Why Some Women Are Worried About Harmony

[burlen]

Harmony is a humanoid with the look and feel of human flesh, and body of some of the world's beauties.

You could have relatively sophisticated conversations with Harmony given its artificial intelligence. Harmony including its variants have been called AI dolls, companion humanoids, sexbots, and sex dolls.

According to its creators, Harmony provides companionship and sex to guys who may otherwise struggle with dating. Harmony provides something extra or a fantasy to male partners who may otherwise not get it from their relationships.

Harmony has attracted opposition and criticisms, notably from female activists and ethicists. "Sex robots are pornified versions of women", said a critic. Another critic observed that Harmony is "feeding into the fantasy women can be sexual objects for men".

Another critic went as far as saying Harmony, which will go on sale at the end of 2017, "is a commercialisation of rape", and amounts to cheating if a male partner ever uses it.

While the concerns of these critics are understandable, they are groundless and hypocritical. These same critics probably use vibrators and didols, and yet never criticised the use of dildos or vibrators by women.

A case could be made if Harmony is sexual objectification of women likewise vibrators and dildos are sexual objectification of penises.

It begs the question what are these women afraid of? Do they have a legitimate concern? Is a male partner who uses Harmony cheating on his girlfriend or spouse?

[Barrabus_the_Free]

At what point do you think women will finally ask themselves "What are we doing wrong, how are we making it so men would rather play video games and smoke weed instead of being around us? How horrible are we that they'd prefer porn and a Fleshlight, or an android, or a fuckdoll, over an actual woman? What have we done, and how do we undo it?"

Rhetorical question... they'll never ask those questions. Not only because they're incapable of self-reflection, but also because as long as they've got the thugs and the very top men, they don't care about the other 90% of men. The. gov will force those losers to pay for her birth control, and the welfare she'll get when she has a thugspawn anyway. Women would rather share one of those top men or thugs among 20 women (or more), rather than having one of the other 90% of men to themselves.

Monogamy will hold only so long as organized religion does. And religion is on its way out.

I love watching Society's death throes.

[TayTay21]

Honestly, some girls should be worried about this stuff, because they're easily replaceable. Just like there are a lot of guys girls don't want, there are a lot of girls with shitty personalities and shittier looks who make robot sex look fun by comparison.

[mjz00]

well holy crap if my partner was using her id be devasted in myself by the fact im so dense i didn't realise our relationship was that disturbed and disconnected. seriously in a serious ltr if a guy is using this for his own pleasure and release im sorry but i couldnt accept that as his partner, at my absolute pushing my mind boundaries and im struggling oooo god the whole threesome fantasy maybe there's something possible in their but still not happy saying that.. ok a male version exists your girl goes off to the bedroom to get satisfied by him you ok with that?

[xxmamichulaxx]

I'd be more disturbed that I'm dating someone who fucks dolls😂

[blondfrog]

Yeah I wouldn't mind if she did. A male sex doll is not cheating.

[samhradh_leannan]

I don't see any reason to be worried. If a guy would rather be with a robot than a real human, then he's not right for me in the first place.

[I-am-a-nobody]

So true! Nothing like a quirky non-programmed flawed real human being. It's funny robots are looking more like people and people are looking more like robots.

[PlacentaSalad]

Women probably fear that they're going to be made obsolete by sexbots but women have already made men obsolete through feminism so what do they truly expect? I never understood the argument either. For example, a lot of feminists are pro-sex work while other feminists reject the idea of women selling themselves for money. They can't come to common grounds.

The way I see it, if a guy can afford to buy a sexbot and objectifies IT (not her), he can probably afford other real women to also objectify them as well. Most women shouldn't worry, as I imagine without even looking at the price, it's probably rather expensive.

[PlacentaSalad]

Women (feminists) also have such a low opinion of women that they're worried women can't compete with sexbots. If a woman doesn't know how to pleasure a man, that's her problem. Men have never cared about dildos and vibrators because we know we're better (and more desired) than the toys. It's always women who are insecure from men using toys for their own sexual pleasure.

