Tag Archives: sex in society

Will Sex Robots Make Us Better People?

https://i0.wp.com/mojidelano.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/15-58-55-special-report-sex-robots-a-psychological-perspective-sfw-jpeg-209057.png

I’m going to do it again. That’s right. I’m going to talk about sex robots. Do I have your attention now? I know it’s not the first time I’ve brought up this inherently kinky, but sexy topic. I doubt it’ll be the last. Honestly, there’s so much potential in this topic, sexy and otherwise, that I’m surprised I don’t talk about it more often.

There’s no way around it. Sex robots are coming, literally and figuratively. There’s already a brothel in Spain that employs sex dolls for customers. Companies like RealDoll are actively working on developing them. Given that sex still sells and there’s a lot of horny people in the world, the economic and personal incentives are just too huge.

Like any early technology, though, it’s going through some growing paints. It’s still a ways away from being refined, effective, and cheap. Like early cell phones and TVs, sex robots are going through that clunky phase where they seem more like a novelty than a practical reality.

https://i1.wp.com/dynamicmedia.zuza.com/zz/m/resized_gallery/0/f/0f055e1c-6678-4ec1-9bdf-0f3dcbebbc2f/01_realdolls3___Gallery.jpg

Eventually, we’ll work out the kinks, so to speak. I’m confident that everyone under the age of 30 will live to see a day where sex robots are almost indistinguishable from real partners. They won’t just look, feel, and sound real. They’ll be every bit as customizable and versatile as modern smartphones.

You want a meek, submissive partner who only lives to serve you? There will be a sex robot for that. You want a tough, dominant bondage enthusiast who makes you their personal bitch? There will be a sex robot for that too. The only limit is your own perverse imagination.

This leads to one vital question, which I’m sure hasn’t slipped the minds of those who still make weird faces when the topic of sex robots comes up. I imagine these same people used to think Twitter was a waste as well. Today, I imagine they’re still kicking themselves for not buying stock in it. It’s still a wholly relevant question, though.

How will sex robots affect society?

I’ve been dancing around this question for a while because I’m still not sure how to address it. Believe me, though, I’m working on it. I do want to keep talking about sex robots. I’ve noticed it gets my target audience uniquely excited.

However, there are others who think about this topic as well, sometimes more intently than even an aspiring erotica/romance writer would dare. The cast from ThinkTank, a fun and sometimes kinky YouTube channel that I’ve cited before, actually chose to ask that question in a different way.

How will sex robots make us better people?

On the surface, that does seem like a loaded question, if that’s not too inappropriate a term. It seems inherently bias that sex robots will only make people better. That’s like pretending ski masks are only used for skiing or that guns are only used for hunting.

Loaded or not, they do highlight an important dynamic of sex robots. It’s one that tends to get overlooked and underplayed, but one that has the potential to change society in a way that’s very positive by most measures. It has less to do with how we interact with sex robots and more to do with how they’ll interact with us.

Here’s the video that explores this discussion. I’ll give those who own fleshlights and vibrators a minute to collect their thoughts and steady their hearts. Take all the time you need.

At the core of the issue here is how the artificial intelligence within these sex robots is configured. There will be some that just obey orders. Like any appliance or gadget, you push a button and you get the effect you want. There will be a market for those sex robots, just as there’s still a market for old flip phones.

However, that’s not going to be enough for some people. I know this because those with vibrators and fleshlights still seek love and companionship. That’s because, in addition to being extremely horny, we’re a very emotional species as well. We are biologically wired to seek intimate connections with others. Incorporating that function into a sex robot just seems logical.

A sex robot with that kind of ability would do more than just provide the experience of sharing an intimate connection with a user. It’ll help people explore and develop their ability to seek such connections with others. It could be a teacher or a mentor of sorts. This is just one you have sex with and looks as sexy as you want it to be. There’s literally nothing unappealing about that concept.

https://i1.wp.com/www.collegemagazine.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/ef410b39aaacff80684620e12daf9175_b.jpg

Beyond the teenage fantasy, though, there’s another aspect to that idea that ThinkTank didn’t touch on. It has to do with our collective struggles to explore and deal with sexual issues. Given the erratic nature of our sexual attitudes, it’s an issue that’s bound to come up.

Think back to the heath classes or sex ed you got in high school, assuming you didn’t go to school in Texas. Those classes told you what sex was, how it worked, and the body parts involved. Some may have even touched on the dynamics of sexual relationships. Again, if you got your education in a state like Texas, your experience may vary.

Just knowing about sex isn’t enough, though. Most of those students are still horny teenagers who don’t know how to deal with their horniness just yet. They don’t have many outlets to explore that feeling. Other than internet porn and each other, their options are limited.

https://i2.wp.com/mydeepinside.info/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/neschastnaya-lyubov.jpg

Now, imagine getting that same information from health and sex ed. Then, imagine getting your own sex robot to help you explore your sexuality. Whether you’re a man or woman, gay or straight, you have something that will actually guide you through the intricacies of having sex and forging relationships.

It may sound like a bad scene from a porno, but throw an intelligent sex robot into the mix and suddenly, it’s not just pornographic. It’s wholly pragmatic.

As the clip said, sex robots with AI could be programmed to help teach users to interact and understand one another. It could teach men and women to better form genuine, intimate connections. Compared to the lessons that movies, video games, and fairy tales teach, which makes it seem like everyone needs to be a prince or princess, sex robots would be invaluable towards molding healthy minds and genitals.

https://i1.wp.com/www.dogubayazithalkinsesi.com/resimler/2/40794.jpg

So much of our struggles to get along, be they unequal gender dynamics or a poor understanding of what constitutes consent, stem from our limited ability to form relationships. They also may be a product of not getting laid often enough.

