Jump to content
Gibson Brands Forums

Are we becoming obsolete?

GIANTRobOT420

By GIANTRobOT420
in The Gibson Lounge

Recommended Posts

charlie brown

charlie brown

Posted
Posted

Or, will the Robot play the Dark Fire, to have sex, with the Sexbot? ;>b

 

 

 

Fox on Sex: Meet Roxxxy, the 'Woman' of Your Dreams

Monday, January 18, 2010

By Yvonne Fulbright

 

The woman of your dreams is finally here.

 

She’s a slender, 5-foot, 7-inch Caucasian with dark brow, shoulder-length hair and an eternal orgasm face (either that or she’s in shock).

 

Meet Roxxxy, the world’s first sex robot, who is being touted as the sexbot of "peak performances."

 

But do you really want this life-size rubber doll as your girlfriend?

 

She sounds super fun at first thought. Supposedly, she’s sexy, knows soccer, and should be up for anything, erotically speaking. But let the realities of this fantasy sex partner sink in, and she may not be the dream girl most want, for reasons like these ...

 

You’ll want to undress her. But this isn’t because you want to be up against her flesh-like, naked body. A Victoria’s Secret model she’s not. The heinous black lingerie she’s sporting (a lacy top with a poorly matched thong and thigh-highs), with the cheesy lacy choker to boot, beg for an extreme makeover.

 

She’ll talk as much as your real girlfriend or wife. If you think that lifelike movements are all you’ll be getting, you’re wrong. Peace and quiet are not perks to be had in this relationship. Roxxxy was designed to have a conversation with you. And she likes it mushy: "I love holding hands with you." Even worse, she snores.

 

She talks like a child. The New Jersey-based company that made Roxxxy, True Companion LLC, claims the doll is intended to be "someone" its owner can talk and relate to. After all, the company’s founder explains, "sex only goes so far."

 

Yet the turn-off, for some, is that her language abilities are at a child’s level — simple. In all fairness, she will work on building her vocabulary, be able to put together pre-recorded words and sounds, as well as receive updates via the web that bolster her language capabilities. But seriously, playing babydoll can be cute for only so long.

 

Column ArchiveFox on Sex: Meet Roxxxy, the 'Woman' of Your Dreams

Full-page Fox on Sex Archive

She’ll wake the neighbors. A little bit of noise never hurt anybody, but your neighbors may need to ask you to keep it down. Roxxxy is known to unleash a vocal response, and quite a loud one. So keep a pillow handy.

 

You’ll basically be making love to a laptop. That’s right, a computer connected to cables comes out of her back, killing the lifelike efforts made by her creators. So in not ruining the moment, keep your hands on her custom-sized breasts.

 

She’s easy. Think about it. How long is your sexual interest maintained by real women who are "easy"? Don’t underestimate the importance of the chase -- the thrill of a little hard-to-get. No doubt, hearing her say "I know where you can put that hand" is almost irresistible, but the lack of anticipation with the unpredictable is going to get really old really fast.

 

She suffers from multiple personality disorder. Roxxxy isn’t just Roxxxy, but "Wild Wendy," "Frigid Farrah," "S&M Susan," "Mature Martha," and "Young" as well. Could be cool, though, if you’re into the unstable sort ...

 

She’s no cheap date. If you want to own Roxxy, expect to pay $7,000 to $9,000.

 

She doesn’t help out around the house. A perk of having a partner is that you have somebody who is supposed to be pulling his or her weight. Real women are known to do more than their fair share. Roxxxy can’t cook. She doesn’t vacuum. She doesn’t do anything you would want or need her to do outside of the bedroom.

 

She’s not a he. If you’re not into women, don’t sweat it. Rocky, a male version of Roxxxy, is in the works.

 

She can still get an STD of sorts. Non-human doesn’t mean virus-free. In fact, as with so many computers, you can anticipate that, sooner or later, you’ll be trying to rid her of a virus that she’s caught. Spending hours reinstalling her operating system and software may have you wondering if the sex was really worth it.

 

She’s not the "real deal." Companionship is being given as one of the main justifications for Roxxxy’s birth. This is so sad when you think about all of the humans out there who need a friend, mate, or lover — people who are way more interesting and who can connect with you so much better than artificial intelligence.

 

Dr. Yvonne K. Fulbright is a sex educator, relationship expert, columnist and founder of Sexuality Source Inc. She is the author of several books including, "The Better Sex Guide to Extraordinary Lovemaking."

 

 

 

CB

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Basshole

Basshole

Posted
Posted
Or' date=' will the Robot play the Dark Fire, to have sex, with the Sexbot? ;>b

 

CB

 

[/quote']

 

 

haha

 

I saw that on The Colbert Report.

 

 

 

 

With War, Hunger, Disease, Planetary Health, and the ice capades I'm thrilled to see that we are investing in the most important things.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Twiz

Twiz

Posted
Posted
Ahh but can they create music?

 

 

That's a good point. However, if you consider current popular music, (I'm talking a majority of top 40 stuff, or what MTV plays for 8 minutes a day between lame reality tv show documentaries about rich kid birthday parties, or heroin addicted suburban youth) most of that is performed by what are essentially human robots. -Someone else writes & produces the song, and the artist just comes in, and sings it. Then lots of money and clever marketing jam it down everyone's throats until the masses embrace it, and thus perpetuate the cycle for the next 15 minute robot to come along. So yeah, the robots in these videos are playing music that someone else created, but I don't really see that much difference between that, and the hit machine that is the popular music industry now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Shnate McDuanus

Shnate McDuanus

Posted
Posted
I've never taken side on that debate but I will watch closely. Are you talking about actual Star Wras or the Family Guy one?

 

I don't watch Family Guy. I gave up on it after they brought it back' date=' and I thought it lost its edge. Most of it's just shock humor, anyway.

 

If you look at the 1977 cut, it's very, very obvious that Han Solo clearly shot Greedo before Greedo even had the chance to fire--therefore, it may be inaccurate to even say that he shot first, because it suggests that his shot was met in retaliation by another shot. In the 1997 re-release, you'll see a very shoddy and clumsy attempt to edit the scene to make it look as if Greedo shoots, Han dodges, and shoots in retaliation, making it look like Han only shot Greedo in self-defense. The 2004 edition makes the edit look a bit less awkward, but still retains the changes made to the content of the scene, while only making the movement look a little smoother.

 

Still, there are a lot of concerns regarding characterization and story that makes the 1997/2004 edits less compelling and even less consistent. What made the events of the 1977 cut so compelling, in my opinion, is that it portrays Han Solo as more of an anti-hero, more out for his own concerns and more willing to take charge rather than to just act decisively in times of desperation. He's not so black-and-white, and he's clearly a complex character, and one who, when watching the original '77-'83 cuts, experiences a very noticeable transformation of consciousness. The rest of the film tends to make this clear, but George Lucas, ever willing to appeal to a younger, more impressionable demographic, seemed to want to make the relationships simpler by making Han's moral standings more distinct and less complex.

 

Sorry to hijack the thread here, but there's never a bad time to discuss [i']Star Wars[/i].

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...