[vishna]

I'm not afraid of a sex doll-the type of guy I want won't rely on one, he will be able to interact with fresh and blood women and have a living mate.
Guys with extreme social anxiety or who are super awkward or bad with women (and have the money) will get these, and it won't cause many ripples in the dating pool anyway because the men who are just looking for a masturbation toy will still go after women and the ones who fit into the first category will continue to not do so.

[burlen]

Well-said. Libby Emmons, a tech writer takes a different view. She states "it’s time to admit that the planned obsolescence of the female on Earth is nearly complete". See full article: thefederalist.com/.../

[justkidding93]

even many guys who can interact and date regular living women would be interested in these dolls. It won't change that much in terms of the dating pool when it comes to serious relationships where children is considered, but it will drastically lower womens sexual power, when most men will have access to this, they won't go the extra mile trying to impress regular women just to get some casual sex. women will have to work harder for serious relationships as well because the one thing they have to offer that men really want is now supplied by this substitute and the only thing required is money, no effort in terms of games, flirting going on dates, trying to be funny and having high social status, wasting a lot of time without being sure it will give any results etc. If a woman demands to much even high quality men will eventually drop her and fuck one of these dolls for a while until he moves on to the next woman to date.

[vishna]

@justkidding93 I highly doubt even 10% of high quality men would stop trying with women to be with a doll. @burlen I simply don't agree. I'm not afraid of being replaced by a doll.

[justkidding93]

You forget that what women consider high quality men is already only about 20% of the male population, because of unrealistic standards and expectations. And those men are not going to settle down anytime soon, and when they do it (likely when they are 35-40 at the earliest) will be with supermodels or at least 9s or 10s in their youth (womens prime). And in those cases, women will have to work hard to win over the men because the man will be the one who can afford to be selective. that leaves countless other single women with the option to lower their standards and expectations, or end up lonely. Sure women can also make use of artificial wombs or adopt on their own, so they can still get children, but without child support and alimony women will find it more difficult to be single mothers compared to men who might decide to be single fathers.

[vishna]

@justkidding93 I don't agree with any of that, so, lets agree to disagree.

[justkidding93]

doesn't matter if you disagree though, the things i said are based on fact. and anyone with common sense would be aware of it.

[flypaper]

Well said Visna

[RJGraveyTrain]

I'm sorry, but the day that we start fucking human dolls that can talk back to us, is the day that I truly lose hope for humanity. This is just too sad and too creepy for words.

[DontStepOnTheCat]

i think most men lost hope for humanity the day women got the vote lol.

[TMarissaWL]

I'm kind of worried to be honest...

It just gives guys one more reason to not commit to an actual human... and look at what Tinder has done

[JohnDoe3000]

Tinder hasn't made guys less likely to commit: you're complaining about the few really, really attractive men all women swipe right on. Those guys were never especially willing to settle soon and even if they were only a small minority of women could settle with them anyway, for arithmetical reasons, they're also not the kind of men who would be using sex andriods.

[TMarissaWL]

@JohnDoe3000 I don't know... I've messaged 20+ guys on tinder and I've gotten 3-4 replies at most. And I consider myself pretty attractive It's as if they are just using it as an ego boost and going on with their lives woman-free otherwise

[JohnDoe3000]

Statistics show men send the first message much more often on dating apps and sites. The only men who are going to ignore a nessage from an attractive woman are the ones who are drowning in attention from attractive women already, those are also the men who women are most likely to send a first message to. So that's probably the explanation. Believe me, most men on dating apps/sites rarely receive a first message from an attractive woman.

[JohnDoe3000]

And your other question here on GaG confirms my beliefs...

