# Is using a Real Doll (for sex) misogynist? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [September 15, 2009, 8:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-using-a-real-doll-for-sex-misogynist/510223 "2009-09-15T20:35:23Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 5
**Author:** ![gaffa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e68b1a/32.png) [@gaffa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gaffa)\ **Post date:** [September 17, 2009, 3:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-using-a-real-doll-for-sex-misogynist/510223/81 "2009-09-17T03:55:22Z")
> [@Polerius](#): > > A dildo is not the same as these things, since these things look like (or attempt to look like) humans. I can see how someone can think dildos are OK but these things are creepy (both male and female versions) Huh? While some dildos and vibes are smooth and non-representational, a healthy percentage of dildos sold do look like humans - OK, a small portion of a human, but definitely human. > [@](#): > > When a guy masturbates/uses sex toys, it has the tint of “loser” since it implies that he is not a successful male in this society. When a woman masturbates/uses sex toys is does not have that tint. Not sure why. Don’t know why this should be. Man is the tool user. A sex toy is a orgasm tool. > [@](#): > > It’s good if these things help some men who can’t find women to have sex with, but the overwhelming feeling I get is sadness for these guys. Read the [testimonials on the Venus 2000 site](http://www.sybian.com/venus2000_testimonials.html). Some of them are are genuinely moving. Like this one: _I am 72 years old and my wife of 42 years died in March after a long series of disabling illnesses stretching over 20 years. I have been “celibate” for twenty years. I masturbated at least once a week during that time. The last five years it has not been easy, I had a triple by-pass five years ago and the medication I am on more-or-less prevents me from having an erection, or if I do manage to get one, I can’t maintain it. I used Venus last night, on a very slow speed with my flaccid penis, while watching a movie on television. I had the most intense orgasm from Venus than from any time in my past…_ I have no connection to this company, I just find them a useful example of how a high-end sex toy can have a deeply positive impact on a person’s quality of life. I’m sure the 72 year old widower would be comfortable with you feeling sad. I can’t imagine what it’s like trying to find a sex partner at 72. ---
**Author:** ![Polerius](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/d78d45/32.png) [@Polerius](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Polerius)\ **Post date:** [September 17, 2009, 3:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-using-a-real-doll-for-sex-misogynist/510223/82 "2009-09-17T03:57:41Z")
> [@Cesario](#): > > So what you’re saying is, you’d rather I get it on with an actual little kid than risk yourself getting squicked by seeing one of them on the store shelves? Isn’t 11 above your preferred age range? Anyway… There are multiple issues if these things become so lifelike that we can’t tell the difference. Would a pedophile be allowed to walk out in public with his little 11-year-old “robo-lover”? What about PDA with the young robo-lover? ---
**Author:** ![Cesario](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/ecae2f/32.png) [@Cesario](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cesario)\ **Post date:** [September 17, 2009, 4:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-using-a-real-doll-for-sex-misogynist/510223/83 "2009-09-17T04:48:35Z")
> [@Polerius](#): > > Isn’t 11 above your preferred age range? Yes, but it’s the principle of the thing. That, and I presumed your statements would apply just as well to dolls made to appear under 11. > [@Polerius](#): > > Anyway… There are multiple issues if these things become so lifelike that we can’t tell the difference. Turing test again? > [@Polerius](#): > > Would a pedophile be allowed to walk out in public with his little 11-year-old “robo-lover”? Why would there be a problem with this, exactly? > [@Polerius](#): > > What about PDA with the young robo-lover? Don’t see any reason why this should be a problem either, beyond the existing issues we’ve got with PDAs in genera. ---
**Author:** ![MOIDALIZE](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e274bd/32.png) [@MOIDALIZE](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MOIDALIZE)\ **Post date:** [September 17, 2009, 5:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-using-a-real-doll-for-sex-misogynist/510223/84 "2009-09-17T05:23:02Z")
> [@billfish678](#): > > Are the women going to find bots that give them money and protection in ADDITION to the fucking? > > IMO, men will benifit more than women when the fuckbot/cloning revolution comes. Note to self: must patent Home Security Cuddlebot with maintenance servos and optional sybian attachment. > [@fuzzypickles](#): > > Does the doll bleed? If not, forget it. You know what? The Real Dolls _should_ bleed. As expensive as they are, if they withstand some catastrophic damage, they should bleed to heighten the tragedy. ---
