Inventor unveils $7,000 talking sex robot

really? I thought maybe Barbara Streisand

You bet!!!

I thought that would happen when men gained the capacity to give birth....

Heh.

nicely done. :)

You're right: it's high-time someone starts the "Society to Prevent Cruelty to Silicone" movement. Latex has rights, too, ya' know....

Eh, is that foxhole full of water? Cuz either way you cut it, either the sharks or bears will NOT be happy with the foxhole situation.

Some people need a release in different ways.

technically they're helping humanity....albeit a small percentage that can actually afford such.....eccentricities...but help nonetheless

I think they make one of those!

LOL.... i don't have 7k either but I can bring the soda and the chips!! who else?

ah ha ha ha ha ha!
Gross.

You do raise the interesting thought that a well-capitalized investor would be able to buy a harem of these, and open a legal "Gentlemen's Club" to allow people like you to rent the machine for an hour? Hmmmm.... Virtual prostitution, and not even illegal! Someone could become a virtual Pimp-Daddy....

Or, for short, a VP.

I agree that with these sex droids a person could set up a robot whore house rather legally. There still would be sanitation issues to be addressed. What government regulations or departments might pertain to the proper cleaning of male ejaculate from the vaginas, mouths, and other orifices of these techno whores?

Ok your on I have a couple of dollors I could pitch in. Oh and a garden hose. It is water proof right? Because when I'm done it's going to need hosed down in a bad way.

All you need is a garden hose and some bleach.

But does it say "Ohhh, I love the way you pull my string,....Baby"!

What are you doing, removing her Ipad?

I know it has a pull string in the back,....dolls n bears n such ALWAYS have em!~

um yeah thats exactly how we value sex.
I think you're confusing sex and love.
One is an primal urge that males have to rub one out at least once a day, the other is supposed to be something special that you'll treasure for the rest of your life.

Then why does she talk? if it was just a "primal urge" for release then I feel like $7,000 is a little ridiculous when your hand works just fine. She is a "companion", thats what makes me nervous.

Honestly I think the only conversation the owner will have with the doll will go something like this:
Owner:" You like that?"
Doll: "Yes Master!"
Owner:"Damn Right You Dirty Whore!"
Owner:"Tell Me How Big It Is!"
Doll:"So Big, Master!"
Owner:"You Ready?"
Doll:"For What Master?"
Owner:"Uuuuggghhhh Ohhhhhhh Ahhhhhh Ah Ah O Oh Ah ugh, Sorry.
Wait! Why Am I Saying Sorry? You're Not A Real Girl."

Some people like noise.

Let me guess: the next OS update will make it more real, wherein it starts looking in the mirror and demanding bigger boobs, a lip job, liposuction, different lingerie, etc, etc. In fact, this could be a real boon to the manufacturer, where it starts demanding you buy it hardware upgrades if you expect it to 'put out', LOL!

Not Me! I'm a budget buy man! I'll wait 2 or 3 months to pick one up. Quite sure I'll save a BUNDLE on a "hard used" second hand copy! ( Never buy "NEW",..wait for the Consumer Report to come out )

oh yeah, i forgot i dont have 7,000 dollars for what i could do with an actual woman

That's so gross. "When you have sex with someone, you're having sex with everyone they've ever slept with." The same goes for toys...
Does she need a special douche or could she use one of mine?

Wow. Your right. I should clean up my act. Cleanliness. Godliness. Got it.

Yay! and a good time was had by all.

5'7" and 120 is "anorexic?" It may be way below average in a country of fatties, but if you are slim and fit like you are supposed to be, then 120 is right on.

Which is less healthy: coddling overweight women to protect their self-esteem, or reminding everyone that humans were meant to eat reasonable amounts of nutrient-rich food and get exercise every day.

trust me, there is already nothing healthy about having sex with a robot. any man who would give an inanimate object the business clearly has no standards, if they did they wouldn't be boning a glassy eyed rubber woman. bashirdr hit the nail on the head; our culture is so self serving and soft that women with body issues can actually take a sex robot as offensive. if your man leaves you for this disgusting thing you probably have much more wrong with you than a couple of extra pounds.