[justkidding93]

nah, the thing is, women always want to date up, the guy has to be better than herself in terms of the whole package, and that can be in different ways, if a guy is much better looking than her that will be enough in some cases, especially on tinder where casual sex is on most peoples mind. otherwise it can be in terms of money and status. So those guys you swiped right on, most likely has more in one of those categories than you have, which means if they didn't respond to your message they where talking to several other women who are more physically attractive than you, and you can bet these top percentage men fuck a lot of women. they are not going to settle down until they get to a certain age where they want children, likely 35-40 at the earliest with some exceptions.

[BuchitaBuchys]

I don't think it's hypocritical to be against android sex dolls vs fake dicks. Because no one is complaining about "fleshlights" aka the ACTUAL male counterpart of using dildos or vibes.
You need a better argument on that for comparison sake, so far that point is pretty weak as "sex positive" people are for cock rings, fleshlights, etc.

Also, I'd rather the bitter lonely guys bang these dolls as opposed to bothering women.
My only concern is that those socially awkward guys will just become even more socially recluse and thus decrease in empathy not just for women but humans. I'm sure our technology will be sophisticated enough one day, but as ofnow, it's a challenge to make humanoid robots recreate facial expressions tied to human emotions because there's so many emotions and different ways to express with your face. Then there's body language and forget it lol
My point is if the only interaction, and only female or romantic interactions comes from a robot, I'm afraid for their mental health.
cdn.meme.am/.../...rd-good-good-make-them-wait.jpg

[BuchitaBuchys]

Wrong pic I entered lol And if my husband was using that thing, I'd divorce his ass lol No way, I usually have a higher sex drive than my partners and if he wasn't giving me any just to bang a robot, there's going to be problems lol

[TMarissaWL]

To be honest you're the one who sounds like the angry bitter person...

[BuchitaBuchys]

@TMarissaWL I am. No one said I'm not

[TMarissaWL]

Why lol?

[Topkek]

Guys are ONLY with women because of sex, nothing else. The moment sexbots become widely available and affordable is the day women become obsolete. Mark my words.

[BuchitaBuchys]

@Topkek I don't agree with that but we'll have to agree to disagree

[Topkek]

Women don't offer anything valuable other than sex, which is why more and more men will stay away from women altogether once sexbots become affordable.

[BuchitaBuchys]

@Topkek good for you. Now bye

[Topkek]

Sounds like you're mad because, deep down, you know i'm right.

[BuchitaBuchys]

@Topkek yea sure bye

[Topkek]

Typical woman response. Keep being in denial.

[BuchitaBuchys]

@Topkek ok. Yes sure

[chowmain]

Those robots things are way too expensive to actually make difference in the male population as a whole. Maybe some weirdos with a lot of money will start fucking robots but that is no way near the mainstream.
People have sex with animals, this is nowhere near the worst thing.

[LittleSally]

Hahahaha I doubt they are... And if there are guys out there who'd want to be with a sex robot instead of a women - then the women have saved themselves! Hahahaha

by the way.-part of why they're not worried is probably because the robot is a TALKING robot.
cdn.smosh.com/.../laughing-gifs-joint-laughter.gif

[DontStepOnTheCat]

they will just program it to be funny and not have shitty stories.

[Nyx_85]

Most important question: How much?

Honestly if some rich lonely recluse (incel or not) wants to fulfill his needs by artificial mean why not? Not everyone can do the whole 'human connection' thing.

[Tanuron]

I dont really see the problem, but jezuz those who protest against seem way more insane than anyone who would buy this thing. "is a commercialisation of rape", Seriously... thats... just crazy. As well "feeding into the fantasy women can be sexual objects for men"... Come on... I bet rather that these women are worried they will never find a guy to put up with their bullshit if given an option (A better option) . Rather than evolve they rather hold back humanity instead.

Which obviously and naturally, not everyone would wanna get a sex-doll/bot. Those who do, go for it of course, those who dont, just get them. And obviously too, I dont see the problem if girls got a male version of this also.

