There are many, many different ways to define feminism and even the many waves of feminism. But, until today, I had never heard this definition of third-wave feminism: sex with robots. Today, in Violet Blue's sex column for the San Francisco Chronicle, a woman who goes by the name Binx explains why she took a sex machine for a public spin at a sex and technology conference last year:
Feminism, baby ... F-ing machines are the pornographic equivalent of third-wave feminism. It does not show men being violent towards women because it does not include men, only women and their sweet, sweet machines.
So, look, I'm all for women having sex with robots if it turns them on, but I'm confused. Is pornographic robot sex feminist because it eliminates the potential for violence against women -- and does it, really? Is it feminist because a woman can't be exploited by a robot sex partner -- even if she's performing for a human audience? Is it feminist because it allows a woman to get pleasured without pleasuring a man, which somehow maintains the political purity of her pleasure? Is it that asking for and demanding the sexual -- and sexy -- respect that one wants in the bedroom isn't as feminist as simply replacing men with literal sex machines? Is it feminist because we all know feminists not-so-secretly hope to annihilate the entire male species and replace them with robots that can simulate emotions -- including a belief in equality -- and never ever forget to put the toilet seat down?
Just wonderin' ...