Pretty mediocre article. Replace “sex toy” with any other IoT device and you get the same thing.
Don’t want your sex toys connecting to the internet? Don’t buy the one with a wifi connection. But really, the end of the article says this best:
“Despite the risks, many continue to use networked sex toys because they feel, correctly or not, that these devices—like social media platforms—give them more than they take.”
>Don’t want your sex toys connecting to the internet? Don’t buy the one with a wifi connection.
I'm not certain that the problem is that they connect to the Internet, I think the problem is that bad actors are fucking with improperly secured internet-connected devices. I'm not an expert or anything but I think it's probably possible to make a wifi-connected sex toy, hell, a wifi connected anything, without turning it into a standard IoT-future-botnet-participant. Kinda strikes me like saying "don't want to have someone take over your car through the satellite radio? Buy a pre-1990 ICE car!" or "don't want to be spied on by your smartphone? Don't carry a smartphone!" or even "don't want to get shot? Don't leave the house!". While these are all entirely practicable solutions that indeed solve the problem, they blame the individual for a predatory situation. Wouldn't it be nicer to try to improve the situation, rather than blame the insufficiently techy victim? Pretty much everybody is driving a modern car, using a smartphone, and lacking a bulletproof vest. Are they all to blame?
>“Despite the risks, many continue to use networked sex toys because they feel, correctly or not, that these devices—like social media platforms—give them more than they take.”
This line seems included to help the reader blame the ig'nant sex-toy user -- don't they know that everybody's lying about the safety of everything?!
I'd argue the problem is that they connect to the internet. Not everything needs an internet connection to work. Just because we can put a networked computer into something does not mean we should. Its a lazy, bruteforce kind of product development that shares a lot of parallels with modern web design.
> they blame the individual for a predatory situation. Wouldn't it be nicer to try to improve the situation, rather than blame the insufficiently techy victim?
Years of being in ecommerce and web development has taught me that there's no getting around buyer beware, it is the price for living in a consumer-focused society. There's always a greater fool, and the people building solutions will always prioritize sales and revenue over virtually all else. Attempting to circumvent this means going bankrupt faster.
With the looming 5G deployment supporting 1000x device density, what's keeping iot devices to just connect to the 5G network and directly report their payload with no user intervention. If we're lucky we'll get an opt-out choice hidden somewhere in the small print that will auto-revert to "on" every now and then because "user convenience".
There have been 20 years of exploding ubiquitous spyware, online and offline. We can't walk on the street without an array of spy cameras recoding every word, move, facial expression. The excuse "don't buy x / don't use x" is beyond stale.
> “Your cock is mine now.” The hacker who had gained control of the clunky metal devices announced that they would be holding penises hostage until a Bitcoin ransom was paid.
Another reason why buying a "smart" device isn't a smart thing to do.
My uncle used to have a usb shock ring (it does what you think it does) that you would use in a chatroom that allowed the person you were sexting with to shock you (and vice a versa.) There are legitimate, if weird, reasons to have networked sex toys.
I wonder if there is a market for sex toys that specifically are only peer to peer. These interactive ones require a social component.
On another note regarding the non-social offline sex toy market, I've found that it is unnecessarily gendered that female sex toys are accepted in more circles than male sex toys. ie a single female with a dildo is almost an expected or fun thing maybe initially received by their female friends in a fun way, whereas a single or coupled male with a fleshlight is not seen as a positive thing in any context. I can perceive the supporting toxic culture that reinforces this standard, it is still unnecessarily gendered, and I think that angle at this point in time can help deconstruct a lot of these standards.
I don't know about others, but for me fleshlights just look seedy and a bit sad. Dildos are acceptable because they're much less human, I think -- they're almost sculpture. Put a tenga egg on your mantelpiece and I doubt anyone will bat an eyebrow...
Dildos are more socially acceptable because it's usually understood that the woman could have an actual penis if she wished, but on this occasion is choosing the toy instead. Men would rarely choose a Fleshlight over an actual vagina. If they're using one it's understood that this is the closest they can get to the real thing at the moment, hence the sadness.