I know I’ve said this before, but it’s worth saying again. There are a lot of health benefits to regular sex. When someone has a rich, satisfying sex life, they’re generally happier and nicer to be around. A society full of sexually satisfied men and women who actually know how to forge intimate relationships can only be a good one.

https://i1.wp.com/consciouslifenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/image12.jpg

It’s still impossible to know just how sex robots will affect society. There may very well be other negative consequences that I either haven’t explored or thought of yet. Whatever they may be, expect me to talk about them or write about them in my novels at some point. It’s just too sexy a topic to ignore. In time, nobody will be able to ignore it.

Leave a comment

Filed under Sexy Future

A Second Sexual Revolution: The (Sexy) Precedent

https://i2.wp.com/picture-cdn.wheretoget.it/xmauij-l-610x610-pants-hippie+clothing-hippie+pants-indie-skirt-hipster-soft+grunge-hippie-spring-vintage.jpg

In any human society, nothing becomes a revolution until after people realize just how revolutionary their ideas were in the context of the times. Few people who end up being part of a social movement, see their activities as part of a revolution. That assumes they’re sober, which history tells us can be a factor.

Those who oppose revolutionary activities are even less inclined to call them as such. They see these kinds of movements as chaos, criminal, and dangerous because it’s distracting people from doing more important things like paying their taxes, pumping out babies, and giving money to their preferred religious service.

It’s hard to really transform a simple protest to a full-blown revolution is what I’m saying. That brings me to the sexual revolution of the 1960s and the possibility of other sexual revolutions in the future.

I’ve talked about the sexual revolution of the 60s before. It was fueled by two powerful factors that helped loosen sexual norms, namely the advent of effective contraception and the elimination of major sexually transmitted diseases thanks to antibiotics. For the first time in recorded history, human beings had more flexibility in exercising their sexual desires.

Advances in technology, science, and public health gave people the ability to explore their sexuality without fear of negative health consequences. Unwanted pregnancies and life-threatening diseases were no longer as big a concern. Men and women could engage in various sexual activities more freely and openly. The only obstacle in their way were the prudish sexual norms that remained.

That’s where the revolution came in. Science and technology can do a lot of things for us, such as curing disease and preventing pregnancy. However, it can’t convince people to just abandon their beliefs, values, and assumptions about certain subjects. That’s why we still have people in positions of great power who don’t believe in evolution.

Anyone who has ever dared to read the comments section on a news site understands it all too well. There’s a segment of people who ardently cling to the norms of the past. There’s also a segment of people who cling to the emerging norms of the present. When the two meet, it can get ugly.

The sexual revolution of the 60s was basically the comments section of a New York Times article made flesh. An entire generation of youth, who now had both the tools and the desires to explore their sexuality, was running into the brick wall that their elders had established.

They were taught from the days of Elvis’ evil hips that sex was a generally bad thing. It’s only acceptable function was to make babies that will work in factories, pay taxes, and go to church. Any orgasms that anyone had were optional. It’s easy to see why a whole lot of horny teenagers heard that message and decided to rebel.

In many respects, the spirit of the sexual revolution of the 60s was a direct response to the incredibly uptight, annoyingly prudish attitudes of a 1950s culture where couples sleeping in the same bed on TV was seen as scandalous. One generation bombards the other with endless morality lectures. The other rebels. The next thing you know, you’ve got mud orgies going on at Woodstock.

https://jackfisherbooks.files.wordpress.com/2017/05/ebec8-1.jpg?w=1221&h=916

It’s not necessarily a new pattern. Throughout history, cultures have gone through periods of sexual prudishness and sexual promiscuity. Cultures like the ancient Egyptians and the ancient Indians were well-known for their liberal attitudes. Then, you have extremely restrictive mores of  the ancient Chinese and Victorian England. By and large, sexual attitudes have been downright erratic.

When you examine the history of these attitudes, you see a cycle of sorts. That cycle usually plays out like this:

  • There’s some kind of upheaval in society, usually caused by economics, famine, or disease.

  • A large segment of society seeks more order so they embrace morals that encourage more uptight, restrained attitudes.

  • Those attitudes extend to sexuality and more prudish attitudes take over, giving any sexuality that doesn’t involve procreation a negative connotation.

  • Society stabilizes and comes to accept these attitudes for a long stretch of time.

  • A new generation is born, never knowing the upheavals that previous generations faced.

  • That generation sees the overly prudish attitudes of their elders as flawed and rebel.

  • New attitudes emerge that loosen sexual standards, often in ways that shock and horrify older generations.

  • The new attitudes become a spectacle and the shock value wears off.

  • Eventually, the attitudes result in another round of upheaval in society, which is magnified by a rises in sexually transmitted diseases or unstable family structures.

  • Another generation emerges and adopts more restrictive sexual attitudes once more.

Like every revolution, the sexual revolution of the 60s did incur a backlash. The emergence of new diseases like AIDS, as well as less stable family structures, contributed to all sorts of ills that played out over the course of several decades. You could make the argument that it’s still playing out.

That leads us to today. At the moment, it’s hard to say where in the cycle we are. Unlike previous periods in history, technology and modern infrastructure has taken society into uncharted territory.

Even if sexual attitudes regressed after the 60s, the growth of the porn industry and the widespread availability of erotic content, thanks to the internet, kept the backlash from going too far. It’s one thing to regress in a society dominated by uneducated masses. It’s quite another to do so in one with high literacy, fewer famines, and unlimited access to full-frontal nudity in their pockets.

However, I have made the argument before that our society is steadily becoming more sexually uptight. We’re seeing it in the way people react to sex in the media. It’s becoming more taboo for female characters in movies and video games to be sexy in any way. It’s also becoming taboo to use sex as much in advertising, as Carl’s Junior recently found out when they dropped their sexy ads.

