The Social/Cultural Ramifications of one Sex losing a significant portion of their power/purpose?

Paragon Fury

The Loud Shadow
Jan 23, 2009
5,161
0
0
Recusant said:
Xsjadoblayde said:
I swear this exact topic has been posted before here. By the very same person! Am I imagining this? It had the same sort of replies and rebuttals for a few pages. Perhaps a little more long-winded.
This isn't your average de-ja-vu, nor glitch in the matrix, nay... I ... can't have invented this memory. Not another one. It has to be real this time.
If I have, it was more than a few months ago, probably more than 6.
Fairly certain it was this one - similar but not exactly the same

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/18.939052-Poll-So-youre-the-last-man-woman-on-Earth-left-with-everyone-of-the-opposite-sex

Gethsemani said:
Paragon Fury said:
A woman's ability to have children creates automatic value, period. End of story. This isn't even debatable; it's scientific fact. However, alongside this they can have all the same kinds of value men can have - wit, intelligence, friendliness, cooking, crafting, charisma etc.
*Snips*

b) you absolutely need men too for babies to occur. This means that for any fertile women who wants babies, fertile men have the same value because without them she's up shit creek. It also means that on a sociological level you absolutely need both men and women because both are intrinsic to the procreation of the human race.

Something the "women have value because babies" does not, because it is intrinsically rooted in the idea that women act as gatekeepers to men having children. The irony being that the opposite is true for women, they need men to have children.
From the much laxer thread

Lil devils x said:
you do not necessarily have to have males to fertilize eggs.

http://discovermagazine.com/2007/jul/babies-from-bone-marrow
http://www.gizmag.com/stem-cell-skin-cells-embryos/36221/
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/1431489.stm
Also

Recusant said:
Bear in mind that (although many of the technologies are unrefined and currently illegal) we currently can make artificial gametes (male and female) artificial wombs, and (as of 2012) artificial DNA, we don't even need humans to make more humans (so long as we still have data from the human genome project).
Science!
 

Gethsemani_v1legacy

New member
Oct 1, 2009
2,552
0
0
Gauche said:
From the much laxer thread

Recusant said:
Bear in mind that (although many of the technologies are unrefined and currently illegal) we currently can make artificial gametes (male and female) artificial wombs, and (as of 2012) artificial DNA, we don't even need humans to make more humans (so long as we still have data from the human genome project).
Science!
I know, I remember reading about all of that when it happened. As you said, we don't really need humans to make humans in a lab. In every day life we are still stuck with the limitations of men and women exchanging bodily fluids for babies to occur (with IVF being the only way for man and woman to not even meet to make baby) and we will be there for the foreseeable future. Even if we can get past the ethical concerns of artificial wombs or forced sperm donation, the question is if we, as a society, are ready to give up all the other things that comes with making babies. Artificial baby making will be expensive, IVF already is expensive, while the cost of knocking boots with someone is very, very low if you are in the "have children together"-stage.

So while science marches on, it does nothing to really disprove the notion that the overwhelming majority of baby making (and all of the legal baby making) must involve a man and a woman.
 

Phasmal

Sailor Jupiter Woman
Jun 10, 2011
3,676
0
0
Oh wow I've not been on the Escapist for ages I wonder what-


Nope.
 

McElroy

Elite Member
Legacy
Apr 3, 2013
4,375
288
88
Finland
altnameJag said:
If these AI are advanced enough to pass the Turing test, then keeping them enslaved is a moral and ethical wrong.
Only if the dumbasses program it to desire freedom and suffer without it. Wait, only if they program it to suffer in the first place.

If safe AI principles are followed, the most advanced Turing-proof super AI they put into a waifubot only makes it a better waifubot instead of a person.
 

Delicious Anathema

New member
Aug 25, 2009
261
0
0
Paragon Fury said:
So a topic that has been rumbling about in my mind after a article appeared here in the Escapist, and was only reinforced by a couple of topics I've seen since on Reddit AND while browsing through some old anime and manga of mine;
That's your problem right there.

While I agree that women are life-givers and are generally much better than men at being caregivers and nursing, relegating their role to only that is not a good idea. Not that forced diversity or lowered standards for accommodating women in some jobs is necessarily good, but the polar opposite doesn't help (though I think housewives have been wrongly demonized and should be recognized).
 

