In the fall issue of futurist magazine H+, Kristi Scott tells us (on page 14) that "Andy" the sex droid (geddit?) "can hold multiple sex positions, be ordered to simulate breathing, perform oral sex acts, have a pulse, be equipped with a g-spot that responds to orgasm, and much, much more." Another First Androids doll, says Scott, "has the most realistic fake areolas I have ever seen, and I've seen my fair share." Hooray for technology!

Back when Real Dolls were the freakishly realistic sex toy of the moment, I heard a lot of people make the argument that there's no harm in helping lonely, awkward men have someone — something — to curl up with at night. (And fuck. And sponge-bathe. And repair, when their nipple paint wears off.) Megan Laslocky, writing in Salon, said, "[Real Dolls founder Matt] McMullen believes that, for the most part, his dolls are therapeutic transitional objects for men" — just something to get them through a dry spell, before they resume human dating. Laslocky herself, having immersed herself in the world of sex doll enthusiasts, wasn't too concerned, either: "By the end of my reporting... I just saw the men as pathetic and the conversations so packed with false bravado as to be ludicrous." But then she explains how that false bravado is expressed. In an online chatroom, she found "the men were bragging about their success getting 'pussy' using strategies from the likes of Seduce and Conquer and Speed Seduction" — i.e., the patently misogynistic training in manipulation and aggression marketed to lovelorn "nice guys" like George Sodini.

Are we really supposed to believe the overlap in the markets is a coincidence? The whole pickup artist industry is based on the premise that women's bodies are the "nice" guy's Everest, to be conquered by overriding the pesky parts of our brains that naturally produce a "Fuck off, creep" reaction. If you just remove the brain entirely, the Sodinis of the world get everything they want: A warm body with pretty hair, squeezable tits and assorted holes to penetrate, minus that damnable free will.

If I actually believed that sex androids would keep guys like that at home and out of the bars permanently, I might be in favor of them. Unfortunately, I fear they'll only contribute to a thriving culture of misogyny that reinforces unhinged lonely dudes' belief that women's ability to refuse sex is an abstract problem to be solved — not to mention that the solution, when one can't afford a doll, is to stop being so "nice." The thing about the "transitional therapeutic object" theory is that an object is not really an appropriate transition between relationships with actual human beings — unless, of course, you're confused about the distinction there in the first place. Which I would argue is the "nice" guy's fundamental problem.

There's nothing inherently wrong with banging an inanimate object — who among us hasn't? But there's a lot wrong with blurring the line between inanimate object and female human being so aggressively that the primary distinction becomes her capacity for consent — and the lack thereof becomes the fake version's chief selling point. There's a big difference between wanting to simulate the bullet points of real sex, and wanting to simulate every last detail save the humanity of the person you're screwing. Guys who already believe they're entitled to sex with any woman they find attractive, and that those women's brains represent an unjust obstacle in the way of their goal, do not need a coldly pragmatic solution to their perceived problem. They need some fucking therapy, before they open fire on a gym.

Andy Droid: Your Sex Doll Has Arrived [H+]

Related: Just like a woman [Salon]

Earlier:All Dolled Up With No Place To Go
How Not To Cure Shyness: Misogyny, Sodini, & The Plight Of The "Love-Shy"

"He wasn't...gainfully employed...legally?" says Brittany Lynch of her Bad Boy™ boyfriend. Ooookay then!

And in true Bad Boy™ fashion, he didn't make Lynch feel good about herself. "He intimidated me, and put me in a position where I almost felt lower, in some way, and for some reason, it was attractive to me," says Lynch. "I wanted to keep fighting to get to his level. He didn't treat me badly, but he wasn't overly kind." So she dumped him and moved on.

Sessions Stepp also talks to self-identified Nice Guy™ Jorge, who "pretends" to be a Bad Guy™ as a matter of strategy. "I just stopped being nice...from what I see, women like spice to a guy. They don't like overly nice guys. I know guys who are an asshole because they think that's the only approach to really get women." Jorge lives in New York, ladies. (Of course he does.) Watch out for him!

Stephen in Mason, Georgia, lies about his sexual conquests to his friends. "I tried once to have a one-night stand, but it just wasn't for me," he reports. The woman involved mocked him. Asked why he thinks women prefer Bad Boys™, he replies: "I dunno, that's a really good question...maybe they like the challenge?"

Sessions Stepp mentions two studies recently covered in the New Scientist, whose results she characterizes as "The message to guys: Be nice. But not too nice."

But, even leaving aside for a minute the question of whether these Nice Guy™/Bad Boy™ categories are actually as monolithically well-defined as Sessions Stepp (and rom coms, and chick lit, and magazines) would have it, is this actually a correct analysis of the scientific data? It would appear not.

One of the studies mentioned by the New Scientist was a survey of 200 college students — overwhelmingly, people under the age of 22 — that found that higher numbers of partners and higher numbers of brief relationships were reported by men who also were identified as "narcissistic," "deceitful," and "Machiavellian." This does not mean that women "prefer" these guys, or that they have more sex — merely that these "deceitful" young assholes claim to have more partners. And sex researchers know that studies of sexual behavior that rely on self-reported numbers are flawed. Researchers have long attributed the impossible disparity between men's claimed number of partners and women's claimed number of partners to the fact that study subjects often offer socially-desirable answers, as opposed to correct ones, and note that this disparity is so ingrained as to actually constitute a kind of "self-fulfilling prophecy." So these guys, who admit they lie more than the average population, may be lying about all the sex they're having. It's entirely possible that we've created the cultural trope of the Bad Boy™ out of nothing more than string and glue.

Strangely, the more Nice Guys™ adopt Bad Guy™ mannerisms to get ahead, and the more Bad Guys™ try it on by pretending to be Nice™, the more we stubbornly refuse to attribute these facts to a flaw in the system of categorization.

So how about this for sex advice: People are different. Find one you like, and bone him or her. Use protection. Repeat as necessary.

Friends [XKCD]
Why Nice Guys Finish Last [SexReally]
Bad Guys Really Do Get The Most Girls [New Scientist]
The Myth, The Math, The Sex [NYTimes]

Earlier: Is It Too Soon To Call SexReally The Worst Sex Website Ever?
Is There A Worse Dude To Do Than The Reformed Nice Guy?