Skip Navigation

InitialsDiceBearhttps://github.com/dicebear/dicebearhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/„Initials” (https://github.com/dicebear/dicebear) by „DiceBear”, licensed under „CC0 1.0” (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/)SW
Posts
38
Comments
1,827
Joined
2 yr. ago

  • Sexy woman coded, perhaps, unless you’re saying that women who don’t have prominent breasts and what appears to be makeup aren’t real women

    Why are you conflating “real”ness with sexiness?

    But this is a drawing of a machine. Machines don’t have gender, biological or social or otherwise.

    This is actually incorrect. Gender is a social construct. Anything can have gender if (a) society agrees upon it.

    Whoever created this image thought, consciously or not, “I’m going to make a picture of a robot, and I’m gonna make it a sexy woman robot.” Not just a “woman-coded” humanoid robot […]

    You have not proved this. Also, which is it? Machines don’t have gender, or this machine is a sexy woman robot? Your analysis and discourse are inconsistent and lacking.

    because that can be done without playing heavy on the sexiness, right?

    Again, the image is not particularly sexy. Just having large breast-analogs in the picture doesn’t make it sexy, unless you’re a stereotypical teenage boy.

    So why? Why make a sexy woman robot? I ask again: Am I supposed to want to fuck it?

    You have not earned the right to ask these questions.

  • The art is the way that it is because the artist made it that way. The image is not particularly sexual, and robot art can be woman-coded. If you want to project some misogynist angle onto some stock art that has no bearing on the article, that's fine, I guess.

  • I remember seeing a particularly stupid libertarian guy argue against public transport by saying that car owners would lose out because the value of having a car would decrease. I think it’s a crab in a bucket type mentality. Everyone should suffer from cars. I blame Big Car for this.