Neuromancer

Endless Struggle
Legacy
Mar 16, 2012
5,035
525
118
a homeless squat
Country
None
Gender
Abolish
Paragon Fury said:
It is then that the Owner walks up and announces that Eva is the demonstration of their company's new product; a walking, talking female android.


Paragon Fury said:
Walk right up and hug her, kiss her or do something more intimate and you'll barely tell the difference between her and real flesh-and-blood, if you even can.


Paragon Fury said:
What happens when half the world's population suddenly finds themselves being replaceable....by robots? That nearly anyone with a job can afford?
 

BarkBarker

New member
May 30, 2013
466
0
0
I mean the dynamic between women and men without much of a care for sexual pursuit may be interesting, I imagine it will either go swimmingly or fall apart horrendously. Maintaining physical attraction and health for some has a small root in self confidence and perhaps a larger part in actually drawing the attention of their desired, I would fail to see one convince themselves of worth while still failing to draw attention of their desired unless prideful beyond words.

What would happen to the porn industry? What kinds of disconnects to human sexuality and worth would occur? The notion of same sex and alternative sex relationship is also interesting, if you don't have to deal with peoples human problems and some things that just don't mesh well with your biological make-up, would you put up with it? Work through it? The needs and perspective of each are different in general.
 

TheMysteriousGX

Elite Member
Legacy
Sep 16, 2014
6,518
4,577
118
Country
United States
McElroy said:
altnameJag said:
If these AI are advanced enough to pass the Turing test, then keeping them enslaved is a moral and ethical wrong.
Only if the dumbasses program it to desire freedom and suffer without it. Wait, only if they program it to suffer in the first place.
Humans are terrible, they will do both those things. Basically immediately.

If safe AI principles are followed...
C'mon now, we just had a solar eclipse. Guess when "why do my eyes hurt" searches spiked?
ProfMcStevie said:
What would happen to the porn industry? What kinds of disconnects to human sexuality and worth would occur? The notion of same sex and alternative sex relationship is also interesting, if you don't have to deal with peoples human problems and some things that just don't mesh well with your biological make-up, would you put up with it? Work through it? The needs and perspective of each are different in general.
Considering that
A) the porn industry sells plenty of stuff to couples already, and
B) these waifu bots still cost as much as a car, I'm guessing these things aren't going to explode in popularity.
Zontar said:
altnameJag said:
If these AI are advanced enough to pass the Turing test, then keeping them enslaved is a moral and ethical wrong.
Why? Computation isn't consciousness, there's no argument to be made that a machine that can mimick us well enough to pass for one should be "free" then any bot, especially since it wouldn't know what to do with its freedom in the first place. All responses would be based on its programming, so free or not it effectively makes no difference.

This isn't a pulp science fiction novel where they'll somehow develop a "soul" out of nothing.
If they're Turing test compatable, how could you tell? Especially when they can pass as one of us in mundane human interaction scenarios and not just narrow, specific things? You've created a people at that point. Humans can be programmed to desire many things, and making them not desire these things by blunt force programming is generally considered illegal. (Conversion therapy, brainwashing, etc) If you are going to argue these creations don't have a "soul", and that makes them different than us, you're going to have to prove that we have a soul. Good luck!

(To blunt an obvious counter argument, no, I don't generally condone eating potentially sapient animals either. I only make an exception for pigs, because they'd happily do the same if our situations were reversed. And they're delicious)
 

CaitSeith

Formely Gone Gonzo
Legacy
Jun 30, 2014
5,231
240
68
First, I consider that giving power to a sex group merely for its purpose is inevitably toxic. Not only because of the power struggle between sexes, but because the worth of the each members inside of the group is measured by attributes that aren't as important to be a productive member in a civilized society. Although it can inspire some people to improve physically and mentally when aimed to goals related to its purpose, it also creates unnecessary and sometimes destructive tension between the members of the group.

If their sex group loses their purpose and power along with, they end up either living an oppressive nightmare or living an illusion where they think they worth on society, while the rest of society actually looks down on them and takes every decision for them. Being able to take your own decision is a very human desire; and if it's suppressed for too long, it ends up in pushing back.

If their sex group loses power without losing their purpose, then their only aspirations would be to be the best on accomplishing their sex attributed purpose, because they aren't allowed to do anything else. But they are still humans, individuals with different desires, capacities and ambitions; lots of them unrelated to their sex. If those desires are repressed, sooner or later they'll push back.

Now, what would happen if their sex loses purpose, but their power is still the same? Then the activities that used to lead to that purpose would become recreational, instead of forced by society.

