Objectophilia / Objectum Sexuality: Loving / Marrying Inanimate Objects

[James_H]

Surely the question about consent should be asked here - you can't (and quite rightly) marry someone who is judged unable to give 'informed consent'. Yet you can 'marry' an inanimate object that is, by definition, unable to give any kind of consent at all. So we presume that these inanimate object have no feelings or emotions to be transgressed by this 'marriage'?

There is a next stage to this, which I don't even want to think about...

Thorny issue, can dildos give consent? I would argue that with no meaningful consciousness, there is not issue.
However, I guess it's something that's going to come up with increasingly intelligent sex robots in the future.

 

[catseye]

But how can you fall in love with something that has no agency? Surely there has to be a degree of love to necessitate marriage - and if the love is all one-sided, then it's not called marriage, it's called a hostage situation...

 

[Shady]

Will she have a lil pillow? And have it baptised?

 

[James_H]

But how can you fall in love with something that has no agency? Surely there has to be a degree of love to necessitate marriage - and if the love is all one-sided, then it's not called marriage, it's called a hostage situation...

I guess it's a weird psychosexual situation, like a fetish, rather than what we usually call love, which implies mutuality (though 'unrequited love' does rear its head)

 

[Ermintruder]

Will she have a lil pillow?

There may be no product from their union, for she will be of natural fibres, but I bet her lover will be polyester hollow fibre.

These low-tog layabouts think nothing of lying on top of human females all night, then just slip off onto the floor without a sound or a backward glance.

And have it baptised?

30mins @40deg synthetics with a spin-cycle. But no conditioner. You can't let them grow-up too soft, y'know.

and if the love is all one-sided, then it's not called marriage, it's called a hostage situation...

Exactly. It may be that this poor duvet has already been taken. It could already be in a meaningful same-species LTR with a fitted Egyptian kingsize sheet that has its folds in all the right places (and you know what I'm talkin' about, sister....well, actually, if you do, please tell us)

 

[Frideswide]

One of the things about autism is a capacity to like, be interested in, value and cherish objects in the way NTs behave with people.

Given most people I'm always vaguely surprised that more NTs don't go down the valued objects route

I don't know of anyone who has a sexual aspect to this though. Plenty of people who use objects as analogies for themselves, their experiences and their emotions.

PS I'm assuming that people know that autistics are just as emotion full as NTs?

 

[Shady]

Whats an NT, Normal Twats?

 

[Frideswide]

BWHAHAHAHAHA! no!

Neurotypical - the base line "normal". People who have some difference are neurodiverse - which includes autistics. And "everyone except the autistics" is allistic.

Very useful terms when you are talking about inclusive/exclusove behaviours. access and so on.

And NONE of them are rude or dismissive

 

[Shady]

Well some who are normal are twats, so its ok

 

[Frideswide]

as are some who are ND - I'm an equal opportunity people hater!

 

[Coal]

as are some who are ND - I'm an equal opportunity people hater!

I do like NT and ND, those are great terms.

I've spent toooooo long trying to get technical folk to describe non-technical folk as 'norms'.

 

[Andy X]

When that Internet of Things really takes off we'll have duvets marrying women.

 

[Frideswide]

we'll have duvets marrying women.

also they will marry men!

 

[Andy X]

No, that would be weird.

 

[MorningAngel]

You slag! ..

My duvet has a life of her own, she usually winds herself around my legs so I have to be careful not to fall out of bed most mornings.

I wonder if it’s related to Dr Strange’s cloak.

 

[MorningAngel]

Thorny issue, can dildos give consent? I would argue that with no meaningful consciousness, there is not issue.
However, I guess it's something that's going to come up with increasingly intelligent sex robots in the future.

Anyone seen Humans? That did not end well with Niska.

And what if even your sex robot doesn’t want you?

 

[James_H]

In Japan, dakimakura ('waifu pillows'/hug pillows) have been around since at least the '90s. Here's an article about their emerging technological future:

Waifu Pillow Advances Could Mean a Sexless Future for Japan

By far, the standout marriage between dakimakura and technology on display in Akihabara were the talking pillows. The brainchild of Kouchi Uchimura, these pillows come with sensor pads attached to a central relay that pairs to the user's smartphone. After placing the pads on key zones around the pillow (breasts, butt, genitals), the user can caress it and hear—in one of 200 available voices—their bedtime companion coo, moan and even scold, should the groping get too rough.

 

[Yithian]

Each time we have a new 'crazy person marries object' thread I insist on editing the title to include inverted commas around the verb 'marries'.

Is there a single jurisdiction or religion in which marriage to inanimate/non-sentient objects (or even animals) is permitted by rule or law?

 

[Ermintruder]

I insist on editing the title to include inverted commas around the verb 'marries'

I agree and disagree with your reasoning.

Firstly (and mainly) the use of quotation marks around the word to show our collective disbelief in the transapplicable sanctity of the state of marriage in this case then neutralises it as an instance worthy of comment and analysis.

Put it another way: everyone reading the source news-piece prepresumes (at least for the duration of that moment) that the human in this relationship does earnestly-believe that what they're doing is real, for them. That's got to be the instant underpinning expectation.

So for this to happen (yes, it is collusion, I agree) we need to adopt partiality in the perception of the incident, at least for the purposes of an initial fielding of the thread. A kind-of non-judgemental transient naivity.

