REALDOLL VS. OVID'S PYGMALION

‘beneath his touch the flesh grew soft, its ivory hardness vanishing, and yielded to his hands, as in the sun wax of Hymettus softens and is shaped by practised fingers into many forms, and usefulness acquires by being used.’ - Ovid, Miles. 347, II. 342-47.

Metamorphoses is Ovid’s most famous work. A single poem comprised of fifteen books, Metamorphoses contains roughly 250 myths all centred around the theme of transformation.

The myth of Pygmalion in Ovid’s ‘Metamorphoses’ reflects a desire that everyone holds: for our fantasies to become a reality. In the story, Pygmalion is a Cypriot sculptor disappointed by the women around him. As no woman is entirely flawless, Pygamalion denies himself the company of women. He carves a statue of a woman named Galatea so realistically, that he falls in love with it and wishes for a bride of the same likeness; he creates an image of the idea woman Aphrodite gives life to the statue, in answer to his prayers and Pygmalion’s male fantasy becomes tangible.

To me there are two possibilities here: one is to view Ovid as a protofeminist - he is trying to give women a voice. The other is that the story is entirely misogynistic. Ultimately, the myth embodies the stereotype of the man as an active creator and the woman as passive, adjunct to male fantasy. It exposes a potent male fantasy - the creation of a perfectly beautiful woman designed to specific specifications and entirely devoted to her creator.

This narrative has also been represented in recent art and culture, suggesting that since the beginning of time, men have been obsessed with creating the perfect woman. In todays social climate, the so called ‘ideal girl’ however appears to be a virtual construction - not an ivory statue like Pygmalion’s. In an age of ultra-sophisticated technologies, the chances of the ‘ideal girl’ being a real flesh and blood person are becoming slimmer by the day. RealDoll, introduced in 1996, is a life-size sex doll designed to recreate the appearance of the human female and male form. Functioning primarily to serve as sex partners, RealDoll have a PVC skeleton with steel joints and silicone flesh; some models even offer removable or interchangeable inserts for the face, mouth and vagina and hand painted eyeballs to ensure they are as realistic as possible.

How will this change expectations of real-life sexual partners? Is it possible that young women of the future will feel pressure to not only look like pornstars, but to perform like robots - always available and eager to please? The advance of the sex android to me, completely refutes the fight for women’s rights. Automated bodies designed to look and feel like women are sexual objectification’s apotheosis.

Jenny Kleeman for The Guardian writes the following after an introduction to Harmony:

Harmony reinforces an incredibly dangerous idea: that women’s bodies are only bodies, and exist only for the use of men. When asked about Harmony’s ‘brain’, McMullen says:




Harmony’s body is completely sexualised, and her ‘brain’ completely controlled by her owner. Doesn’t the idea that the happiness of men should be catered for by the bodies and objectification of women - that women should nurture men no matter what - epitomise patriarchy?

I hoped that sex robots as the ‘perfect solution to the feminist movement’ - ‘If you won’t comply, we’ll create women who do’ - was not the case here, until I stumbled upon the following YouTube reactions to a video of RealDoll’s Harmony:

“The AI will learn through interaction, and not just learn about you, but learn about the world in general. You can explain certain facts to her, she will remember them and they will become part of her base knowledge.” [McMullen in Murphy 2017]

Perpetuating this idea that women are objects and reinforcing unrealistic physical ideals is troubling. The ethical and societal ramifications are undeniable.

“How would you feel about your ex boyfriend getting a robot that looked exactly like you, just in order to beat it up every night?” It’s a shocking idea, isn’t it? On the one hand, it’s a machine - it isn’t you. But then, it is you, because it stands for you, and who you are.’ [Gee 2017]

How long before sci-fi dystopias become a frightening reality?