There are also shifting trends in what society seeks to shame. There are now buzzwords like “toxic masculinity” and “rape culture” that skew sexual attitudes. Every week, it seems, there’s a new moral crusade against some sort of sexual injustice, be it sexual assault or inequalities in the LGBT community.

These crusades are putting sex into a negative context, not unlike the one it had in the uptight 1950s. In the current cultural landscape, any and all negative manifestations of sex get more attention and are blown out of proportion, either intentionally or unintentionally.

Never mind the fact that rates of sexual violence against women have declined by over 60 percent since 1995. Fear, dread, and upheaval still pervade whenever issues of sexual violence emerge, even if it turns out to be false. Remember the first part of that cycle I mentioned? Well, that upheaval element is there so the cycle might continue.

If that happens, then the end result will be similar to what we saw in the 60s. There will be another sexual revolution of sorts in response to emerging trends or as a backlash to the ongoing moral crusades. The human libido is powerful and erratic, but it never sits on the sideline when we aggressively attack our own sexuality.

Now, I’m not a good predictor of the future. If I were, I’d be picking stocks and betting on football games for a living instead of writing erotica/romance. However, my caveman brain still sees patterns, especially the sexy kind. What I see now and what I see in the past with the 60s sexual revolution checks more than a few boxes.

It’s hard to know how it’ll manifest, but I think there will be another sexual revolution of sorts. Within a generation, we’ll see young people engaging in sexual behaviors that shock and horrify today’s latte-loving millennials. What kind of behaviors might that entail? It’s hard to say, but it’s fun to imagine.

2 Comments

Filed under Second Sexual Revolution

A Disease-Free World: We’re More Ready Than You Think

https://i2.wp.com/portuguese-american-journal.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/stem_cell_lab_hood05_10734.jpg

It’s such a frightening thought. It terrifies parents, priests, rabbis, mullahs, monks, and conservative republicans. People, especially young people, are having sex at this very moment. If that’s not horrifying enough, they’re having sex for fun.

They’re not doing it with their government-approved, religiously-sanctioned spouse. They’re not doing it to produce more babies that will grow into tax-paying, church-going citizens. They’re just doing it because they enjoy the wonderful, toe-curling pleasure that comes with sex.

The most horrifying thought of all, though, is that they’re doing it and they’re not facing any consequences for it. They’re not getting pregnant because of modern contraception. They’re not getting sick either because of modern medicine. There’s literally no legitimate reason other than stigma to dissuade people from having sex for fun. It’s such a horrifying thought.

Okay, that’s enough sarcasm for now. What I just described is an exaggerated extreme of the mentality of those who are opposed to a society that permits or does not punish sexual promiscuity. It’s a reverse of the thought experiment I pitched last year about a world where the diseases that used to scare people out of having sex are all cured.

I don’t think people realize just how much closer we are to that world than they think. Most people alive today don’t remember a world where the biggest dread wasn’t HIV. It was debilitating diseases like syphilis, gonorrhea, and chlamydia. To give you an idea of just how devastating they were, over 20,000 people died from syphilis alone in 1939.

Like small pox, these diseases ravaged generation after generation. Also like small pox, modern medicine eradicated it from our collective fears. In fact, the rise of antibiotics has been largely credited with kick-starting the sexual revolution of the 1960s, more so than contraception.

There are still some scary diseases out there, though. In some respects, those same parents, priests, rabbis, mullahs, monks, and conservative republicans can take a perverse comfort that diseases like HIV/AIDS provides a strong incentive to avoid excessive promiscuity. That comfort, however, won’t last.

 

In a previous post, I talked about an emerging medical tool called CRISPR and how it may hold the key to ending infectious disease as we know it. I also asked a question I’m sure the anti-promiscuity crowd dreads. Are we ready for a world where we don’t have to worry about sexually transmitted diseases?

There are people who believe that our society simply cannot function in a world where there aren’t any scary diseases to dissuade people from having more sex than the Catholic Church sanctions. On paper, their fears aren’t wholly unreasonable.

In a society with so much promiscuity, fewer people will get married. Fewer people will form the stable, nuclear family that every 50s sitcom championed. Without disease, why would anyone forge any stable family units? Then, there’s the children. How traumatic would it be for them if they grew up in a world where people just had sex for fun?

 

That’s not entirely sarcasm. That is a very real concern and I can empathize with it to some extent. A society without disease, but full of rampant promiscuity is just so different. Our society has always had to content with these horrible diseases. The idea that they would no longer be a factor just seems unnatural and uncharted for our species.

However, empathy or not, it’s also a sentiment that I believe is misguided. It’s rooted more in flawed assumptions about a specific cultural ideal than actual human biology. I would argue that human beings, as well as society in general, is more prepared for a disease-free world than the Vatican would have us believe.

I believe this because there is a precedent, sort of. In fact, this may be one of the few instances where caveman logic works in favor of our emerging future and not against it. To understand this, we have to go beyond the ways our hunter/gatherer ancestors functioned. We have to look at the practical aspects of these nasty diseases.

For a disease to be real nasty, it has to both spread easily and within a population of hosts that are able to infect as many potential hosts as possible. When you look at our modern infrastructure, or even our ancient trade routes, it’s easy to see why a nasty disease would choose humans.

It’s also easy to see why diseases would use sex to spread. Like eating, it’s a hardwired drive that built into every human being. The desire to mate is every bit as powerful as the desire to eat. Unlike foodborne disease, though, sex provides more opportunities to infect other hosts. On top of that, rubbing body parts together is a lot more direct than simply sneezing on someone.