If anything I would say this would probably help both genders instead. The dating game has been rough for ages now, people are pushy, impatient, reckless etc. If people dont go into the dating game just for primal reasons or urges things could have a much better result both for men and women. And naturally too all the guys that are pushy assholes towards women, if given a simpler option that dosent require you to chase and spend money on women to trick them or fool them into their bed for sex etc or a relationship all together really, this would most likely happen way less. Its honestly just win win for everyone, except for women who are assholes. And same with guy assholes when the male bot version comes.

[sovetskii13]

Watched both videos. Very interesting.
Everything has its ups and downs. And every person feels and thinks differently about each thing. I believe that if these robots will make someone have a happier and more fulfilling life then it's a great invention. If someone does not need or want to interact with robots and prefers to aim for actual humans, that's still great because male and female human beings will still be around. So each person will have two choices and get to decide which is best for them. It's a win-win. So I am all for this technology.

[10dsw]

I'd honestly rather fuck that thing than some of the angry man hating walruses I have gotten into bed with in the past...

My point is further proved by the aggressive comments left by women here!

[Blonde401]

Eh. Some men want that some won't. I'm not worried but then I gave up on dating a while ago and don't really care lol

[independentman]

Why you stop dating you feelt bored?

[Blonde401]

@independentman just fed up with the whole shebang TBH.

[independentman]

And you feel like relationships go in the same way?

[Blonde401]

@independentman yeah pretty much. Nobody wants anything serious these days.

[independentman]

What you consider serious?

[Blonde401]

@independentman a committed relationship that's going somewhere.

[independentman]

Somewhere should be a common goal for both partners

[Blonde401]

@independentman of course. It's usually not though.

[justkidding93]

when you say "going somewhere" are you referring to marriage? or would kids and cohabitation be enough to consider serious for you?

[Blonde401]

@justkidding93 living together would be a start. Having dogs together. I want to adopt someday so I guess being married would aid that process but I would wanna get married so I could adopt, not to spend 40 grand on a party.

[xXiTacoXx]

There's male versions of this type of doll too. All the guys in the comment section are like "women will be obsolete", but there asses are going down with us breh.

[blondfrog]

Nope I know I have no chance with women. I Am done playing your stupid little games. Harmony here I come!

[PlacentaSalad]

Let's be honest, we all know more men will buy sexbots than women will. For men, masturbation is much better with visuals while women are completely fine with their dildo and vibrators whenever they need sexual release. For women, sex is better when they have an emotional connection which they aren't going to get out of a robot unless they're mentally handicapped (like some men might be who buy this sexbot). When sexbots do become a more common thing, I'd bet any money that statistics will show more men buying the product than women. Men have never worried about women using dildos or vibrators because we know that we're better (and more desired) than the toys, but women (feminists) have such a low opinion of women that they're worried they can't compete with a sexbot.

[burlen]

@xXiTacoXx
It's fair to say some women have arrived to that conclusion. Libby Emmons, a female tech writer, observes that "it’s time to admit that the planned obsolescence of the female on Earth is nearly complete". See full article: thefederalist.com/.../

[xXiTacoXx]

Again, men are becoming just as obsolete. There's technology out there being developed where women can make babies WITHOUT men. Neither sex is more hot shit than the other. Don't flatter yourself dude.

[hmmmmidk]

actually taco, that study nitpicked one of the most important factors which is you need a MALE NUCLEUS and you always will. this is how it works. There are two women, and a third doner who is male give them the nucleus and merges it in a lab with 2 eggs. Basically, the kid actually has three parents. that will be some story to tell your child. We will always need a male and female nucleus unless we are cloning.

[justkidding93]

sorry but you're completely wrong. The fact is that women need men for more and different reasons than men need women. Men only need women for sex and reproduction, which these dolls and artificial wombs can provide. Women however want that from men in addition to a provided, someone with status and influence, someone who can protect them (we are not going to allow these robots being able to hurt humans so it cannot protect women) and an emotional connection which a robot won't be able to provide. Men are visual when it comes to sex so we dont need an emotional connection to the robot. And its mainly men who will maintain society in terms of building and advancing it, including this robot industry, so men won't become obsolete ever, but women will technically become replaceable. Women will still be valued for their maternal instincts but you will have to be a lot less demanding and more willing to impress a man if you want one instead of the one sided thing we have today in courtship.

