I’m referring to this link. Having sex with robot hookers is soon going to be a reality; but dont they already get sex toys that can be used for sexual gratification and isn’t that a cheating? Than what about masturbation? While masturbating can you guaranty that you are thinking about your partner and not your porn idol?
I think more than technical it is an emotional, psychological issue. But I think it is a technical issue too; technical in the sense let us say socio-technical. Why doesn’t one partner agree to the other partner having sex with someone else (I’m talking about conventional couples and not "liberated" and "ultramodern" couples)? It has a lot to do with having a sense of security. Sex is an important aspect in a relationship and lots of our decisions are based on sex. If you begin to have sex outside of the ongoing relationship on a routine basis then a big binding force is missing. This binding force often keeps a relationship intact and if it is missing it is very difficult to maintain the bond although I’m not saying that it is not at all possible.
Consciously or unconsciously we also attach sex with giving birth to children and we don’t want to bring up children with just about anybody; we choose the partners very carefully or with lots of social deliberations (as is the case in India where marriages are often arranged by parents and relatives). So since we are possessive about our children we also become possessive about the source, that is, the other partner. We want to preserve that sources exclusively for ourselves. For instance you wont like your husband’s kids popping up everywhere in the neighborhood and when your wife becomes pregnant you want to be sure that it is your child and not someone else’s. This is also because so much effort goes into bringing up a child so you would only like to make so much effort for your own child.
But then a robot hooker will not be producing your kids so that problem gets sorted out on its own.
No matter how open our society becomes sex is still an intimate activity shared by two individuals in the most private corner of their existence. It is a special activity with your most special person. Your partner feels complete when he or she is able to satiate your sexual needs. When you seek sexual gratification from other sources, for instance, a robot hooker, then it means your partner is not able to provide you that gratification, and this further means a distance developing between you and your partner. The issue is not about having sex with some other person or a robot, the issue is that at that moment you are not having sex with your partner. Your partner has an unwritten right on your every orgasm. The writer in the above link says it’s okay to have sex with a robot hooker because there is no emotional attachment.
Do you agree to that? Share your thoughts in the comment section.
This thought came to me when I was listening to Darde dil, darde jigar, dil mai jagaya aapne a Rafi song from the film Karz that became a hit in the mid-70s. This song explains why Mohammad Rafis career had begun to recede while Kishore Kumar was still doing great. Rafi not at all sounds good in this song. Listen to the song:
He sounds bland especially in the lower notes (not to sound boastful I can sing this song better). Compared to that listen to this Kishore Kumar song from Mr. India:
Kishore Kumar must have sung Kaate nahi kat-te almost after 15 years Rafi sang Darde dil and still, he sounds sizzling, just like Roop tera mastana from Aradhna. Kishore Kumar knew how to adapt and still sound classy. Although Im a die-hard Rafi fan I think after a certain period his singing lost relevance and he was still trapped in the golden age of Man tarpat hari darshan ko aaj and Kuhu-kuhu bole koyaliya renditions that only Rafi could deliver, of course. Savor both the songs:
Rafi was no doubt the playback god of Indian cinema but his singing style couldnt adapt to the changing times. Kishore Kumar did this with great ease and was a successful singer till his last breath. He even sang exceptionally well for those cheap Jitendra flicks produced by south Indian producers.
This is exactly what Amitabh Bachchan does when all his contemporaries have vanished into the oblivion. In the 70s and 80s he hit the right cord and became a mega star. Even these days his roles are as contemporary as it gets. So whats common between Kishore Kumar and Amitabh Bachchan? The ability to adapt.
Adaptability can help you in any sphere of life. When you can easily and quickly adapt, you can survive under any condition.
In my previous post I talked about the food becoming scarce and dear. The thought of food became a catalyst to another thought that has been coming to my mind for a few weeks, and that thought is, why don’t we feed those who don’t have food? This is no social work, this is nation-building.
I’ll talk from India’s point of view; we desperately need a thinking revamp when it comes to feeding ourselves and the others. Yesterday Alka and I were sitting in the balcony observing kids going to their schools, followed by mothers-teachers (in our building most of the mothers are teachers because this building was constructed by the society of teachers from a particular school). The children seemed to have no spirits. It was morning, and ideally they should have been full of vigor and enthusiasm; where was that charm of greeting a new day? We attributed this to food.
In India we stuff our bellies (those who can) but never give a second thought to the kind of food we are eating. We equate eating lots of food with nourishment. This misconception must be changed. We don’t need to eat lots of food, we need to eat good food.
The other thing is, we must routinely feed poor families that cannot afford food. As I mentioned above, this is not social work. There are lots of disparities in our country and that is why we are not progressing the way we should have. The poor family you try to feed might turn out to be a pack of assholes but that’s not the point. Feeding poor families will achieve two things that our country desperately needs:
- To a tiny extent it will bridge the gap between the haves and the havenots. It will sensitize us towards each other. There is lots of animosity: the rich dislike the poor and the poor dislike the rich and I see this everywhere. Someday this feeling is going to explode and nobody will be able to control the ensuing catastrophe. Knowing the ratio of haves and havenots you can easily make out who will suffer the most at the hands of whom. Feeding will at least initiate a contact.
- It will improve the health of people around you. With better health they will be able to work more. Take for instance your sweeper, or your maid. If you feed them, even twice a week, it will significantly improve their health and they will do their jobs better. Gradually, may be in the next 5 to 10 years, a small portion (because we cannot reach every nook and corner of the country) of the population will be healthier, happier.
From unhealthy food, and the lack of basic food, stem most of the problems India faces today. I think good food gives rise to good thoughts and good principals.
Sharing food is not as difficult as it seems. Small lifestyle changes can enable you to give food to the poor. If you eat 3 pizzas every month, eat two. If you go to a restaurant 5 times in a month, go 3 times. Don’t throw away the food after parties and marriages: let the poor have it. Be innovative and reduce your electricity bill and use that money for the extra food you need to purchase. Similarly, there are many cost-cuttings you can carry out to arrange enough money to feed a poor family.
I don’t trust people easily, and I don’t take it in the negative sense. My life has taught me pretty good lessons on trust. But it doesn’t mean that I don’t entertain any sort of trust. For instance, these days sometimes I outsource content writing work and then I have to trust that the writers will finish the job in a decent manner, on time. Then, I trust that my clients will pay me for the content I deliver them. But this is as far as it goes: I don’t trust in the goodness of people just like that. This lady did and paid with her life. I trust very close family members though.