However, while modern and even pre-modern infrastructure made sex an ideal mechanism for spreading disease, we have to remember that this situation is actually very recent. The ability to simply travel to other regions, meet other people, and possibly have sex with them is very new in the context of our evolutionary history. For most of that history, though, the story was very different.

That brings me back to the hunter/gatherer lifestyle from which all our ancestors evolved. Books like “Sex At Dawn,” which I’ve mentioned before, describe in great detail the particulars of this lifestyle. It’s a lifestyle that, ironically to some extent, makes sex a pretty lousy method for transmitting disease.

This is because during those hunter/gatherer days, we humans roamed and foraged in small bands of closely-knit tribes. These tribes rarely interacted with other tribes because most were spaced out over large areas. Naturally, roaming lands and foraging for food makes it hard to stay in one place, stake claim to a territory, and fight over it.

On top of that, these close-knit tribes had very low population density, a limited ability to travel long distances, and no elaborate trade networks. That means that within these tribes, a sexually transmitted disease is rightly screwed. Sure, it can infect a tribe, but not much else. If that disease is fatal, it may kill the tribe, but it also kills itself as well. So if a disease as nasty as AIDS did emerge, it never had a chance to spread.

If there were any diseases, they couldn’t be fatal and they couldn’t seriously affect fertility. Like the common cold or the flu, it could only ever be so nasty. Otherwise, it never would’ve survived into the modern era.

Keep in mind, also, that the hunter/gatherer lifestyle was the lifestyle of choice for our species for nearly 90 percent of its existence. Our evolution and biology emerged within this lifestyle. That lifestyle was also conducive to some fairly loose sexual practices, many of which would make the Rick Santorums of the world faint. That’s why it’s not unreasonable to say that our ancestors had better sex lives than we do.

Those sexual practices were rarely conducive to the world of white picket fence type families that is so idealized by western civilization. It’s also not conducive to the world of kings and his multiple wives/concubines/sex slaves. That kind of rigid structure or hierarchy just doesn’t work in in a hunter/gatherer society. That’s why many practice strong egalitarian traditions.

This makes sense in terms of sheer pragmatism. In a society of hunter/gatherers where you’re only working with small tribes, you can’t be too much of a bigot. Everyone has to pitch in. Everyone has to share. You can’t be too big an asshole because you won’t survive without your tribe, nor will you have a chance to have sex. From an evolutionary and society perspective, it’s a pretty good deal.

In this context, human beings are already well-wired for a more promiscuous society. In fact, as “Sex At Dawn” argues half-jokingly, it may be better for us overall. You need only look at the happy, sexy lives that Bonobo chimps live. They have a lot of sex. They rarely fight. Even by hippie standards, they’re pretty chill.

At the moment, we humans can’t live those lives. Our world is too developed, too connected, and too vast for our caveman brains to make sense of. Add nasty diseases that can now use sex to effectively spread and it just isn’t pragmatic anymore, even if our biology favors it.

That may change very soon though. Once tools like CRISPR and contraceptives like Vasalgel are refined, those barriers are gone. We can safely exercise the same libido that our ancestors got to enjoy. What will that do for society? What will that do for the dynamics between men and women? It’s hard to imagine, but it’s a damn sexy idea that’s worth imagining.

Leave a comment

Filed under Sexy Future

A Disease-Free World: It’s Closer Than You Think

https://cdn2.hubspot.net/hub/62006/file-889628455-jpg/images/future_of_medicine_with_ehr.jpg

Last year, I proposed a little thought experiment that I’m sure everyone whoever sat through a high school health class outside of Texas has contemplated at some point. I simply asked people to imagine a world where all the dreaded infectious diseases, including the very unsexy kind, were cured.

I tailored the thought experiment to focus on our sex lives because disease is still a major concern for anyone that is sexually active. That’s not just because diseases are used as scare tactics to dissuade teenagers from having more sex than priests, rabbis, mullahs, and monks have deemed appropriate. These diseases still carry a stigma to them that you just don’t get with the cold or flu.

Anything that effects disease is bound to affect our sex lives and many underestimate just how big an effect it’s already had. Many attribute the sexual revolution of the 1960s to the rise of contraception, but in observing the historical data, it’s now clear that this remarkable advancement didn’t play quite as big a role.

https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/originals/66/92/1d/66921d8c6bb216ae0d02fb9d39d42f5f.jpg

If any one breakthrough should be credited with the sexual revolution and the greater sexual freedom that came with it, it’s modern antibiotics. That’s right. Penicillin probably did more for your sex life than the pill ever did.

That’s because up until the 20th century, nasty diseases like syphilis, gonorrhea, and chlamydia weren’t just more prevalent. They were downright debilitating. Just ask Al Capone. There was a legitimate reason to avoid excessive sexual promiscuity. It could actually kill you.

These days, however, the diseases that ravaged generations and scared the extremely horny to death are no big deal. If caught early, a thorough round of antibiotics will ensure your blood is as clean as a chaste nun. While religious conservatives may hate that, it is one of the many benefits that modern medicine has bestowed upon us that our disease-weary ancestors could only dream of.

http://destination-yisrael.biblesearchers.com/.a/6a0120a610bec4970c017d412833e1970c-pi

At the moment, HIV is the only disease that’s still fatal, but even that is losing its grip because modern antiviral drugs can contain it to the point where it’s manageable. It’s still a concern and it’s still ravaging certain parts of the world. However, at some point, even diseases like this will succumb to modern medicine.

I bring all this up because a future without infectious disease, including the unsexy kind, is actually closer than you think. I’m not saying it’ll happen in the next few years so don’t throw all your condoms away just yet. Within the next couple decades, though, we may very well see a future where the horrifying diseases we dread today no longer plague us.