[hmmmmidk]

@justkidding93 do you always sprout pseudo science?

[justkidding93]

@hmmmmidk its not pseudo science, many studies confirm this typical behavior and differences among the genders. and with that it only takes common sense to see how these robots will change the dynamics once they are introduced.

[hmmmmidk]

@justkidding93 ''confirm this typical behavior and differences among the genders'' gender studies isn't a real science, and it never will be and no, testing 50 males is not proof of ''differences among genders'' there are also studies that contradict your visual claims, where women have proved to have been more visual. when there are studies concluding different results you get the obvious fact which is, men and women both work differently compared to their own genders. being a women does not mean you are less likely to being visual, and emotional attachment is almost in every species capable of consciousness. if you dont have this, then there is something wrong with you.

[justkidding93]

@hmmmmidk sry but no, you're still wrong. And i wasn't even referring to the gender studies course that people can take in school. I was referring to countless studies made on partner selection patterns observed within our population, and how it differs between the genders. Many other studies about ancient humans and how we evolved and sexual selection makes sense in this context if we assume that humans selected partners with the goal of ensuring survival as highest priority. Women being much weaker than men, and thus being relient on us for protection, value strong and capable men with leadership qualities, his status is also important because it makes it easier for women to trust that a man is a good partner and won't leave her or abuse her etc. Being goodlooking wasn't as important back in those days for a male, while women have always been valued for looks because they are an indicator about her fertility.

[hmmmmidk]

@justkidding93 ''sry but no, you're still wrong'' says the person who has no evidence to his claim. your flimsy studies won't help you. Gender studies will never be a real science. ''I was referring to countless studies made on partner selection patterns observed within our population, and how it differs between the genders.'' that is what gender studies is -_-. ITS THE STUDIES OF GENDERS> literally self explanatory. what do you think people do when they are done learning this in school? they go out and make flimsy studies. ''Many other studies about ancient humans '' and what of the romans? women were depicted as men are today in western culture. Men were the ones who were put on a pedestal in terms of sexuality. And today? go to places like spain and modern day rome, men are STILL taking an unorthodox role in terms of society. Just saying its because ''men'' is an illogical conclusion, and you clearly can't problem solve all the variables. Its not a black and white issue.

[justkidding93]

@hmmmmidk and you are just a guy in denial. I have plenty of evidence but im not going to bother gathering them all and put them here in this limited space for you, you can google stuff like dating patterns, 80/20 rule, mating strategy, statistics on age of people who marry etc, but even with common sense you should notice a pattern just from reading news and watching TV that its almost always old/ugly guys with money dating hot young women, and never the opposite. Men dont really care about money or status in the women they date, we just want them to look good and be pleasant to be around, while women want it all in a guy but prioritizes money and status above looks when it is time to find a partner to settle down with.

[justkidding93]

@hmmmmidk and while i haven't taken a gender studies course, i know from talking to many people that the course is not about the things i have spoken about, in the feminist institution that is modern school they avoid talking about many of the factual biological differences between the genders because it would show that men are the superior gender, so instead they talk about "social constructs" in regards to gender and gender roles and the history of women and men and their relations in society. Its very little empirical data and it doesn't focus on the mental differences between women and men, the only biological difference they speak about is the pregnancy and all the things related to it.

[justkidding93]

@hmmmmidk when i said ancient humans i meant primitive stone age cavemen etc. because that is where our instincts are most easily observed because we didn't have many social structures back then. Roman society might have valued male beauty but their women didn't really have much to say when it came to picking men. The fathers consent was always essential. And marriage was also highly religious back then and women where dependent on men and their resources to survive, so im sure they werent as concerned with a mans looks compared to how men valued the looks of the women.