At least that's the first thing it comes to my mind.
 

stroopwafel

Elite Member
Jul 16, 2013
3,031
355
88
Funny how these kind of discussions always center around fertile women like older women don't exist. That's probably the answer to this stupid question. Women lose their 'power' when they no longer have the advantage of youth and good looks(ie fertility). The 'cultural ramifications' are that men no longer have to make pathetic attempts to impress women(atleast not women his own age) and women lose the benefit of being young and pretty. We can all have coffee and apple pie together without the pressures of hormones. Win win situation!
 

Veylon

New member
Aug 15, 2008
1,626
0
0
Paragon Fury said:
It is in this state we find the world; what happens when half the world's population suddenly finds themselves being replaceable....by robots? That nearly anyone with a job can afford?
Why would you have a job when the cheap-as-free robot can do it?
 

Erttheking

Member
Legacy
Oct 5, 2011
10,845
1
3
Country
United States
The Rogue Wolf said:
Am I the only one who finds the spoilered scenario a pretty blatant condemnation of men? "Oh, guys just want a pretty face and hot sex; they only put up with real women 'cause they have to."
To be perfectly frank, I consider a lot of the shit said by men about men to be a condemnation of the male gender, even if they're trying to give it a positive spin. But yeah, out of the box design your own ideal waifu being something every man would want is a real blow below the belt. It's also doubly insulting that apparently there's no catering for women because I guess now that men have their walking talking fleshlights that say whatever they're told to, they don't care anymore? What, do we only give women non breeding related respect because all men want to get laid? WHAT IS THIS FUCKING THREAD!?

OT: Dude, we've been down this road before, it's pretty ridiculous to think that we could get anywhere near to an electric sheep are the norm level of society anywhere near in the future. And we have plenty of history on what happens when women are considered to be only good for breeding. It's called "most of human history." Because we're kind of bastards like that. Also what I said above.

Seriously, why do you bring this up and where are you trying to go with it?
 

Wrex Brogan

New member
Jan 28, 2016
803
0
0
"What would happen if women were suddenly no longer needed for their social/ "human" aspects and were only useful for creating children?"

...Jesus mate, I think you've got a bit of a complex about women here. Preeeeetty sure women exist for more than social aspects (for men) and breeding.

Also I think you're coming at this from an incredibly narrow perspective - especially considering you think the ADAM model would be 'less' popular for companionship. Do you have ANY idea how many women would want to ride a 12-inch hydrolic penis? And do you have any idea how many men wouldn't want what is essentially a glorified fleshlight?

Veylon said:
Paragon Fury said:
It is in this state we find the world; what happens when half the world's population suddenly finds themselves being replaceable....by robots? That nearly anyone with a job can afford?
Why would you have a job when the cheap-as-free robot can do it?
Hey, someone has to test the robots out.

...programming wise, that is. I don't think anyone would really be invested in these robots if they came with a sticker on 'em saying 'WARNING: PRE-FUCKED'.
 

Ravenbom

New member
Oct 24, 2008
355
0
0
*sigh*

It's such a backwards way of thinking in speculative fiction where WOMEN lose their purpose in society when from an anthropological standpoint, MEN have evolutionarily lost their significance, and most of us just can't see it.
From an evolutionary standpoint, men LONG ago lost their purpose. We have a fairly obvious level of sexual dimorphism which would suggest that in the past, evolutionary selection favored bigger, stronger males. The fact that American males are getting fatter and fatter and less evolutionarily fit should preclude them from mate selection.

Machines took over the jobs of males a LONG time ago. Before that, beasts of burden in the fields took over for man. Men haven't been needed for many millennia.

To that effect, the only work that men have been needed for has been violence and warfare.

Violent crimes are almost always perpetrated by men. Women aren't usually allowed in combat roles and very few seek them. Rape is predominately a violent male act.


Probably the best speculative fiction about how men have lost their function in society is Fight Club. The book is great and there's actually a movie that does the book justice. Must read and must watch for any young male.

For B Movie speculative fiction on the subject there's the 80's films Cherry 2000 (early Melanie Griffith film) and A Boy and His Dog (post-apocalyptic film starring a young Don Johnson. *Dakota Johnson's father for the younger readers out there*)

For serious non-speculative fiction reading there's Men's Work: How to Stop the Violence that Tears our Lives Apart by Paul Kivel.