To understand the scope of this issue, we first need to understand how most of our modern medicine works when it comes to treating infectious disease. Modern antibiotics, as well as antiviral drugs, operate in a way that’s akin to carpet bombing in World War II. Anyone who has seen one too many History Channel documentary knows about that.

https://i2.wp.com/static4.businessinsider.com/image/57c70326b996eb26008b568f-538/b-2-spirit-bombing.jpg

It’s a messy, destructive, and potentially counterproductive effort that does a lot of collateral damage. Sure, you’ll probably kill a few Nazis, but you may also kill some of the folks opposing them. For many diseases, though, it does the trick. Our bodies can take the necessary punishment to take down these nasty bugs.

Now, we may have a new tool with which to fight disease and this one go beyond merely bombing its target. It’s more akin to sending a legion of Navy SEALs and ninjas to take down a handful of targets and do so with an efficiency that gives military commanders wet dreams. It’s called CRISPR and it will change the world in ways that even antibiotics never managed.

CRISPR stands for “Clustered Regularly Interspaced Short Palindromic Repeats,” but make no mistake. This exceedingly wordy, overly technical jargon is a game-changer. It’s modern medicines first functional gene-editing tool that allows scientists to cut and paste genes the same way we cut and paste text on a computer. That may not sound like a big deal, but if you’re concerned about your sex life, trust me. It’s a huge deal.

https://i1.wp.com/decisionstrat.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/iStock_000036737862Medium.jpg-628x326.jpeg

Infectious disease, be they a sore throat or total organ failure, relies on pathogenic organisms that are genetically programmed to infect others and spread to as many other hosts as possible. Anyone who saw the movie “Outbreak” understands this. Until CRISPR came along, we really couldn’t attack those genetics. That’s why we needed the biological equivalent of carpet bombing to combat them.

CRISPR changes that. It can specifically identify certain segments of DNA within an orgasm, snip them out, and either replace them with something else or nothing at all. For any robust infectious pathogen looking to ruin your weekend, that’s the equivalent of a head shot with a 44 magnum.

https://i1.wp.com/14544-presscdn-0-64.pagely.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/1339691715153zombie-headshot1.jpg

CRISPR is still in the early stages of its development. It is, essentially, in beta test mode wherein scientists and researchers are working out the kinks and refining various editing techniques. However, the implications are already taking shape.

Last year, a team at Temple University successfully proved that CRISPR could be used to remove HIV from infected cells. If CRISPR can take down something as robust and devious as HIV, a disease that has tormented medicine for decades, then all bets are off. Every disease that relies on a pathogenic microorganism is screwed.

Even antibiotic resistance won’t help them this time. That’s because CRISPR is akin to a chainsaw and a tree. The tree can only adapt so much to resist chemicals, pollutants, or whatever other lifeforms are used to kill it. No amount of adaptation will save it from a chainsaw. That’s why there are no chainsaw-resistant trees.

http://husqvarnacdn.azureedge.net//qs_h=700&crop=1&w=1470&ver=00000000T000000/_$$_/media/dam/husqvarna/forest%20chain%20saws%20electric%20saws%20power%20cutters%20and%20saw%20mills/chain%20saws/2014/12/03/09/00/h150-0213.ashx

Modern medicine already spurred one sexual revolution, but that one still had limits. This brings me back to the same thought experiment I pitched last year. What will happen to our society when tools like CRISPR are perfected and every infectious disease we ever worried about is no more?

This isn’t some distant scenario either. There may very well be children alive today who will grow into a world where they never have to worry about diseases like AIDS, the flu, SARS, or hepatitis. Add in advances in contraception like Vasalgel and the possibilities become even more intriguing, not to mention sexy.

https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/originals/dc/c8/5b/dcc85b167b2683f610c5d2f8385929da.jpg

Again, don’t throw away your condoms just yet. CRISPR isn’t perfected just yet, but its potential is already clear. The days of the diseases that sex ed teachers have used to scare teenagers out of having sex are numbered. A world without infectious disease isn’t just possible. It’s very probable now. The question is are we ready for it?

2 Comments

Filed under Sexy Future

Virtue Signaling: How It Creates Beta Males And Bitchy Girls

They’re weak, pathetic, gullible, whiny, sullen, and boring. They lack confidence, charisma, and any meaningful personality trait that might help them stand out and accomplish something of value. They do nothing to excite the opposite sex and make only the most asinine of efforts to do so. They are the beta males, an inane segment of the male population that I’ve protested before.

Now, allow me to describe a different crop of annoying people whose presence pollutes the collective gene pool. They’re loud, obnoxious, arrogant, impolite, dense, unreasonable, vindictive, and crass. They are unflinching, unfeeling, and utterly devoid of empathy to anyone who isn’t like them. Their disdain of others and perpetual victimhood complex is the only thing that gets them up in the morning.

I’m talking, of course, about bitchy girls. If beta males are a bane to all those with a Y-chromosome, then bitchy girls are repugnant stain on the feminine mystique. I call them girls because there’s a difference between women and girls. Being a woman, just like being a man, requires some measure of maturity. Girls, like their beta male boys, have none of that. As such, they don’t deserve to be called women.

https://k61.kn3.net/taringa/1/9/4/6/2/7/8/shakas666/579.jpg

I bring up these two case studies of festering warts within the human condition to help make another point about virtue signaling. I know some people are probably tired of this topic. Believe me, I feel your pain. However, this last point is more relevant because it affects our personal lives, as well as my efforts as an erotica/romance writer.

Beta males and bitchy girls are sometimes a necessary component of a story, especially one that relies on major antagonistic characters. You need a male or female character that is easy to hate and easy to root against. That’s why we have characters like Biff Tannen and Regina George from “Mean Girls.”