[hmmmmidk]

@justkidding93'' and you are just a guy in denial. '' says the person who has yet to provide a valuable argument by saying ''there have been studies that show men are visual'' or using behavior as an argument when the cause for that being environment has MUCH more backing than your fake science. you are just self projecting your issues here really. Maybe you need sex to feel some attachment and dont require emotional attachment but dont try and mask your problems with science, its pathetic. just get your stupid sex doll, stay away from women because you dont need emotional attachment and speak for yourself.

[hmmmmidk]

@justkidding93 ''i know from talking to many people that the course is not about the things i have spoken about'' dude GENDER STUDIES is the STUDY of genders. there is a branch of different topics that fall under that umbrella including that stupid feminist crap along with your stupid ''men are more visual'' crap. You just dont want to be branched in with feminists because it makes you look bad but you are on the other side of the spectrum of pseudo science. ''biological differences'' biological differences are real, and guess what? its not just men and women. its also depending on the individual, family tree and region those people are from. here is a fun fact for you. Did you know, that some group of women coming from sub sarhan africa actually have higher testosterone levels than a lot of men? did you know, that some men have a lot of estrogen compared to other males?

[hmmmmidk]

this is my point. There are varieties between all people from all places all over the world. Humans are an extremely diverse set of beings, we have brains unique to us, and the way we express hormones are unique. The only major similarities fall under family trees. I''ll bet you this. I have more in common with my sister in terms of functionality in the brain or biologically than you do. We are not closer for the sole reason of being men.

[justkidding93]

@hmmmmidk there is nothing fake abut my science, everything i said is based on fact, you are just to dumb to understand it. And i dont need a sexrobot, i get plenty casual sex from women, but i also dont need emotional attachment to them or from them, i dont care about them. But a sexrobot will make all these beta orbiter white knight men think about getting one of those bots instead of wasting time trying to chase a woman who does not want them anyway but will try to use them for money and attention.

[justkidding93]

@hmmmmidk sorry but the gender studies class in school try to avoid biological differences and mainly focus on social structures, the things i have spoken about would be to controversial and insensitive so they are avoided to not trigger every woman in class. And the biological differences among individuals of the same gender is not as big as the biological differences between individuals of different genders, there are no women from sub saharan africa who has as high testosterone as men do, black people do not even have more testosterone than other races to begin with. Men in general are far more visual because we have adapted that way, its instinctual because our biological goal in life is to find a suitable partner to give birth to our children, so the only indicator of getting healthy children is the looks of the woman, it signals her fertility. Men can be very fertile even if they have a ugly face, and they can also provide a good environment for the kids with money even if old

[justkidding93]

@hmmmmidk and thats actually false, men of different races have more similarities in terms of brain structure than women and men of the same race do.

[Chico_brah]

Why does this have so many blue upvotes? Ahahaha. Jesus.

[li0ness]

OMG thats so sad...

[burlen]

Sad indeed. Libby Emmons, a female tech writer states "it’s time to admit that the planned obsolescence of the female on Earth is nearly complete". See full article: thefederalist.com/.../

[hmmmmidk]

why is it sad lol

[lovelyhoneybones]

At first I honestly thought that was a chick with busted makeup. I looked it three times before realizing it was a machine.

Trust me, females are not worried about these bots because women don't chase after pathetic excuses for men.

[blondfrog]

Is that why so many are outraged and complaining? Lol this will help give women a wake up call and reality check to change their ways.

[pavlove]

lol you don't look like you're exactly in a position to be choosy

[TMarissaWL]

@pavlove Haha not to be a bitch to this girl but that's actually true

[justkidding93]

of course women dont chase after robotmen, because the things women need from men cannot be provided by a robot, unless we managed to make robots that where pretty much identical to real men in terms of intelligence and capability (which even if we could we are probably not going to make that for ethical reasons). Men however only need/want sex from women as well as children. And a sexdoll and artifical womb can provide that.

[lovelyhoneybones]

@pavlove What is that supposed to mean, I'm not in a position to be choosy?