To me, fleshlights have a negative connotations because I think of creepy guys and incel types being the target audience. That's totally false of course! But unfortunately that's the stigma that seems to be attached to them. Though to be fair, we need to make a lot of progress de-stigmatizing all sex toys, not just fleshlights.
imo its because male sex toys tend to look like actual vaginas for a fake sex experience whereas female sex toys tend to look like solid color silicon toy for a tactile experience. Yes, there are female toys that look like big veiny skin toned dicks and there are male toys that are just silicon whatevers, but they're not the common mental image.
If you browse a male sex toy store you're likely to see a lot of stuff which is advertised as actual 1:1 replicas of specific porn stars' orifices. A lot of it has a pretty pathetic, creepy vibe for me. But a good share seems as normal as female vibrators.
The marketing is weird, but I’d imagine that a lot of the guys buying them don’t really care how much the toy resembles some porn star’s vagina. I think the stigma goes a bit deeper than that.
Readit News
Don’t want your sex toys connecting to the internet? Don’t buy the one with a wifi connection. But really, the end of the article says this best:
“Despite the risks, many continue to use networked sex toys because they feel, correctly or not, that these devices—like social media platforms—give them more than they take.”
I'm not certain that the problem is that they connect to the Internet, I think the problem is that bad actors are fucking with improperly secured internet-connected devices. I'm not an expert or anything but I think it's probably possible to make a wifi-connected sex toy, hell, a wifi connected anything, without turning it into a standard IoT-future-botnet-participant. Kinda strikes me like saying "don't want to have someone take over your car through the satellite radio? Buy a pre-1990 ICE car!" or "don't want to be spied on by your smartphone? Don't carry a smartphone!" or even "don't want to get shot? Don't leave the house!". While these are all entirely practicable solutions that indeed solve the problem, they blame the individual for a predatory situation. Wouldn't it be nicer to try to improve the situation, rather than blame the insufficiently techy victim? Pretty much everybody is driving a modern car, using a smartphone, and lacking a bulletproof vest. Are they all to blame?
>“Despite the risks, many continue to use networked sex toys because they feel, correctly or not, that these devices—like social media platforms—give them more than they take.”
This line seems included to help the reader blame the ig'nant sex-toy user -- don't they know that everybody's lying about the safety of everything?!
Years of being in ecommerce and web development has taught me that there's no getting around buyer beware, it is the price for living in a consumer-focused society. There's always a greater fool, and the people building solutions will always prioritize sales and revenue over virtually all else. Attempting to circumvent this means going bankrupt faster.
There have been 20 years of exploding ubiquitous spyware, online and offline. We can't walk on the street without an array of spy cameras recoding every word, move, facial expression. The excuse "don't buy x / don't use x" is beyond stale.
https://www.amazon.com/Reynolds-Wrap-Aluminum-Foil-Square/dp...
Another reason why buying a "smart" device isn't a smart thing to do.
[1] - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vEM6SHbjY7Y
If I agree to have sex with you, I'm not agreeing to have sex with anyone else who happens to come along too, right?
(Yes, I'll show myself out)
On another note regarding the non-social offline sex toy market, I've found that it is unnecessarily gendered that female sex toys are accepted in more circles than male sex toys. ie a single female with a dildo is almost an expected or fun thing maybe initially received by their female friends in a fun way, whereas a single or coupled male with a fleshlight is not seen as a positive thing in any context. I can perceive the supporting toxic culture that reinforces this standard, it is still unnecessarily gendered, and I think that angle at this point in time can help deconstruct a lot of these standards.
To me that’s besides the point though
Any man with a synthetix orifice or solo penis pleasure device around is getting vilified right now
If you browse a male sex toy store you're likely to see a lot of stuff which is advertised as actual 1:1 replicas of specific porn stars' orifices. A lot of it has a pretty pathetic, creepy vibe for me. But a good share seems as normal as female vibrators.
Note that the opposite exist where you can get phalluses signed and molded after porn stars.
Deleted Comment