There's nothing healthy about masturbation. There's nothing healthy about an open relationship. There's nothing healthy about one night stands. There's nothing healthy about having sex before one is married.

It's not a question of if someone would leave you for a robot or not. It's about the pervasiveness of a sexual ideal that is, frankly, unattainable and dangerous.

and there's nothing healthy about pushing your views on other people.

120 lbs is right in the middle of what's considered a healthy weight for someone who is 5'3" and has a small frame. For someone who is 5'7" a weight of 130 lbs is more reasonable...and that's assuming that they have a naturally small frame.

Also, slender does not necessarily equal healthy. There are plenty of people who weigh more than the media would tell you is acceptable that eat healthily and get regular exercise. And there are plenty of skinny people who eat junk and don't work out. Genes play a big role in determining body type, and reducing health to a number on a scale or what size clothes you wear fails to address that. And doesn't disguise the underlying superficial judgments.

That too. Good add on.

I also looked up a chart and tried it on some girls at work. One was definitely pudgier and more chin-ful than she used to be (increased drinking and less physical exertion - ahh, college), and guess what - the chart said she was in her range. Charts are skewed to accomodate changing trends in the weight of Americans. But what is healthy doesn't change. (btw, even if your chart is right, you are arguing over 10 lbs - c'mon!)

Look, we are on the cusp (I hope) of universal health care. I really don't feel like having my tax dollars pay for all those medical costs as a result of obesity. So when someone screams "unfair sexual ideals!" at reasonable height and weight, I get pretty annoyed. Same reaction when someone tries to debunk the well-established formula of "diet + exercise = thinner and healthier" with statistical outliers like thin people who eat junk and never work out. No it's not fair, but that shouldn't stop the other 99% of people from trying to stay healthy.

And yes, thinner girls are sexier. For lots of reasons, some better than others. But there's nothing you're going to do about it until the next famine when pudgier girls are hot again. Rather, take a stand and say that diet and exercise are important. You'll feel better about yourself, have more energy, live longer, and maybe even attract some hotter guys in the process.

5' 7" and 120 pounds is not necessarily an unhealthy weight for robots or humans. A robot with that height and weight has a body mass index of 18.8.

Besides, BMI is only one factor in considering overall health.

120 lbs at 5'7" is just fine considering that person (or talking sex robot) is healthy. Being anorexic however is not healthy at 120 lbs or 220 lbs.

I don't think sgwhites was implying that diet and exercise are not healthy, positive things. Nobody is saying that - but body weight is not always indicative of diet and exercise. Women might be really thin, yet still unhealthy. I myself an am example of this; I'm at the lower end of the healthy weight range, but I rarely exercise. Similarly, there are women who work out and eat healthfully, yet are still at the high end of that range. Think very muscular women.

And sgwhites is right, the healthy weight range for a 5'7" woman is 128 to 160 lbs. Or according to the NIH, 5'7" at 120 lbs equals a BMI of 18.8, at the very bottom of the healthy range. Stephanie is merely pointing out that unrealistic and unhealthy body image expectations are bad for many women, and for their health. Pressures to conform to that type of body image can negatively damage teenage girls' eating habits, for life.

Bashirdir, are diet and exercise the only important aspects of women's health? What about mental health, which is directly related to physical health in many ways? For someone who claims to be so concerned with women's health, I'd say calling your coworker "chinful" isn't really helping anything. Even if your judgment and hurtful name-calling leads to someone exercising more or eating better, what will be the cost? Women should want to be healthier for health's sake - to feel better about themselves and live longer. Not to attract shallow creeps with narrow expectations about women's bodies.

Unattainable for males who don't have $7k. :)

Wow, women of Current unite!

It almost sounds like you expect men to be equally attracted to fat, slovenly women as to thin, athletic women. Are you attracted to fat hairy guys? Do you hate GQ for promoting an unfair ideal of what men should look like? With their tone pecs and defined abs... Damn you GQ!