[lovelyhoneybones]

@blondfrog The only people who are outraged and complaining are you men. Why would we take a robot to be our competition? Nobody is worried about a robot. I don't date losers who need one anyway.

[lovelyhoneybones]

@TMarissaWL What the fuck are you even talking about?

[blondfrog]

Panick is a sign of desperation. Which is exactly what these women protesting are showing. I'd say you better get used to the sex robots as competition.

[lovelyhoneybones]

@blondfrog Again, I don't date men who are so pathetic that they have to fuck a robot. I'm not worried. Somebody expressing their opinions isn't a sign of panic. Those women who are protesting... I have no comment for that because I don't believe anybody is protesting. Unless they're feminists, then I'd believe that.

[blondfrog]

Didn't you watch the 2nd video the asker provided?

[lovelyhoneybones]

@blondfrog I didn't watch the first.

[pavlove]

it means you're ugly so you're not in a position to be selective about the men you "chase" and thats what @TMarissaWL was agreeing with

[blondfrog]

Maybe you should then.

[blondfrog]

@pavlove wow man no need to be a dick to her. Not everybody is fortunate enough to be good looking there is no need to put people down like that. And she can still have standards, standards are not by how you look rather its just s personal thing that people have.

[pavlove]

@blondfrog didn't choose the douchebag life douchebag life chose me plus she deserved by the way she was disrespecting others

[blondfrog]

@pavlove Yeah I guess you kinda of have a point.

[lovelyhoneybones]

@pavlove Actually, I'm not ugly and I am in every position to be picky. If I choose not to date pathetic guys who feel they have to fuck robots, I have every right to do so.

[lovelyhoneybones]

@blondfrog I don't care what he has to say. I'm an attractive person and I don't need some ass hole from the internet to tell me otherwise.

[lovelyhoneybones]

@pavlove I told myself that I was attractive. Unlike you or that other loser who wants to try to bring people down, I don't need other peoples opinions to validate myself. Just because you may not find me attractive, doesn't mean that I'm not. I know I'm attractive and whatever you say doesn't matter to myself confidence. You want to know who isn't an attractive person? Someone who tries to bring others down due to their short comings and lack of self esteem. You're nasty, you're arrogant. You're ignorant. Just because someone disagrees with you doesn't mean they're upset or that they're a bad person. I've seen you be little people just because they disagree with your opinion. Who made you correct on every subject? You're nobody just like every single person on this site. If you don't like the way I look, you don't have to look at me. Nobody's forcing you to.

[lovelyhoneybones]

@TMarissaWL Next time you want to try to call someone ugly, actually have your face set as your profile picture.

[pavlove]

lol you're trying so hard at this point, it's pretty damn embarrassing. By the definition of attractive, you are not attractive. But if you want to come up with another definition of attractive then by all means use it on yourself.

[TMarissaWL]

@pavlove Haha don't bother with this chick @lovelyhoneybones Here's the thing, what you lack in physical appearance you can make up with personality. I agree with @pavlove though, calling out men who prefer to sleep with a robot isn't going to help your chances with whatever options you have. I'm sorry sweetie

[lovelyhoneybones]

@TMarissaWL It doesn't have to help my chances, I have many.

[lovelyhoneybones]

@pavlove You know what we call people like you? A waste of time.

[lovelyhoneybones]

Again, I don't need you to call me attractive to feel validated. I know what I am.

[TMarissaWL]

Okay! Good luck to you!

[lovelyhoneybones]

@TMarissaWL No, good luck to you. I hope you find a decent personality somewhere.

[IsabelGuimaraes]

i'd like to know the women who are worried about it lol

[flypaper]

lol, agreed!

[IsabelGuimaraes]

@flypaper lol poor women (if they exist)... i guess they have a sad, sad life

[blondfrog]

Only the stupid ugly feminists and the self entitled women who believe a man should pay for everything of hers.

[Phoenix98]

Well she's freaky at first glance I thought she was an actual human.

Creeepy I'll pass.