It used to be that we needed those characters to be alpha males or alpha females. They had to be tough, mean-spirited jocks or cruel, cold-hearted bitches that nobody rooted for when they got gutted by a crazed killer in a hockey mask. It’s crude, but it did the trick. Unfortunately, new trends in character development, as well as real life, are tweaking that script and not for the better.

https://typeset-beta.imgix.net/rehost%2F2016%2F9%2F13%2F88eaf78f-f569-41af-aae6-bb067df4f16e.jpg

Beta males and bitchy girls may not be natural allies on paper, but they occupy the same space in terms of being utterly contemptible on multiple levels. They just take different routes and virtue signaling is how they get there.

The best contemporary example are certain breeds of those who call themselves “male feminists.” By the way, anyone who actually has to preface feminism like that should raise a few red flags. That’s usually a sign that they’re already retreating into beta male mode and there’s nothing you can do to stop them.

These types of men are habitual virtue signalers, routinely bashing their own gender and agreeing with the bitchy girls about everything involving some “cisgendered white male patriarchy” conspiracy. They essentially emasculate themselves, shunning any male traits, and associating every masculine trait with being Biff Tannen.

https://i1.wp.com/thelibertarianrepublic.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/maxresdefault-2.jpg

It’s a form of self-flagellation, an effort to alleviate the sheer guilt they feel with being male and trying to earn attention and/or pity from others. That’s how they seek their validation and when they interact in groups, they can’t help but reinforce those efforts. Virtue signaling is just the proverbial gasoline they use to keep the fire going.

For bitchy women, the virtue signaling is much more overt. Unlike the beta males, they’re exceedingly vocal with their efforts. They don’t discuss, debate, or rationalize. They just yell, whine, and groan. Virtue signaling is just how they stay on topic.

Bitchy women don’t care about anyone’s voices, except their own. They loudly whine and bemoan about everyone who doesn’t buy into their view of the world. They will yell about the oppressive white male patriarchy at the top of their lungs. Then, when someone calls them out on their bullshit, they dare to play the victim.

https://i2.wp.com/roughcutmen.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/Playing-the-Victim1-1.jpg

In the mind of a beta male and a bitchy girl, they are the underdog hero of their own story and everyone else is an evil demon-possessed Nazi working on behalf of reincarnated slave-holders from the 1850s. Virtue signaling allows them to prop up this inner narrative, as though they have to keep it going in order to ensure they get the same ending they’ve seen in every Rocky movie.

It isn’t just that this inner narrative is utterly false and devoid of substance. It isn’t just that it gives them too many excuses to cling to these annoying tendencies, which constitutes excuse banking of the worst kind. The biggest tragedy here, beyond the people they annoy, is that with their virtue signaling, they champion traits that naturally drive people apart.

Beta males and bitchy women do not conduct themselves in ways that inspires intimacy, progression, and growth. They present themselves as heroes of their own story, an ideal for what a man and woman should be, but they cannot and will not realize that the picture they’re paintings is both flawed and repugnant.

https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/G/01/digital/video/hero/TVSeries/TheGreatestAmericanHero_327393900_GAH._V348547917_SX940_.jpg

A beta male, in his meek ineptitude, barely qualifies as a pet to a bitchy girl. A bitchy girl, in her immature arrogance, is just another bully that a beta male tolerates. Together, they reinforce a brutal cycle of bitterness, self-loathing, and arrogance that ensures isolation, apathy, and loneliness.

For an aspiring erotica/romance writer, that’s a triple dose of narrative kryptonite. For characters like the ones in “Passion Relapse” or “Skin Deep,” it’s important I strike a particular balance. I can’t have characters being too much like Biff Tannen or Regina George. I can’t have them be like the entire cast of the “Big Bang Theory” either. If I want those characters to be more than mere foils, they need to have some complexity.

I’m not saying there isn’t a place for characters like this. Someone needs to be Freddy Kruger’s first victim in a horror story. However, virtue signaling and those who abuse send a toxic message about what makes a man or a woman moral within the context of a story.

https://i0.wp.com/bh-s2.azureedge.net/bh-uploads/2016/06/freddy-krueger1-1.jpg

Beta males and bitchy girls don’t deserve to be heroes, ideals, or examples. More than anything else, they are cautionary tales of what happens when virtue signaling goes too far and infects someone’s mind. They should not be encouraged, nor should they be ignored either.

There are many different dynamics that go into making a character, real or fictional, into who they are. If they need something like virtue signaling to function, then that’s a sign there’s something inherently flawed. People have enough excuses to be mean to one another, some of which they can’t do a damn thing about. It’s better for society, our live lives, and erotica/romance novels if we don’t provide them with more.

Leave a comment

Filed under Jack Fisher's Insights

Building Your Own Lover: Possibilities And Implications

Strap yourself in and put on a clean pair of panties because I’m going to talk about sex robots again. I know I’ve talked about it a lot, sometimes as a thought experiment and sometimes in response to new breakthroughs, such as the first robot brothel. If it sounds like I think about sex robots more than any straight man should, I apologize. It’s not my fault the subject is both titillating and relevant.

I say it’s relevant because, even when you remove the titillating parts, robots are becoming an increasingly large part of our society. They’re not just fancy toys and CGI characters in Michael Bay movies. Robots are a growing part of our economy. In some ways, they’re taking it over.

Forget China, Mexicans, and immigrants. According a Ball State study, robots accounted for 87 percent of the loss in manufacturing jobs from 2000 to 2010. People aren’t being put out of work because some foreigners are coming over and stealing jobs. Factories are just becoming more efficient because they’re using robots.

