The Somewhat Ambitious

The Somewhat Ambitious header image 2

Creepiness, Thy Name is Roxxxy

February 8th, 2010 · 3 Comments

I’m going to go out and say that this could be considered quite a literal ‘No Fuck Friday’, because I don’t care how realistic your love doll of choice looks, if you ever find yourself having sex with an animatronic robot, you may as well be trying to have sex with the ‘It’s A Small World‘ ride at Disneyland.

Roxxxy

Meet Roxxxy (and creator. What a dynamic looking young man). No, she isn’t suffering from a profound disability. Unless you count the absence of a brain, soul and true autonomy. Rather, she’s the latest advance in the field of ‘female simulation’. And what a noble field it is, filled with gentlemen, entrepeneurs and the finest innovators the world has to offer. For years the high-end love doll of choice has been the decidedly oxymoronic Real Doll (do I really need to point out that almost every link in this post could be considered at least slightly NSFW), a hand-crafted miracle of silicone and pliability that can be yours for the princely sum of $US5 999. Plus, presumably, postage and handling… Although, there better not be too much ‘handling’! Am I right? ‘Ey, ‘ey, ‘ey, ‘ey… ‘ey?… I’ll let myself out.

I gotta admit, the entire endeavour is a pretty alien concept to me. I mean, I’m not exactly fighting off rabid hordes of busty women with naught but a pointed stick (FYI, that’s a cliché, not a phallic pun), but at the same time I’ve also never had the thought “yes, that’s it, I’m obviously never going to be have sex again. Now is the time to dive headlong into the endless abyss of sadness and solipsism that is copulation with an inanimate object”. Hard to know if anyone has ever had that specific thought, but I like to think it’s a definite tipping point. Fortunately, other people have been paid to explore the field, and this is a reasonably entertaining account of one man’s scientific “expedition” into the “world” of the Real Doll.*

But now we have the $US7-9000 Roxxxy, the brainchild of self-described “happily married man”, Douglas Hines. The word brainchild being particularly apt given the amount of se… sentiment he has obviously poured into it. Her. It… I dunno. If you’re game, here’s Douglas showing Roxxxy off to the world for the first time at the recent Adult Entertainment Expo in Las Vegas.

As someone has pointed out, Douglas has quite obviously managed to get Roxxxy’s underwear on sideways. Excellent work, Douglas.

Basically, Roxxxy is unique in that she vocally responds to both your conversation and your sexy touching. She also has a number of settings ranging from Frigid Farrah to Mature Martha to, my favourite, Wild Wendy. Exactly how wild Wendy can be given that she cannot move of her own volition is open to debate, but the thought is there. Anyway, the inherent creepiness of the entire affair probably doesn’t require vast amounts of elaboration (although Slate explores the concept a little more here), suffice to say I now have the distinct fear that next time I’m “in the midst”** with a woman, I’m going to look down and be able to see naught but the glossy, soulless eyes of Roxxxy staring back at me. And then realise that I’m at the tail end of a four-day paint and amyl bender that has somehow culminated in me stealing the original Roxxxy prototype from Douglas Hines’ house and “having my wicked way with it”*** in the man’s living room. While he and his wife stare at me aghast from the kitchen. And I’ll look up and see them and then scream “SHE MADE ME DO IT!” before bursting into tears and jumping through a window.

… My fears are oddly specific.

/Luke

* He had sex with it
** Having sex
*** This is probably a little self-explanatory by now

Tags: Curiosities · Gadgets

3 responses so far ↓

  • 1 miss gilly // Feb 8, 2010 at 8:12 pm

    Does Doug believe in female ejaculation I wonder?…On second thought I’ve probably already learnt enough about creepy sex dolls for one night. Personally I prefer to believe they only exist in humorous sub plots in Boston Legal, ala the Shirley Schmidt sex doll.

  • 2 Cassie // Feb 8, 2010 at 8:21 pm

    Dan O’Brien did a, erm ‘review’ of this doll over on Cracked.com.
    The overall conclusion?
    :” I like my women like I like my Mormons: covered in sweat and disgusted by my filthy mouth. Roxxxy just doesn’t cut it. She’s not human enough to replace sex with a human, and it’s too human to accommodate my unsettling robot fetish.”

    Ayup.

    http://www.cracked.com/blog/my-review-of-the-roxxxy-sex-robot/

  • 3 Alyona // Feb 14, 2010 at 8:17 am

    The biggest problem I have with Roxxxy is that it looks like slutty Catherine Tate.

Leave a Comment