The second way in which the use of 'sarky quotes' is (perhaps, arguably) neither required nor entirely-appropriate in this instance is that there is also a common-root non-human inanimus meaning for the word "marry" as in to match, pair-up (eg socks) or in the sense of alignment (eg "to marry-up the parts" in a construction). It's headed for being a bit archaic in usage (I think...as am I) but do you follow the sense in my caveat? A non betrothal-based unconsummatable match of a marriage...?

 

[Yithian]

No sarcasm, it's as impossible to marry a duvet as it is to adopt a toaster or sue a window pane.

Inverted commas denote novel, irregular or claimed usage, not an ideological bias.

Earnest belief is interesting from a psychological standpoint, but a very silly criterion for truth.

“When I use a word,” Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, “it means just what I choose it to mean—neither more nor less.” “The question is,” said Alice, “whether you can make words mean so many different things.” “The question is,” said Humpty Dumpty, “which is to be master—that's all.”​

Language is a social construct, you don't get to be master if you wish to communicate successfully.

 

[escargot]

No sarcasm, it's as impossible to marry a duvet as it is to adopt a toaster or sue a window pane.

Inverted commas denote novel, irregular or claimed usage, not an ideological bias.

Earnest belief is interesting from a psychological standpoint, but a very silly criterion for truth.

“When I use a word,” Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, “it means just what I choose it to mean—neither more nor less.” “The question is,” said Alice, “whether you can make words mean so many different things.” “The question is,” said Humpty Dumpty, “which is to be master—that's all.”​

Language is a social construct, you don't get to be master if you wish to communicate successfully.

Yup, we're watching a TV series about a serial bigamist. His last 'wife' discovers that she wasn't legally married to him and neither was anyone else, apart from his first wife from whom he was never divorced. So she was his 'wife' not wife, and is now his 'widow' not widow.

 

[Coal]

also they will marry men!

Pft. Mrs Coal doesn't let me caress our duvet, never mind marry one.

 

[Ogdred Weary]

There was a show on tv a few years back, an American program I must add that featured a guy who genuinely was in love with one of his motor vehicles. He was quite open about it and was shown fondling it, caressing and kissing it and fully admitted to having intercourse with the exhaust pipe. The show was quite sympathetic towards him and didn't mock him as you might expect a sensational show like this one was, would.
He too wanted to marry his car.
I wonder what became of him?

Found him. There's a NSFW image halfway down this article, it did the rounds on the net a few years ago, it's one of the funniest photos I've seen.

https://deadspin.com/the-one-where-we-find-out-why-this-man-is-having-sex-wi-5433838

 

[Lord Lucan]

Woman Marries Zombie Doll After The Couple ‘Fell In Love’

A woman who fell in love with a zombie doll aged 13 has revealed she married the inanimate object and says her world is now complete.

No emotional reaction from the doll has been shared with the press as of yet, but do watch this space because it could be the making of the next great Netflix true drama. It takes all sorts, after all.
Felicity Kadlec, a 21-year-old from Massachusetts, wedded the doll, named Kelly Rossi, who she claims is 37 years old and, funnily enough, has no birth certificate to identify a birthplace.
Images of the wedding show Felicity in a ‘beautiful’ white wedding dress, lovingly embracing the toy, who was dressed in a tuxedo for the occasion but deigned not to wash the blood, white makeup or black smudges off its face – or tidy up its teeth.

https://www.unilad.co.uk/life/woman-marries-zombie-doll-after-the-couple-fell-in-love/

For those of you interested, here's the wedding video:

 

[Ermintruder]

There's a NSFW image halfway down this article, it did the rounds on the net a few years ago, it's one of the funniest photos I've seen.

It's taken me nearly a year to make the following shocked observations:

• In order to copulate more-effectively with that exhaust pipe, he either needs to deflate the tyres on his car, or kneel upon a small pile of Haynes manuals (I speak purely from the perspective of observational comment, not personal experience)
• Does wearing what he's sort-of wearing really count as transvestism? I shan't ask why....nor even briefly-contemplate the polyparaphilic complexities that're presenting here
• I won't mention the shaven scrotum. Dammit, I just did (maybe it's a Range Rover thing)

Do people who 'love' internally-combustive cars (in a literal penetrative, rather than platonically-possessive, sense) also love electric cars? I mean, where would you (ahem...) plug-in, to a Tesla? And could you claim, as a defence, that you were trying to recharge it?

 

[Ogdred Weary]

I suppose if you're going to shag a car, you may as well wear some lingerie.

 

[Yithian]

Found him. There's a NSFW image halfway down this article, it did the rounds on the net a few years ago, it's one of the funniest photos I've seen.

https://deadspin.com/the-one-where-we-find-out-why-this-man-is-having-sex-wi-5433838

Cannot unsee.

Why doesn't he dress the Range Rover up in lingerie?

 

[Ogdred Weary]

Cannot unsee.

Why doesn't he dress the Range Rover up in lingerie?

Budgetary constraints?

 

[Yithian]

Budgetary constraints?

Outsize clothing is more readily and cheaply available than ever before!

 

[Ogdred Weary]

Outsize clothing is more readily and cheaply available than ever before!

Yes but you'd have to shop in the US to find lingerie that would fit a vehicle.