Also - In speculative fiction replacing women with Alicia Vikander in Ex Machina style is so stupid. We'll NEVER get that far. We have internet prons and lube and hands and fleshlights and mostly affordable VR now.
It's like the Apple Watch was something we thought we wanted and nobody bought it. And even the idea that the iPad would replace the laptop or that your TV would become your media center for internet, games, music, TV and be voice and motion controlled with cameras that you can't turn off or unplug and then the Xbone shit the bed compared to the PS4 which mostly just plays games.

Robot women would have to be the same price, or near enough, as me grabbing my own dick and turning on private browsing. Fleshlights are only what, $80 or so and I doubt many people here or people you know have bought one. Lube like KY or Astroglide is only like $7 and most dudes don't even buy that!
If only like 2 percent of dudes are willing to spend $7 on Astroglide then I highly doubt sex robots will ever really take off.

Face it, we're connected to an organ that doesn't have refined taste. There's a lot of nerve endings there but it couldn't tell fine wine from tap water. It just needs attention and hands and an internet connection. There's usually no profit in making something if there's a free alternative (not to mention the roughly half the population of the world is technically free if you just talk to them and ask them how their day was every night) so sex bots will never happen.

If you want to have this fantasy though, hey, there's still magical anime/hentai girls. Magic just happens, it's not reliant on showing boardrooms of powerful people quarterly growth and earning powerpoints.
 

Silence

Living undeath to the fullest
Legacy
Sep 21, 2014
4,326
14
3
Country
Germany
Alright, first of all, this makes no sense. If 'women' were not needed for social aspects, males would not as well because wtf do you think is a social 'use' of a person? Way to see women not as people but as social cattle or something.

Second, lol purpose.

Third, the only interesting question is if people would lose power. It would lead to the perfect society because power corrupts, as long as not others gain any new power.

Also I was bored with the spoilered text because there were no anime tiddies.
 

Phasmal

Sailor Jupiter Woman
Jun 10, 2011
3,676
0
0

I was mostly kidding earlier, I pop in occasionally to lurk every now and again and to see how far the site has been eaten by spambots.
But still, I think the last time I actually engaged with the Escapist the Paragon thread of the day was something like "Hey maybe those rape-farms in Gears of War weren't such a big thing if you don't really think about the fact that women are people" and I must say it's pretty weird we're still on this same trend, dude.

So yeah, as for your hypothetical-
It's pretty weird to assume that women's purpose is to try and make men want to date/fuck them. Or to assume that men would automatically prefer robot fuckholes that are programmed to agree with them.
I think that shows a low opinion of both sexes, to be honest.
I also like how in this hypothetical waifu-verse, straight women apparently have less access to robot husbands "for one reason or another" (maybe being comfortable with women being "replaced" in a largely sexual fashion but not so comfortable with the reverse?).
Anywho, there are probably a billion more holes I can pick in this, and I might, but mostly I just want to say-

Dude maybe you should see someone about your issues with women, or at least ask yourself why this is a thing of yours. I don't think it's normal to continually feel the need to pose hypotheticals about "what if women were nothing but baby factories?". I mean, I suppose we're all partly to blame because we keep engaging with this.

Like, no more humouring this.
 

balladbird

Master of Lancer
Legacy
Jan 25, 2012
972
2
13
Country
United States
Gender
male
There's an episode of the simpsons in which all the townspeople with the highest IQs are given power over the town of springfield, and each puts forward a plan for bettering it.

Comic Book Guy is one of these genius new mayors, and his proposal is for the town to imitate the vulcan mating ritual of Pon Farr, wherein all the people would be filled with lust every seven years, and engage in an elaborate reproductive ceremony at that time.

His justification for this idea is that, while this plan would mean less mating than most people are currently accustomed to... it would mean much, MUCH more mating than he's accustomed to.

This is a non sequitur to the current discussion... and yet that scene and his words pop into my head every time I see another one of these threads on here. XD
 

bjj hero

New member
Feb 4, 2009
3,180
0
0
The OP has an odd view of women. I know lots of women who I spend time with for skills other that their ability to pleasure me or have my baby.

We have been through history where women are chattle and only valued to fuck, keep house and have babies. There are big parts of the world just like that now.

Sex bots? Nah. I liked going out, meeting new people getting to know them, figuring out if theyre interested, what they like/dont like, will there be a date? All that stuff.

I wouldnt give that up for a robot that does what its told.