you know, we can lie all we want, but tech is going to be the end of mankind. Women better get on the project of how to reproduce without male sperm right by god NOW!, And MEN, whoa dude we need laws against the involuntary removal of sperm, even through natural ejaculation, and penalties have got to be serious. How about this? what are the ownership clarity regarding rules covering who “owns sperm when it leaves a man’s body. I’m dead serious. Garbage on public property is already publicly owned. There may be some crimes connected to being where the trash is, but in all of the country i THINK that value of the stuff itself belongs to whomever possess it, and no claim for restitution can be made for “that which is discarded”. I don’t know about you but i’ve never seen a man interested in reclaiming sperm once delivered.
This begs a host of questions. The fluids which can be used or manipulated to create life are a world apart of the blueprint of how DNA combined to make you.
Do not forget, the mixture of the ingredienta itself has not yet yielded anything similar to life. It also stands to reason, there is something, by no means yet provable to actually be of you, in any manner which may have an ownership claim to this “Magic” essence. There may be a third “party” so to speak which has under our system, as legitimate a claim or use regardless of whether we can ascertain it or not. Would alien be so horrid a creature, upon discovering that humans were delectably edible, decide to do no more investigation on them apart from culinary.
In our own culture, we face similar questions about abortion, although i do won’t stray into that Sargasso without at least one good seaweed salad recipe.
Let’s say, for arguments sake, that a gender doll, composed of the physically desirable characteristics, of any one, alive or not, could made with the attributes requested, and a simple control panel would let you fiddle a bit with general responses and it got to the point where you could have sexual access to this entity like we now enjoy rights over all our other non living property, unless we throw it away. What are the implications of the coming creation of simulacrum, or Sims, as they might likely be known.
As the world turns, if we have the time, we might become knows as skins, or meat amongst the devices if they gain sufficient awareness to create meme’s of coin addition to the language. They might likely after some time of development become capable of saying , “no”, to the initiation of the sex acts which were the reason for their creation.
When is such a development a “bug”, and when is it a legitimate expression of a being with rights? We already kill to eat routinely man, many creatures, which would NEVER willingly give up their lives to further ours, although they may be seen to willingly enter situations which may result in harm or death to protect their own kind, or family. We like to call this instinct, but it doesn’t look much different from how i’d behave once realizing those who i thought were my friends had all along been caring for m only to make use of my death.
At what point is a sim refusal a real refusal? New tech will bring MANY new changes for some.
If it could cost less than a house, a comfy car, and a sweet city with nice people and good public transportation, I’m all in. I’d personally prefer a real person, but if you pardon the idiocy, there is no reason to take the survey:
“Fuck driverless cars, we start with custom, perfect image of your mind’s eye beautiful driverless 18 year olds? Yes or No?
Who knows, it may become normal enough to have sex with a Sim as well as keeping a devoted committed relationship with another human. AS long as everyone consents, but At what point does a device acquire rights?
Would it get to a point where people might use this regardless of the passability in public? Would it be public sex if only one partner was human? What about devising a non-revealing method to facilitate
Let’s say there was no human undress or nudity involved although the action and goal of the behavior was clearly sexual, perhaps out of obvious view, in an alley where people had merely look away to prevent what surely has to be 95% imagination from being witnessed? Is it prosecutable to prevent a fully clothed person from, say gyrating their hips to simulate sex, lovemaking, orgasm? Not if there is music. Not if there are choreographic accompaniment even today? How will sexual congress exist, with still just one person, maybe with music, or 25 all choreographed and claimed as art? Claimed as religion.
Taken to the supreme court where it must surely be ruled that a person may be subject to some imposition of community standards, but that assumes the ability to keep opposition in power. Maybe there won’t long be enough opposition to forbid having discrete sex with a sim, if no human genital flesh is exposed, much like other pre mating displays have been ruled constitutionally permissible even though that is also acknowledged distasteful to some?
One can generally grab another willing adult and deeply kiss them while kneading their flesh in a clearly seductive display, so how then will we regulate that which is allowed between people, yet under what support do we deny they same individual to perform the same motions without largely touching another human at all?
How many people would really honestly with all the problem between people we already struggle with, just not be just fine, fine as all hell with say spending some hours of later age life, with a simulation of say a 20yr old, strong where you would like it, gentle in the rest, happy to spend time with you, beautiful, or even a faithful replica of a loved one lost, or relive some of the joy of youthful sex. Who should say that anyone should be denied the feeling of falling in love, even if a suitable human partner has not been found? Why not enjoy the illusion of a relationship with a loved one, perhaps taken by tragedy? Accepted yet clearly not illusion enough to be an illness or mental disorder? How much difference from a video, and where should interference begin at all in private matters? f
Probably like most relationships, sex would evolve to be a lesser part, so perhaps recapturing or finally getting to create the connection or intimacy of one loved and lost? Why not might a person have a sim family?
zx
By what right does the government determine that a single person might not find the joy of parenting, or even spending long years with a beloved child stays at a certain age, or rate of maturity? By what right does any system assume the right to restrict anything which might evolve between a person and an inanimate thing? Are there rules for toaster involvement? Is it permissible to be in love with your phone, tv, or car?
There would be a instant army of the prettiest obeyers ever created just charging up the electric bill, when not being, well, …fucked. Just think of the government salivation over the tax, the self willingness to be surveillance. if relationships between Sims and humans became normalized?
To be honest, if it could get close enough to enjoy it 3/4 as much as sex with a woman, come on you lying bastards you know you’d go for it. I mean it would be great if you REALLY couldn’t tell, unless you wanted say a stroll down a memory lane destroyed before the production online date, but even so, with even a limited set of well implemented behavior responses most men would be initially satisfied. Hell, it is probably the only thing other than looks needed to close a sale for at least half the men, is the feature itself of settable and limited emotional reaction and simulation of need.
It would be the shock of the life for most all the women of the world, except they’d soon have their own “Robert” or “Charles” tucked away in some cubby somewhere. And you thought they were “Tupperware” parties.