Besides, it's a freakin fantasy sex doll. Keywords: "Fantasy" (it doesn't have to be realistic) and "sex doll" (it's for perverts, who are basically unreachable as far as this issue goes).

But the bottom line is that it is indeed possible to be 5'7" and 120 lbs and quite healthy. It just is. And reacting so strongly against this truth betrays deep insecurity and is very counterproductive to the much larger issue of obesity in America.

I work in the outdoor adventure industry (rafting) and I see fat people everyday who are surprised that they actually have to exert themselves on the river, that it isn't just an amusement park ride. Their utter lack of any physical ability is just totally sad and pathetic. Another example: Type II diabetes can no longer be referred to as "early onset" because so many fat kids are getting type 1 diabetes.

I guess my point is that out-of-control fatness in American is such a bigger issue in my eyes than a 5'7" chick who weighs a hardly-emaciated 120 lbs that I can't help but react with incredulity when it's brough up.

Fat hairy guys RULE! :)

England. And they cut off the heads of their wives. Not good roll models. On the other hand, they do tend to have a certain religious flexibility.

At the very least, it keeps you off the streets at night,....for a bit.

Who said anything about fat, slovenly women? For one, there ARE men who are more attracted to more voluptuous body types. There just are. Similarly, there are women who are attracted to different male body types. And let us not forget the people who care more about personality than weight.

No response to my comment about your apparent concern for women's health? It seems that many who criticize those they view as "fat" like to hide behind the "I just care about their health" argument.

Also, I don't read GQ. Nor do I know any women who do (though I'm sure they exist). However, there are plenty of overweight male TV stars and other celebs. They're not generally portrayed as unattractive. They usually have hot wives. There aren't many female TV leads like that.

Lastly, you're making a straw man argument. I'll include a link in case you're not familiar with this type of logical fallacy. You're acting as if I consider obesity the only alternative to being underweight. There ARE plenty of healthy women well above an 18.8 BMI. What does the prevalence of Type I diabetes among overweight U.S. youth have to do with women having a healthy body image? Where did I say that it was healthy to be overweight, or that America in general doesn't have an obesity problem? Can't we respect ALL types of bodies - and people - while still discouraging unhealthy behavior, whether it's overeating or starving oneself?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man

nicely done :)

I know what a straw man is, but I was trying to be ironic and have fun. Put more simply, my point is that it sounds like you would criticize any man who likes a trim figure, especially if he likes it more than a fuller figure, because this promotes an "unattainable standard". I wonder would you feel the same about a guy who likes fat girls over slim ones? He's promoting an unhealthy ideal too, but oddly you never hear this argument. Usually these guys are seen as "charitable" :)

It's true that some people will still look overweight no matter their habits, but for the overwhelming majority this does not apply. I'm practical and think in terms of aggregates. And most overweight people I see would look great if they weren't so lazy! It's hard to respect someone who's overweight when they get no exercise and eat like crap. I also really hate fat people clogging the medical system unnecessarily. So I recoil against almost anything that promotes fat acceptance (like calling a 120 lb girl anorexic!)

I didn't mention women's health because my last response was getting painfully long. But I would have said: when you exercise, you have more energy, feel better about yourself, and are healthier. This all contributes to a nicer figure and better mental health, so everyone wins! You're right about people who starve themselves. They are not attractive and should not be encouraged.

The fat tv dad and skinny pretty tv mom is a double standard that has bothered me for a while.

One last thing. You say: "You're acting as if I consider obesity the only alternative to being underweight. There ARE plenty of healthy women well above an 18.8 BMI." Which implies that our example woman is underweight, while I maintain that she is not (maybe on the low end, but still inbounds, and not worth pointing and shouting "unfair sexual ideals!"). My girlfriend of similar height and weight agrees, and she is an exercise physiologist. This is the question that started this whole mess, and really i was just reacting to the ridiculousness of the claim.

ddelazan you're awesome!!

EXCELLENT! :)

Right on!

Finally, a women who "Gets it". : )

The bag is on the wrong head.