A.I.

I had no idea the technology was so sophisticated. I think the photo of that sexbot says it all. Blond hair, somewhat East-Asian shaped eyes that are blue, not dark brown, skin of a northern European, face shaped like a Chinese female. A completely fake product. The piece says that China is the world's largest market for such things. There are, no doubt, a number of reasons for this. But I believe the biggest reason is that due to the CCP's "One Child" policy that lasted for decades. There are something like 20 million more young males in China than females. To solve this biological problem, China would have to institute reverse polygamy.

China Doll

Of course, there's much more to say about AI sex dolls. And what I have been saying for a while now is that they are going act as a severe competitive force to feminism. And, as such, it won't be long until (perhaps just in the West) these AI bots are highly regulated, if not banned outright. Women are not going to like this competition...especially when these bots will almost certain mimic more traditional, man-pleasing women.

The thing is, young men are already finding out that young feminist women are toxic. Few write about this, of course, because it's another "third rail" of politics. But the truth is that it is becoming readily apparent that there is very little upside to having a relationship with a woman. The decks is stacked against men.

So, with porn and other distractions available, why bother? Any many aren't. And with the advent of more and more lifelike bot companions, real women will be forced to compete with them. These bots will be cheerful. They will welcome you home after a long day at work instead of loading you up with complaints. They will get you a beer. And they will just treat you with respect.

Yes, there is the sex aspect. But the secret is that men desire companionship as well, which is one of the aspects that fuels prostitution. It's not all about sex, although men will, of course, tend to channel all their emotional needs through sex. That's who we are.

So...look for leagues of angry women to pop up looking to spread another Eighteenth Amendment. They will want to do away with these bots. One might be right in thinking of these bots (when the price comes down) as being a middle-class toy. But rich men have even more to lose from feminism. And they will be the ones who can first afford the uber-life-like bots. Either that or take a chance that some woman will walk away with half of their fortunes.

And forget the argument that there's no way men can relate to an AI bot. Men (and women) are doing that now to text-only AI bots. Put a realistic body on it that can talk and you're talking about girlfriends becoming a commodity that, yes, you can actually turn off when you want to. And be turned on just as easily without having to leave your masculinity at the door.

And, from one perspective, given that feminist women (or just liberal women) are already programmed bots to some extent, we need to take in this wider perspective. If the market is left to decide, then angry, man-hating women who have all the law on their side will be on the outs. What implications this has for society, I don't know. But it's interesting that many of the weird science fiction stories written decades ago now don't look so fanciful.

Only a dog can arguably do that. But people seem to have the same relationship with their politicians in terms of the artificial being mistaken for the real. Or commercials. Or this. Or that. As we've both noted, we live in a commercial culture were we are inundated by lies and half-truths 24/7.

Can that make people nuts? Maybe. But we know for sure it can make them gullible.

There are some good thoughts here: Why Does AI Give Bad Dating Advice?

But it's still amusing to me that this fellow can't bring himself to admit that all this "safetyism" has a female root. But still he makes some good observations:



Having never used a dating app, I have to guess as what seems reasonable. And the following does:



That's a running theme of this article. AI is programmed to be so milquetoast, non-threatening, and (and least from a Progressive point of view) non-controversial that it dispenses an anodyne mix of vapid nothings.



The fellow is afraid (or unable) to understand that "safetyism" derives from what women want. He all but says this. The entire article is sort of saying, "If you strip the reality of masculinity out of dating apps, you're left with a useless mush." But he can't say it. Most men cannot criticize Mommy Dearest Feminism because it's so ingrained in them not to think for themselves.



I think at one point he does note the lack of fathers in many homes...or should. I would also add "the lack of fathers willing to come out from under the estrogen tent." If you can't connect the dots between women and the KFF lockdowns, then you're just not yet ready to counter the Karens out there.



These are astonishing statistics, if true. But it all goes toward the central effect of feminism: The social world out there is hostile to normal men. Has it turned women into prickly princesses who are difficult to approach? Almost for sure.



This fellow does describe well the boilerplate garbage you get form AI should you dare to suggest there are differences between men and women. But, he had told us earlier, this isn't about "woke." Okay, if you say so.

The following is an interesting point:



It's funny, because I'm sure you've all heard of the "Turing Test." It's a test to see if an AI agent can be distinguished from a real person answering questions, having a conversation, etc. It's all done without seeing who, or what, you may be talking to. But just ask in such a test "How are women different from men?" and you will quickly out the real from the artificial...although many men today act and speak just like a neutered AI agent so I suppose there would still be room for doubt if it was "live or Memorex."



Oh, it's completely Progressive, woke, and feminist.



Women can drive us to do all sorts of goofy things. But, buddy, if you're going to an AI chat agent for this kind of advice, maybe your problem lies elsewhere. Just sayin'.

Then he goes on to talking about creating his own chat agent to better handle the realities of dating between men and women. I'm dubious that AI agents will ever be anything but useless for real human issues. But he has outlined a credible scenario:



If real men and real women – not hysterical females and perverts – were the backbone of the logic in now AI agents operated, they cold be of use. But because hysterical females and perverts are going to be catered to (in the foreseeable future) by corporate culture, reality will not soon be a part of an AI dating app. But good luck on your efforts to create one...I guess.



