"You are one sick fuck." ... thank you.
Most ppl think monogamous couplings in the form of marriages are normative to humans. It used to be, in bygone days, that to express a desire for anything but that was tantamount to declaring oneself so morally depraved as to want institutionalizing. Not anymore. Most ppl in the US are unmarried (most adults) and seem to prefer that, largely. They also like to bang multiple people. Hookers LOVE fucking lots of people, men and other women (well, most like other girls, anyway). Hobbyists love banging as many hookers as we can. And while we may be considered by some to be morally depraved, if we simply didn't charge/pay for it, they would suspend that judgment and simply say, we are doing our own thing. Funny, the moment economics is involved, they judge it badly.
Given how marriage is largely an economic deal, the great ideal of monogamy quickly looks more like a whore/john rel'p with a whore keeping a relatively exclusive client list: her husband and a few guys she bangs throughout her career as a kept woman/hooker. While divorce was fault and the man typically kept the money he earned, women rarely initiated a divorce. When no-fault and man-raiding courts asserted themselves, marriage became at best a tenuous proposition with US women now divorcing men 70% of the time. No surprise there.
Marriage for women is revealed, historically, to be principally an economic convenience. And all those years, ppl thought it was all about true love and a beautiful idealized monogamous pairing. No. It was about money. Now that women need not depend on men for money, marriage is exceptional, w/ marriages where wifey stays married still more exceptional. I guess True Love does happen sometimes but in those cases I am still pretty sure the hubby is paying for most stuff and the mrs. is still probably banging the mailman. And so it goes. Hookers are at least honest with others in that they know it's about money, and if she can get off too, all the better. They are honest in a limited way though in that it is with their johns re what they are; with anyone of any importance to them (of which johns are not), they however remain undaunted, expert liars. "I work at a bank," etc. LOL. They're pretty good at lying to johns, too: "That was the first time I was with another girl..." LOL.
My point here, roundabout as it is, is that some things in one age, one not long ago in fact, could seem utterly preposterous for even a long time, but check back not too much later and you will find that things and standards have changed. Men, reportedly, have set foot on the moon. That was about 55 years ago, right, maybe just 50? 150 years ago, it was considered a ludicrous idea, well beyond human capacity to achieve. Yet 100 years later, we did it (supposedly).
The great driver of history is technology. Technological advancements and superiority have been determining the course of history and the outcomes of nations' fates since Man emerged. Technologies of warfare, manufacturing, and living... the superior technologies win out. We develop them relentlessly. We are only getting more aggressive at it, too.
Like it or not, lifelike sex-bots, becoming more and more realistic with each year, will eventually be indistinguishable from people. In 150 years I predict we will have Cylon skin job-type androids (made still of non-organic materials, mostly) walking around. We will be fucking them senseless. Women prob will be by then, too. In another 100 years, the synth 'droids will be replaced by 'droids that are 70% made of biological material. That WILL be a real vagina you are inside. It just won't bleed one week out of every month.
In the somewhat distant future, Man will eventually deprecate himself with his own inventions and indeed, humanity will replace itself via lack of offspring with humanoid androids. Or possibly non-humanoid androids, robots better designed for "life" on Earth than humans are.
"Man will never fly," they said, for countless millennia. But then he did. Soon after he invented a doomsday machine: nuclear weapons. And on he goes, every year, inventing and advancing faster and faster, inventing things that invent things themselves... in 300 years, androids hot enough to fuck all day and make you think they are in fact real women will look to those people like what buggy whips look like to us now. But unlike buggy whips, hot androids who fuck all day better than Jenna Jameson will still be useful.
I was going to make fun of you for this nonsense, but I gotta take into account the kind of girl Junior is likely to have access to: a fat, lazy, and loose princess. The post-millenial girl may not scruple at swallowing or anal, but (like a doll), she'll probably just lie there. Unlike a doll, she'll consider it her right to fuck anyone she pleases and Junior better not mind sharing her with his friends, his enemies, or his dad. The doll may well be better at listening and speaking coherently, and it won't whine if the ice cream runs out; neither will help with the chores but the doll at least won't leave dirty dishes under the bed. Being just as useless a douchebag as his female cohorts, Junior will naturally expect a compliant movie star without effort on his part.
So no I don't think androids (i.e. gynoids) will compete with real women in the foreseeable future, but real women will be scarce and not interested in ordinary punks.
P.S. You are one sick fuck.
Originally Posted by Buying a *Way to Heaven
