long way to explain the feelings of hopelessness and futility that some feel in the dating world.  This kind of analysis strongly suggests that there would be a community of men who feel completely removed from pool of potential dating candidates, no matter how much they try.  That it manifests as /r/incel or r9k or whatever, makes a lot of sense, as it also suggests this population is nontrivial in size.

[10:28 AM]
Now, MRAs and the folks who take /r/Incel seriously are unequivocally assholes.

[10:29 AM]
But knowing all this, we on both an individual and societal level can ask, 'How can we make this better?'


alex [10:35 AM]
replied to a thread:
2 replies from kautzman and you
Not even that, since literally everyone has a phone. If anything, the only selection is "first world men and women"

[10:37 AM]
i'm glad kautzman is here since he can provide a more objective look at it than most ppl here can

[10:37 AM]
myself included


petoux [10:42 AM]
Again, I think we're agreeing that blanketing people purchasing this product is problematic

[10:44 AM]
My saying "men are not oppressed" is more in response to the feeling of the article in general, when men cite the dating atmosphere as a proof of their oppression. Probably an off topic thing to cite, especially when it was taken as a direct response to something you said


kautzman [10:46 AM]
I'd frame the scenario as such:

[10:46 AM]
Purchasing a doll is indeed probably a problem, but how you address it is the key

[10:48 AM]
Framing it economically, we might say that the purchase of said product is a product of economic conditions / market forces ("I can't find a SO!") and some other preconditions ("I have money / this doesn't seem strange to me / etc.")

[10:48 AM]
I'd actually liken it a great deal to theft vs buying power

[10:49 AM]
where we'd say Theft is a product of economic conditions / market forces ("I can't find money to live") and some other preconditions ("I have questionable ethics / I'm desperate").

[10:52 AM]
Considering this, it's not useful to try and address the issue face-on.  [You can make stealing illegal / You can make buying sex dolls shameful or expensive], but it's not going to actually stop the activity because the root cause, a drought of [Buying Power / Perceived Eligible SO's] is what would need to be addressed. (edited)


glibbygibby [10:52 AM]
The "marketplace" can definitely not work for some people, that's not really controversial. In addition to being have a fucked economy of its real economy, China has a fucked economy of dating due to the legacy of the One Child era. "Economic" forces making dating ridiculously competitive and it produces warped expectations

[10:54 AM]
Looking at being left on the "losing" end of a market as some inherent flaw or deliberate effort on the part of women is really bad, but I *think* we agree on that

[10:55 AM]
I don't have a problem myself with buying sex dolls if nothing works out, or if you prefer it, but the driving mindset can be kind of twisted


alex [11:05 AM]
>Looking at being left on the "losing" end of a market as some inherent flaw or deliberate effort on the part of women is really bad, but I *think* we agree on that


If you disagree with the datasets provided, which show a clear and consistent bias by women for only the top 20% of men, then you need to provide an alternative explanation. I don't think it's a deliberate conspiracy or women hating men, but I do think our culture gives women a sense of self worth such that they feel that the bottom 80% of men are beneath them

[11:07 AM]
The dataset is large enough that you can't brush it off as "well sure SOME women are picky", this is a society-wide trend

[11:08 AM]
And for a portion of those 80% sexdolls are the only viable alternative

[11:08 AM]
That is a fucked culture

[11:08 AM]
And it is not men's fault

[11:08 AM]
Especially not the men unfortunate enough to not be top 20% attractive

[11:11 AM]
while logging into this chat I got this very appropriate loading screen:

"No I will not 'calm down'" --alex (edited)


kautzman [11:12 AM]
lolol


alex [11:14 AM]
replied to a thread:
1 reply
I'm taking the article as an attack on the lowest men in society, who I sympathize with even though I'd like to think I am not among them. It's a symptom of the entitled culture I'm talking about.


petoux [11:41 AM]
Hm, I will have to genuinely think on this, because I don't view the pushing of ultimate machismo as desirable as a woman-driven thing.


glibbygibby [11:42 AM]
I don't either


alex [11:45 AM]
Whatever it is that women view as the top 20% as attractive is irrelevant. It oculd be the traditional 6'4" muscular white guy with straight teeth (and probably is) but it could be anything. the problem is that since most men are not whatever the Attractive Thing is, they're of low value and get to deal with things like <5% message replies on dating sites. Imagine that! You put yourself out there, you go out on a limb and make a connection another human being, and 19 times out of 20, she doesn't even reply at all. day in and day out, this is your interaction with women. People who blame men after they reject a society that gives them that experience show a stunning lack of empathy

2 replies


petoux [11:54 AM]
Alex, my sympathy for this scenario exists. Not the scenario where the conclusion is drawn that there's some sort of 'misandrist' system causing this.

[11:55 AM]
Ugh, let me rephrase.

[11:56 AM]
I am sympathetic to that situation in particular. I am not sympathetic to the situation where a man experiences this, and turns to misogynist thinking to justify his lack of success in the dating world, instead of looking at society as a whole.

[11:57 AM]
What drives the standard of attractiveness for both men and women? It's marketing, movies, tv, internet things - most of which are male-driven businesses. The same biases created by this extremely filtered, idealistic view of either gender causes problems for both.

[12:02 PM]
I know rejection hurts, as an unattractive, fat person I was rejected a lot during my dating years. It felt like shit - but at no point was my conclusion that men owe me anything, or that the world would be better off without them, etc etc. I wouldn't see men as less or replaceable for their lack of desire for me. Now, the issue here is I have some choices: I can make changes to conform, I can continue trying until I meet someone, I can choose to not interact in that particular venue and try something else, I can choose to not interact at all.