**Author:** ![Cesario](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/ecae2f/32.png) [@Cesario](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cesario)\ **Post date:** [September 17, 2009, 5:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-using-a-real-doll-for-sex-misogynist/510223/85 "2009-09-17T05:43:17Z")
I feel the urge to add that I absolutely love all the “stick’n it to the Woman” responses this thread has gotten. While I don’t honestly believe that a fancy sex toy is going to singlehandedly usher in a new era of gender relations, it’s a nice fantasy to believe that such a world might come about where all the stupid sexual politics can be wiped out and men and women can deal with one another on equal terms. ---
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [September 17, 2009, 9:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-using-a-real-doll-for-sex-misogynist/510223/86 "2009-09-17T09:40:28Z")
> [@Cesario](#): > > I feel the urge to add that I absolutely love all the “stick’n it to the Woman” responses this thread has gotten. Wouldn’t it be more like NOT “stick’n it to the Woman” ? 😃 And more seriously; the women in question aren’t women in general, but those women who are less emotionally fulfilling to have a relationship with than an inanimate object. Hopefully, that’s a minority of them. ---
**Author:** ![Rune](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e68b1a/32.png) [@Rune](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rune)\ **Post date:** [September 17, 2009, 11:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-using-a-real-doll-for-sex-misogynist/510223/87 "2009-09-17T11:01:24Z")
> [@Freudian\_Slit](#): > > Am I the only one getting Michelle Obama collectible doll ads?! emm. Not here. The whole MILF housefrau package isn’t really my poison. Although I’m sure a lot of Germans are into Angela Merkel too. When Thatcher was PM, whores provided a very much sought for service, dressing up as a Thatcher and administering strict disciplining to their customers. Yulia Tymoshenko is much better than any of them, but if I had to pick a leading politician’s wife I’d go for Sarkozy’s new wife. Or one of Berlusconi’s many bimbos. > [@Polerius](#): > > This makes me wonder: If they perfect these things, will it be legal to make an 11-year old girl version? > > On one hand, it means some pedophiles can get their jollies without harming actual 11-year olds. On the other hand, ewww. Why not? Nobody is being harmed. Better a doll than a real person. Last month I saw on the TV that they were experimenting with giving idiot girls that wanted a baby, a doll baby that behaved like the real thing. E.g. woke up at night, etc. Which got the girls on better thoughts. ---
**Author:** ![Captain\_Awesome](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a698b9/32.png) [@Captain\_Awesome](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Captain_Awesome)\ **Post date:** [September 17, 2009, 11:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-using-a-real-doll-for-sex-misogynist/510223/88 "2009-09-17T11:18:17Z")
> [@Rune](#): > > Why not? Nobody is being harmed. Better a doll than a real person. Last month I saw on the TV that they were experimenting with giving idiot girls that wanted a baby, a doll baby that behaved like the real thing. E.g. woke up at night, etc. Which got the girls on better thoughts. Maybe someone could start making life-like black dolls so racists can re-enact lynchings? We could make them writhe and scream realistically too. Brave new world, eh. ---
**Author:** ![Grumman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/43a26b/32.png) [@Grumman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Grumman)\ **Post date:** [September 17, 2009, 11:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-using-a-real-doll-for-sex-misogynist/510223/89 "2009-09-17T11:24:32Z")
> [@Captain\_Awesome](#): > > Maybe someone could start making life-like black dolls so racists can re-enact lynchings? We could make them writhe and scream realistically too. Brave new world, eh. Can we combine it with **MOIDALIZE** ’s Hug-of-death-bot? ---
**Author:** ![Malthus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/85f322/32.png) [@Malthus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Malthus)\ **Post date:** [September 17, 2009, 1:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-using-a-real-doll-for-sex-misogynist/510223/90 "2009-09-17T13:31:44Z")
> [@Freudian\_Slit](#): > > They have a Cabbage patch CONCENTRATION CAMP? What’s better than a Cabbage Patch Concentration Camp? A Cabbage Patch Concentration Camp in which the dolls have realistic life-size genitals, that’s what! ---
