Kathleen Richardson is the founder and leader of the Campaign Against Sex Robots. She’s the Professor of Ethics and Culture of Robots and AI at De Montfort University, and as a feminist academic, by definition a taxpayer-funded parasite. On the ‘Team’ page of the campaign website, we learn:
The Campaign Against Sex Robots is a group of activists, writers and academics developing sorely needed feminist and abolitionist perspectives of robots and AI.
… because the world sorely needs feminist perspectives.
Justice for Men & Boys 
AAahhhhh, and all the palaver about men becoming obsolete comes home to roost….. revenge is a dish best served cold……
LikeLike
What for you are the two most pressing problems affecting the human race? For me they are overpopulation and over-consumption. Women produce the babies and represent something like 90 – 95% of the consumption, in addition to all the other problems they cause. I’d say the solution to a great many issues is not far away.
LikeLike
I’d take the plastic smile of a sex robot over that thing every time. That aside, this campaign is going nowhere because women won’t want anything to do with it:
https://www.thesun.co.uk/living/2605288/westworld-humans-robots-coming-rise-sex-machine/
LikeLike
The world needs feminist perspectives the way a fish needs a bicycle.
LikeLike
One look at that face should be enough to sell a thousand robots…
LikeLike
I notice that on their website there is no mention at all that the development of male sex robots objectifies men. Oh that’s right, they are feminists, men don’t matter.
LikeLike
This is a partial quote from the online men’s rights site, “The American Gentleman”:
Many men’s rights advocates have asserted that men should have their sexual rights restored and enhanced.
An on line article entitled “Anti-Feminist Theory of Men’s Rights, Male Sexuality, Feminism” (Posted on November 17, 2012) delineates some reasonable demands in this regard. 8. The author of this book may not agree with all of the recommendations presented in this on line post. A partial quote from the same lists these demands follows:
Long Quote
” An end to the criminalization of male sexuality. Whilst we recognise that new technology sometimes requires legislation to be modified in order to protect the vulnerable from new threats, it must also be recognised that a ‘legislative creep’ is taking place, based primarily on moral panics and media manipulation, that appears to have no end, and which will ultimately lead to crimes against humanity (if it has not already done so). The criminalization of Sexual Trade Unionism. We demand that it should be recognised that sex laws that benefit the makers and promoters of those laws – whether financially, sexually, psychologically, or otherwise – be subjected to intense objective and independent scrutiny. We demand further that if those laws that may have sprung from a selfish motive are found to be lobbied for on the basis of any lies or exaggerations, the individuals concerned be punished severely by law for ‘Sexual Trade Unionism’. Another way of expressing this demand is the desire that it be made a criminal offence to exploit the vulnerability or sexuality of a child or young person for the financial, sexual, or psychological gain of an adult under the guise of ‘child protection’. The right to anonymity of those men (and women) accused of sex crimes. This basic demand simply recognises the transparent fact that sex crimes are unique in that the mere public accusation can destroy a man’s life, even if he subsequently be found innocent, and that this represents not only a manifest injustice but may also serve as a motive for such false accusations in itself. A false accuser should face the same punishment as the accused would face if found guilty of the alleged crime. A ‘false accuser’ register should be set up – as long as a sex offenders register exists, so should a register for women who make false allegations against men. An end to the ‘sex offenders register’, and it’s replacement (if a replacement is needed) with a ‘violent offenders register’. This recognises that the focus and obsession with sex offences, many of which are non-violent, as compared with violent offences, is a projection of female values upon the world that is only possible because of the disregard and disposability of male needs and values. It is noted that repeated studies confirm that most abuse of children is physical and carried out by the child’s mother. It is also noted that studies also repeatedly demonstrate that non-violent sex offenders are less recidivist than violent non-sexual offenders. A limit of statutations upon all sex crimes. (statue of limitations in the USA) Sex offences are the most subject to the passing hysterias and fads of society, as well as the scope for re-interpretation by individual victims over years and decades. Therefore, it is manifestly wrong to allow the possibility that a man can be judged for a historical offence by a different era, and by essentially a different women (or man) than the original ‘victim’, and even face a different and much harsher punishment than if he had been tried soon after the original offence. The right of two adults to engage in paid for sexual transactions to be enshrined in law. It should be recognised as a fundamental human right in a democratic and free society to be able to question the laws that govern society without fear of persecution or prosecution. This is particularly true in regard to sex laws, given that it is these laws that feminists want to outlaw criticism of in particular, and also because, as previously mentioned, such laws are most likely to be relative in fact to the particular moral fads and hysterias of society. The recognition that if these fascist laws restricting the right to even question the law had existed even half a century ago, we would likely still be performing crimes against humanity – for example executing and/or castrating homosexuals such as Alan Turing.”
LikeLike
It is bizarre that by far the most common and widely used sexual robot is the vibrator yet this is not mentioned at all. The use of a machine as a substitute sexual partner is fine if the partner substituted is a man but a major concern if a woman. In reality a machine that effectively imitates a human is a long way off.
LikeLike
I would think feminists and their followers, who are so worried about the growing number of ‘sexual assaults’ on women, would welcome sex robots, to reduce the incidents of rapes and sex harassment by sexually satisfied men. But contrary to the logic, they want to stop the introduction of sex robots. The only explanation I can possibly think of in this case must be that they consider sex robots same as human women and want to save them from evil men. Or could it be they see sex robots as competition they can’t beat ? one or the other. I think we all know which one it is…. haha
LikeLike
I expect the good Ms. Richardson won’t have the problem of her face and body being copied into a sex robot. Don’t hate me. I was born with this level of prognosticative genius.
LikeLike