[12:03 PM]
When the idea of sex and relationships is written as the prize by modern society, as the ultimate goal, then yeah - that is just breeding grounds for disappointment. That prize-winning is not solely a woman-driven thing, their choosiness may be a symptom of it, but not the cause.

[12:05 PM]
Should the article have cited MRAs and the nasty sects of incels as a caveat before presenting its criticisms? I think she could have been clearer on that, yes.

alex [2:54 PM]
>What drives the standard of attractiveness for both men and women? It's marketing, movies, tv, internet things - most of which are male-driven businesses. The same biases created by this extremely filtered, idealistic view of either gender causes problems for both.


If this is the case, why do men rate women as if it were a totally normalized distribution? Only a small fraction get perfect or 0 ratings. If the media is run by men, men who have a vested interest in only glorifying the most beautiful women, why aren't our standards in the real world unrealistically high? Why, when most prime time TV features average/mediocre  looking joe shmos and super attractive women, do men still rate women fairly? (edited)

[2:56 PM]
Why is it that no matter how you frame the issue, you consistently end up blaming men? If women are too picky that's mens' fault too, somehow.  :thinking_face:


alex [2:58 PM]
replied to a thread:
10 replies from petoux, kautzman, and you
I have more platonic friendships with women than men. I am okay with being friends with women. I do not want to date them. It's a totally different experience.


petoux [3:08 PM]
How men and women are conditioned to prospect and date is important to note here.

[3:08 PM]
Women aren't just picky in a vacuum.

[3:11 PM]
Ugh, we're never gonna see eye to eye on this, and I don't feel like either of us is even remotely ready to actually change our minds here.

[3:13 PM]
There are many reasons why I can think that women are more choosey when it comes to selecting men, rating them, responding to them, whatever. A lot of it probably has to do with the fact that from an early age we're taught that our bodies are mysterious currency to be protected, and only shared when necessary. We're shamed for sharing, shamed for not sharing, etc etc. We're also taught that men are aggressive and dangerous, that we need to be "careful" while out on dates, but also that while out on these dates if anything happens to us we're probably asking for it.

[3:14 PM]
Given those circumstances, I'd be pretty fucking picky about what guys I swipe right on, respond to.

[3:15 PM]
And, in fact, I learned that lesson the hard way more than once. I see online dating as sort of a sanctuary where women can control what access men have to them, when out and about any dude can approach you and think you owe him your time.

[3:16 PM]
If women weren't harassed in public spaces, at bars, even after we say "no thank you", why should it be expected that when we are in a space specifically so that we can seek out people we WANT to talk to, we should entertain other options that we don't want? (edited)


petoux [3:21 PM]
And this mentality isn't some sort of woman-sustaining thing, here. This isn't something that women are perpetuating. The harassment by men of women is a MAN's problem, the inability to see women as anything other than a conquest is a MAN's problem, thinking that sex is currency or conquest is a concept constructed by men, the paradox of the prude/slut is a concept constructed by, and enforced, by men. All of these things factor into a woman's choosiness. (edited)


petoux [3:29 PM]
As far as the attractiveness thing goes, do they have a sampling of the types of pictures that were used or taken?

[3:30 PM]
From my time on OKCupid I can say that a lot of the photos I saw of guys were badly composed close ups

[3:30 PM]
And the guys that took the time to groom and care about their appearance for one reason or another, had nicer photos


alex [3:30 PM]
I follow the logic that men are dangerous to women and therefore you have to be picky. Why are they picky for reasons of physical attractiveness? Are handsome guys less likely to assault women than average ones?


petoux [3:31 PM]
Women are generally conditioned to know how to make themselves look nicer, take better photos, etc

[3:32 PM]
I'm not saying it's right, I'm trying to think of reasons


alex [3:33 PM]
This is a rating system compared to an average. It is statistically impossible that *most* men are less attractive than average. You can come up with a million reasons why a given person might be attractive, or a given person might say they're more or less attractive. But when, on average, women find most men "below average", that's a serious problem with values


petoux [3:35 PM]
We're just going on pics, here, no profile or anything?


alex [3:39 PM]
You can read the article (it's the okcupid blog post I'm referring to) and there's a lot more in the full book ("dataclysm") , though I don't expect anyone to read an entire book about a one - off argument.

[3:40 PM]
The observations consistently hold up on all online dating data sets


petoux [3:40 PM]
Just the pics that are on the two articles, men v. women, the women's pics are better.

[3:40 PM]
Better composed

[3:40 PM]
Now, would I personally rate those guys below average? Probably not, that's mysterious

[3:41 PM]
In conclusion, if guys are mad at women and the dating scene and want to buy themselves a doll then go ahead I don't care. I'm just gonna continue to be a nice person and move on with my life. I'm sorry that article made you feel bad.

[3:42 PM]
I have a feeling that things would be a lot fucking better if guys stopped being gross and called out other gross guys, and we all learned how to be more empathetic humans in general. the end.

[3:43 PM]
now here's my OKCupid husband with the weather, take it away @glibbygibby


glibbygibby [3:43 PM]
That article was not meant to make you feel bad. It's an exploration of how a view of sex dolls is a gross expression the broader culture underwriting the MRA issue


alex [3:45 PM]
This has absolutely nothing to do with my feelings and I resent that you're trying to minimize the issue in that way.


petoux [3:45 PM]
I'm not, that was snippy, sorry

[3:45 PM]
I'm just done with it