Have you ordered something from Amazon lately? Have you ordered something from any retailer? Well, chances are, a robot helped process that order and for good reason. Robots don’t get sick, they don’t unionize, they don’t get tired, and they don’t take coffee breaks.

The problem is that robots don’t respond to protests, intimidation, racism, and xenophobia. In addition, robots like the ones Boston Dynamics have created recently are kind of scary. Protest all you want. You are not going to win a fight against a robot. They may not kill you like the Terminator, but they will take over because they’re just that much more efficient.

Now I don’t want to get into a debate about how robots affect the economy and how people can possibly compete against robot workers. That’s a complex debate that isn’t going to make anyone outside of an economics class horny. Instead, I’d like to discuss the growing trends in robots in a more intimate manner.

Robots are going to be a bigger part of our lives in the coming years. There’s just too much money to be made and too many benefits to overlook. There will be those who take “The Terminator” and “The Matrix” too seriously and dread that robots will destroy us all. I’m not saying that’s an impossible scenario, but I do believe it’s one we can avoid.

That’s where the intimacy comes in. We can’t fight robots and win. Robots can’t get made without us. In a sense, we’re already two creatures that are intimately entwined. So perhaps a solution to embracing robots as part of humanity is to actually love them and teach them to love us back.

I know it doesn’t sound that sexy right now. When most people think of robots these days, they either think of the ones that took their jobs or the ones that blow shit up in every action movie ever made. On top of that, they don’t exactly much sex appeal.

https://tgc-cache.s3.amazonaws.com/images/uploads/articles/Ultron.jpg

However, I believe that will change. I believe it’s already changing with the way we interact with technology. We already have AI assistants that are steadily integrating themselves into our lives. We have Siri on our phones, Alexa in our homes, and Cortana in our computers. These AI’s don’t have bodies yet, but one day they will. The only question is how much sex appeal will we give them?

That’s progress for some and another step towards a robot apocalypse for another. What’s the endgame though? Well, nobody can really say right now, especially not an aspiring erotica/romance writer who gets most of his robot knowledge from comic books and TED Talks. However, there is one scenario that I might be able to explore, which may end up deciding whether we get along with them or become their pet meat-bags.

It starts with a simple question that I’m sure everyone who is single or stuck in an unsatisfying relationship has asked themselves in some form or another. If you could create the perfect lover, what would he or she be like?

With pace of advancement in robotics technology, that’s not entirely a rhetorical question anymore. If we can program a robot to keep our schedule, clean our carpets, and fill our Amazon orders, then why can’t we program one to love us? Again, that’s not entirely a rhetorical question.

I say not entirely because there’s still a lot about emotions we don’t understand. There are probably certain aspects about emotions we can never understand. Human beings are just too complicated. What else explains the love and devotion that some people put into lovers, family, and My Little Pony?

Even if we don’t fully understand our emotion, we still understand them well enough to know what want in a lover. Robots, being programmable and malleable, are an ideal medium for crafting those emotional connections. We’ve already made a movie about a man who falls in love with his phone. Someone falling in love with a life-like robot isn’t too great a stretch.

The concept has already found itself into plenty of narratives, including a Hallie Joel Osmont movie and a technical demonstration for the PlayStation 4 called “Kara.” Just watch “Kara” for a moment and let your dirty, sexy thoughts fill in the blanks.

Kara might have just been a demonstration, but it crafts a clear and believable scenario about how our future robot lovers may take shape. Like buying a custom computer, we specify how we want it to look. We specify which language it’ll speak. We even craft a personality that we find desirable. Anything we could possibly want in a lover, we could create.

Want your lover to look like a young Brad Pitt? You can have one. Want your lover to look like Jennifer Lawrence? You can have one. Want your lover to look like mix of Keith Richards and Snoop Dogg? You can have one of those too, even if it does reveal a lot about your tastes in lovers.

The gender of your robot lover could be fluid. It could be exceedingly masculine, like John Cena on steroids. It can be voluptuously feminine, like Pamela Anderson after a boob job. It can even be some sort of blend, a female body with a penis or a male body with a vagina. There’s no limit because robots aren’t confined by the limits of biology.

Those worried about the functionality of certain body parts wouldn’t have to worry. Lab-grown body parts are already in development. It’s even farther ahead than you think. I’ve already talked about the development of a bionic penis. Given a few more decades of refinement, artificial genitals won’t just be functional. They’ll function better than anything nature could create.

These robot lovers wouldn’t be slaves or servants, though. There would likely be other types of robots to fill these uses. These robots have one purpose and one purpose only. That’s to be your ideal lover. How can any other human possibly compete? Just as robots took our factory jobs, they may also take the job of every whore, gigolo, and match-maker.

For some, this is a scary scenario, people preferring the love of robots over other people. Some would even dread that this would lead to the extinction of the human race. Well, those same people probably haven’t heard about artificial wombs either. In fact, it’s probably a good idea not to tell them. If they have that big a problem with robot lovers, then chances are they won’t feel much better about robot wombs.

We create robots because we seek more efficiency. We seek lover because, as living beings, we seek connection. Robots, in their current form, aren’t alive and don’t need the same connections. However, once we create in them a desire for connection, what would that mean for them? What would that mean for us?

I’m not at all qualified to contemplate the full implications. At most, I’m qualified to take this concept and turn it into a sexy story. Chances are, I will at some point in the future. I can’t say it’ll be a prelude of things to come. I craft my stories with the intent of being fun, entertaining, and sexy.

However, there may come a day when a sexy story just doesn’t cut it. One day, our desire for connection may find its way into a robot. When that happens, what kind of connection will we create? What kind of intimacy will we forge? It’s a daunting, but sexy idea to contemplate.