**Author:** ![JR\_Brown](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/d6d6ee/32.png) [@JR\_Brown](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JR_Brown)\ **Post date:** [September 17, 2009, 5:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-using-a-real-doll-for-sex-misogynist/510223/91 "2009-09-17T17:37:06Z")
> [@The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](#): > > In your as-a-woman opinion, is that – what, eight percent of the males? Or eighteen percent of the males? Or eighty percent of the males? Something on the order of 5%. But they cause 90% of the grief.\* (\*Within the context of the social/recreational activities that cause you to have to associate with them, I mean. The rest of the time we can pretend they don’t exist.) ---
**Author:** ![JR\_Brown](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/d6d6ee/32.png) [@JR\_Brown](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JR_Brown)\ **Post date:** [September 17, 2009, 5:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-using-a-real-doll-for-sex-misogynist/510223/92 "2009-09-17T17:39:00Z")
> [@Polerius](#): > > This makes me wonder: If they perfect these things, will it be legal to make an 11-year old girl version? > > On one hand, it means some pedophiles can get their jollies without harming actual 11-year olds. On the other hand, ewww. Err, by “boy” I meant something along the lines of the cute college students running around Boston in September. Not 11 year olds… ---
**Author:** ![Freudian\_Slit](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/5daacb/32.png) [@Freudian\_Slit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Freudian_Slit)\ **Post date:** [September 17, 2009, 5:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-using-a-real-doll-for-sex-misogynist/510223/93 "2009-09-17T17:39:56Z")
> [@Captain\_Awesome](#): > > Maybe someone could start making life-like black dolls so racists can re-enact lynchings? We could make them writhe and scream realistically too. Brave new world, eh. Well, that would be creepy, but what would be the problem? I mean, people can write books, stage plays/scenes, make CGI lynchings, draw realistic photos, circulate photos of dead lynchees already. Do we ban those things? ---
**Author:** ![Cesario](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/ecae2f/32.png) [@Cesario](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cesario)\ **Post date:** [September 18, 2009, 1:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-using-a-real-doll-for-sex-misogynist/510223/94 "2009-09-18T01:21:32Z")
> [@Captain\_Awesome](#): > > Maybe someone could start making life-like black dolls so racists can re-enact lynchings? We could make them writhe and scream realistically too. Brave new world, eh. If you can convince bigots to do their lynchings exclusively with human analogues, seems to me like that’s a good thing. ---
**Author:** ![Argent\_Towers](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/e8c25b/32.png) [@Argent\_Towers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Argent_Towers)\ **Post date:** [September 18, 2009, 1:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-using-a-real-doll-for-sex-misogynist/510223/95 "2009-09-18T01:54:43Z")
> [@Freudian\_Slit](#): > > Well, that would be creepy, but what would be the problem? I mean, people can write books, stage plays/scenes, make CGI lynchings, draw realistic photos, circulate photos of dead lynchees already. Do we ban those things? Not to mention the concept of effigy which has existed for probably about two thousand years at least. ---
**Author:** ![Freudian\_Slit](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/5daacb/32.png) [@Freudian\_Slit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Freudian_Slit)\ **Post date:** [September 18, 2009, 2:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-using-a-real-doll-for-sex-misogynist/510223/96 "2009-09-18T02:03:22Z")
> [@Argent\_Towers](#): > > Not to mention the concept of effigy which has existed for probably about two thousand years at least. Yeah. I mean the guy who hangs a dead black android from a tree is messed up. But without androids, he’d probably content himself with burning crosses on lawns or sending people nooses or putting up black dummies in trees with nooses around their necks. They’re racist and they suck, but that’s their call to make. ---