Good point about the restrictive influence of the Bay Area nuts. But maybe the problem is inherent to AI. It's not human. And, especially so, to make it appear to be human, it is very carefully nudged, programmed, and filtered in myriad ways by humans (and usually by some select Bay Area group of nuts). And so AI is probably always going to reflect the views of those who do the programming and filtering. But, who knows? Forever is indeed a long time.

I would imagine that most people, including myself, are comfortable with looking things up on the internet if they need some information. That's my first go-to source, and I would imagine that's fairly common.

One reason I started the AI thread is that I wanted to know more about it and to keep my eye on it. It was quickly apparent that AI might give you the capitol of Spain fairly reliably but that any social or political question was out of its realm. All you would get would be pretty much what this guy described in his article: bland nothings.

I don't consider myself particularly intelligent. But perhaps part of what we consider "intelligent" is not having entrenched blind spots. I'd love it if AI could solve all my problems via a little Q&A. But any halfway objective person could quickly see that AI was useless for anything but basically Progressive flattery and/or propaganda.

So maybe that's it. There are people (we've noted this before) who swim in the fishbowl and don't know they are in water. This is very common. They don't seem to get that they are trying to pound a nail with a screwdriver. They don't see the inherent biases, anti-male or otherwise, in the ocean of Progressive baloney.

I might go to a brother or trusted friend for dating advice, man or woman. But only someone who is socially and Progressively naive would ever think AI could give them good advice. But maybe what they're really looking for is what this guy mentions in his article: "ChatGPT is a shameless sycophant that will almost always find a way to praise you."

What I'm saying is that people are used to looking up information on the internet. Thus it's no stretch of the imagination that they would use online tools – including AI – to get information about dating.

And although there are apps you can download for ChatGPT for your computer or phone, ultimately you are required to have an internet connection to use them, so they are definitely "online" resources. AI is quite unlike a dictionary or encyclopedia that never crash and still have their uses, although I find looking things up online is faster. But Chat GPT can't tell you who is buried in Grant's tomb unless you have a connection to their servers.



Imagine real-life scenarios, especially for men. Perhaps even your best buddies won't tell you that you need to take a bath, brush your teeth, buy some better clothes, lose some weight, etc. in order to improve your chances with the ladies. But it's almost certain that (right now) any AI bot isn't going to tell you any of those things. It's flattery, flattery, flattery. Therefore they are useless.

Now, why someone would want approval from a machine, we get into distinctly female territories, I think. And because most men have become over-feminized (there is a bit of womanly influence that is needed and appropriate), they join that crowd where validation, feelings, and making facts fungible to suit these requirements, is the Zeitgeist.

I don't know how many times people tell me "stay safe" about this or that. My friend, Pat, is the only one of the correct mindset. He instead tells people to "stay free." The latter is masculine. The former is feminine. There is a place for both. But my thesis is that the female mindset has totally overtaken society...to society's ultimate ruin.

And perhaps one reason anyone would consult AI for dating help is that most guys are clueless. There's just no one reliable to ask. Could it be true, for instance, that "A study of risk-aversion and dating shows that 45 percent of men 18 to 25 have never even approached a woman in person."

And yet my brother and I were talking about this phenomenon over ten years ago, or at least an aspect related to it. He noted (through the experiences of his children) that most girls were so hyper-sensitive that any just normal assertive male behavior was labeled as "creepy". That is the reality that is out there. Bitchy females seems to be the norm. And thus when we hear that many males (one might hardly call them "men") are alone, not dating, and perhaps have never even approached a woman in person, there are distinct reasons for that. And an anodyne AI dating chatbot isn't not going to be of much help and will likely, through it's bad advice and false aura of authority, do harm.

He just stated one of the secret ingredients that gives these self-righteous kooks the belief that it's everyone else who's brainwashed. "I went to a demonstration." It's their version of walking the Stations of the Cross. It sanctifies their Leftist dogma.

Before this evil jackass criticizes his son for supposed wrongs, how about taking on his own party and movement who support Hamas, killing the unborn, crime, dependency, racism, and the chemical or surgical mangling of children. Having a son who thinks "patriotism, manhood, intelligence, independence and honesty" are good doesn't seem so bad by comparison.

And to write an article excoriating his own son? This shows you the heart of darkness of these bastards. He's using his own son to reinforce his politics and his own sense of victimhood. I would love to be able to sit down with his son and try to help him. I mean, he got fucked up big-time by his evil father. Taking a kid to a left-wing protest in a baby carriage? How fucked up is that? Let him be a kid before you turn him into an advocate for Mao.

This guy is pure evil. A true heart of darkness masquerading in all this hand-wringing false compassion. I truly despise him. Whatever one thinks of Trump, to throw your own son under the bus in a public article like this shows you what scum that this guy is. I pray for his son to find direction, honor, peace, and clarity. Good god, to have been mind-fucked by this idiot Communist. It can't be easy for such kids.