Leave a comment

Filed under Jack Fisher's Insights

Are We Becoming More (Sexually) Uptight?

https://www.alluvium-journal.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/13348205645_726ec0c1b7_k-1024x938.jpg

There was once a time in American culture where the media couldn’t even acknowledge that sex existed, let alone happened between wholesome scenes of family dinners and fishing trips. An average episode of “Scandal” would’ve horrified audiences in 1965, who were used to seeing a married couple sleep in separate beds on “I Love Lucy.”

Without a doubt, sex on TV has come a long way. We no longer bat an eye when Kevin Spacey goes down on Kate Mara in “House of Cards” or when Glen Quagmire raises the bar for sexual debauchery on “Family Guy.” By all accounts, we’ve become a lot more accepting.

That being said, is it possible that we’re becoming more sexually uptight? Bear with me. I promise I’m not being sarcastic here. This is part of an ongoing observation that I’ve explored in other posts.

Some of it has to do with trends in feminism. Some of it has to do with the various peculiarities of the gender dynamics in our sexual culture. I’m not saying what I’m seeing is definitive, but as an aspiring erotica/romance writer, this does concern me because it may very well affect my industry.

Now when I ask whether we’re becoming more sexually uptight, I don’t mean to say that we’re regressing to a point where women can’t show their ankles and men can’t acknowledge that the female orgasm exists. In an era of internet porn and Photoshop, that sort of prudishness just isn’t possible. Never-the-less, there are other ways for Puritan attitudes towards sex to manifest in new ways.

Picture the following scenario:

There’s a beautiful woman walking around topless on a sunny beach. A young man takes a moment to stare at her breasts and admire their beauty. The woman notices the man and is appalled. The woman points at the man, calls him a misogynist pig, and rallies every woman around her to scold and shame the man for daring to look at her exposed breasts.

What I just described isn’t necessarily something that happens on a day-to-day basis. It’s more a manifestation of the kinds of sexual attitudes that are evolving. We no longer censor sexuality or deny that it exists. Instead, we shame people who dare to appreciate it in ways we don’t approve of.

In many respects, this is just as bad as any censorship by the FCC because it isn’t imposed by a government body. It’s something that we’re doing to each other. Unlike government bureaucracy though, shaming actually works. In fact, shaming pre-dates government because it uses the built-in system of guilt that every human who isn’t a sociopath has hardwired into them.

Now trends in being sexually uptight aren’t new. For much of human history, civilization has gone through various cycles of sexual attitudes. Some ancient cultures, like Egypt, were relatively liberal in their sexual attitudes. Others, like Victorian era England, were so famously uptight for their sexual repression that visible ankles were considered scandalous.

Even in modern times, there are some parts of the world that are more sexually repressed than others. Places like India and Saudi Arabia, despite being thriving modern economies, have some very backwards attitudes towards sexuality. They don’t need shame to shun someone who has sex in a way they don’t approve of. They have the authority to just throw those people in jail, which they believe is sure to kill their sex drive.

What makes this trend in the west so disconcerting, though, is that it’s emerging from a society where equality and justice are among our highest values. Countries like America pride themselves, despite protests to the contrary, in their values towards gender equality. The problem is that, for some, equality just isn’t enough.

Here’s a real-world example that illustrates this issue. Back in 2013, an incident occurred at Occidental College wherein two freshmen had consensual sex while drunk, but only the man ended up getting expelled. Why did he get expelled? Well, by their standards, a woman cannot consent to sex while drunk. Therefore, the man committed sexual assault.

Think about that for a moment and try to make sense of it. Two people get drunk, but they’re not so drunk that they can barely stand. In this story, the two people involved could not only send texts. They could also talk about using condoms and practicing safe sex. How can such responsible behavior constitute assault?

It didn’t matter though. By the standards of the school, the man still committed sexual assault and was expelled. The woman didn’t get charged with anything. She was a victim who was traumatized by the act of having consensual sex after a few drinks.

Again, think about that for a moment. Think about what that kind of mentality indicates. Our sexual culture is becoming unequal again, but this time in a different way. Instead of women being shamed for their sexual practices, it’s men who are being shamed.

Today, a man who lusts for a woman and expresses his fondness of sex is considered a pig, a deviant, and a sexist. A woman who lusts for a man and expresses her fondness of sex is considered liberated, free-spirited, and strong. That is not equality. That is a recipe for repression and injustice, albeit in different way.

Ironically, this trend is regressing fashion trends among women. We’re already seeing it in superhero costumes. Female characters are less likely to show off their breasts or female curves. It’s as if highlighting the physical traits of women is now considered an act of misogyny.

As a man, I find these trends troubling and insulting. Am I somehow wrong, immoral, or sexist because I enjoy the sight of beautiful naked women? Are my attitudes towards women somehow flawed because I dare to admire their beauty? I wish those were rhetorical questions.

This troubles me even more as an aspiring erotica/romance writer because it means some of the novels I want to write might be rejected as being sexual in the wrong sort of way. I can easily imagine rejection letters saying “this book doesn’t have enough diversity” or “the man enjoys the sex too much” or “the woman is too feminine.”

I can just as easily imagine such regressive attitudes turning the erotica/romance I love into this target for those who claim it’s an affront to women. Never mind the fact that I write these stories to enchant, entertain, and titillate, some will still see it as some sort of egregious act of sexism.

This really does concern me. I’d rather not return to the days where people don’t even acknowledge sex exists and any attempt to discuss it is somehow taboo. We’ve already experienced that kind of repression and it doesn’t work. Let’s at least try to remain sane on matters as important and intimate as sexuality.

2 Comments

Filed under Jack Fisher's Insights