**Author:** ![Captain\_Awesome](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a698b9/32.png) [@Captain\_Awesome](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Captain_Awesome)\ **Post date:** [September 18, 2009, 5:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-using-a-real-doll-for-sex-misogynist/510223/97 "2009-09-18T05:25:05Z")
> [@Freudian\_Slit](#): > > Well, that would be creepy, but what would be the problem? I mean, people can write books, stage plays/scenes, make CGI lynchings, draw realistic photos, circulate photos of dead lynchees already. Do we ban those things? Where I live, re-enacting lynchings would fall foul of the Racial and Religious Hatred Act, 2006. Similarly, graphical representations of child pornography are illegal under the Children And Young Persons (Harmful Publications) Act, 1955. Obviously we have laws governing freedom of expression too, but these seem like sensible limits in my opinion. There is clearly a difference between art, literature and documenting history, and people wanting to fulfill their own warped imagination in real life. > [@Cesario](#): > > If you can convince bigots to do their lynchings exclusively with human analogues, seems to me like that’s a good thing. I prefer not to take moral cues from a pedophile, and allowing people to live out their sadistic fantasies in real life is not something devoid of consequences. Public pseudo-lynchings are not a ‘good thing’. > [@Argent\_Towers](#): > > Not to mention the concept of effigy which has existed for probably about two thousand years at least. Effigies do not _necessarily_ incite racial hatred, but where they do, they are illegal. ---
**Author:** ![Cesario](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/ecae2f/32.png) [@Cesario](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cesario)\ **Post date:** [September 18, 2009, 6:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-using-a-real-doll-for-sex-misogynist/510223/98 "2009-09-18T06:00:19Z")
> [@Captain\_Awesome](#): > > Similarly, graphical representations of child pornography are illegal under the Children And Young Persons (Harmful Publications) Act, 1955. The US Supreme Court disagrees with your assessment on that particular obscenity issue, having ruled that it is unconstitutional to restrict the production, sale, or distribution of child pornography that was not created through an act of child abuse (drawings, CGI effects, etc.) > [@Captain\_Awesome](#): > > I prefer not to take moral cues from a pedophile, Good for you. I care, why? > [@Captain\_Awesome](#): > > and allowing people to live out their sadistic fantasies in real life is not something devoid of consequences. It is if those fantasies are lived out without actually hurting anyone. > [@Captain\_Awesome](#): > > Public pseudo-lynchings are not a ‘good thing’. They are if they prevent real people from being lynched instead, which is **precisely** what I said last time. ---
**Author:** ![Captain\_Awesome](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a698b9/32.png) [@Captain\_Awesome](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Captain_Awesome)\ **Post date:** [September 18, 2009, 6:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-using-a-real-doll-for-sex-misogynist/510223/99 "2009-09-18T06:21:20Z")
> [@Cesario](#): > > The US Supreme Court disagrees with your assessment on that particular obscenity issue, having ruled that it is unconstitutional to restrict the production, sale, or distribution of child pornography that was not created through an act of child abuse (drawings, CGI effects, etc.) Not really an issue since the US Constitution and Supreme Court have little jurisdiction where I live. Regardless, they haven’t chosen the more logical and moral outcome. > [@Cesario](#): > > Good for you. I care, why? I wouldn’t expect you to care. > [@Cesario](#): > > It is if those fantasies are lived out without actually hurting anyone. It’s not entirely surprising that a pedophile fails to understand the concept of non-physical harm, or at least attempts to delude himself into thinking so. > [@Cesario](#): > > They are if they prevent real people from being lynched instead, which is **precisely** what I said last time. It’s not preventing real people from being lynched instead. Where I live, both are illegal. ---
**Author:** ![Cesario](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/ecae2f/32.png) [@Cesario](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cesario)\ **Post date:** [September 18, 2009, 6:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-using-a-real-doll-for-sex-misogynist/510223/100 "2009-09-18T06:26:23Z")
> [@Captain\_Awesome](#): > > Not really an issue since the US Supreme Court has little jurisdiction where I live. Regardless, they haven’t chosen the more logical and moral outcome. I agree that it’s sad that your jurisdiction has chosen the less logical and moral outcome. I have faith that one day they’ll recognize the merrits of free speech and move to protect it. > [@Captain\_Awesome](#): > > I wouldn’t expect you to care. Good to see there’s one less delusion you need to labor under. > [@Captain\_Awesome](#): > > It’s not entirely surprising that a pedophile fails to understand the concept of non-physical harm, or at least attempts to delude himself into thinking so. > > It’s not preventing real people from being lynched instead. Where I live, both are illegal. Not too clear on how an if-then statement works, are you? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-using-a-real-doll-for-sex-misogynist/510223.md?page=4) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-using-a-real-doll-for-sex-misogynist/510223.md?page=6)