Talk:Gynoid

Not sure why feminism is here ...

I thought this was an article about technology, if we need feminism in here then fine but does it really have to seem like the main focus of the article? 90.193.90.210 (talk) 16:41, 12 January 2013 (UTC)

I agree. Someone seems to push his/her POV here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.49.214.49 (talk) 01:04, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

I also agree. This article comes across as a heavily motivated opinion piece, and talks more about feminist issues rather than the technology.122.151.90.238 (talk) 14:57, 14 February 2015 (UTC)anon

I fourth this, obviously the page was edited to promote a biased viewpoint unrelated to technology rather than legitimate information about the topic at hand and needs to be corrected. 174.27.74.216 (talk) 22:04, 24 April 2015 (UTC)

I don't agree. Fembots have been clearly related to feminist/chauvinist views from their first uses in literature and movies. It is not an article about the technology, which can be found in the Android (robot), Robot and Cyborg articles, simply because the fact that they are Fembots has obvious gender implications. Artificial women, as the article shows, have almost always been linked to satisfying male sexual desires or performing stereotypical female jobs or tasks. To the point that fembots are expected to be a metaphore of either the perfect woman or women liberation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Elideb (talk • contribs) 09:53, 16 May 2016 (UTC)

Changing Title to Fembot?

I propose changing the title of this article from "gynoid" to "fembot" for several reasons:

1. Fembot, particularly after Austin Powers and other popular texts, is a more recognizable term than gynoid. It also seems to be in wider use (google search gynoid vs. fembot)
2. Fembot is a word recognized by the Oxford English Dictionary. Gynoid is not.
3. Fembot also predates gynoid (The Bionic Woman, 1976 vs. Divine Endurance, 1985)

NazcaTheMad (talk) 22:48, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

I agree. --RicardAnufriev (talk) 03:29, 11 March 2015 (UTC)

 Done Missvain (talk) 23:06, 11 March 2016 (UTC)

Dragonball's Android 18

Android 18, although called Android (artificial human in Japanese), is actually a cyborg (human turned robot). She seems to retain most of her biological self, including the ability to have children.

Would that qualify as fembot or does the term imply artificial origin exclusively? Otherwise, the Dr. Slump section could be replaced with a Toriyama section, and Android 18 added in there. This would be a special case, because Toriyama's fembots are quite influential and Android 18 is a fan favourite. Still, care should be taken when adding things, because otherwise the article could become a list of all female robots in anime, manga and videogames (which are not few). --Elideb (talk) 09:40, 16 May 2016 (UTC)

Whether she is technically a cyborg could be added as a footnote, but it would need references to show she was indeed human prior to her creation. Gynoids can be designed with biological human abilities such as bearing children. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 17:17, 1 November 2017 (UTC)

Requested move 7 October 2017

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Page moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) -- Dane ^talk 04:56, 15 October 2017 (UTC)

---

Fembot → Gynoid – There was some pushback when I attempted to move the list article companion to this article, which showed that there appears to be consensus that "fembot" is a fancrufty term. Therefore, I think that the article should be moved back to its original namespace and the move was not properly considered. _{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 14:57, 7 October 2017 (UTC)

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Earliest usage

See here; Gwyneth Jones is not the earliest usage. I'll fix this in the next day or so if someone doesn't beat me to it. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 18:26, 18 May 2021 (UTC)

Pronunciation: Hard G or soft G?

G as in grin or G as in gin? 92.1.168.148 (talk) 20:30, 6 March 2023 (UTC)

As in grin or guy. As in Gynacology ("Obs and Gy"). --𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 21:03, 6 March 2023 (UTC)

And don't forget the TV Series "Humans"

Although the "synths' can be either android or gynoid. I will say that Genna Chan was most excellent in her role. Humans TV Series

Cornell737 (talk) 03:50, 20 July 2023 (UTC)

Why is "Magical girlfriend" on the See Also list?

That article doesn't appear to have anything to do with robotics. --Rob Kelk 14:38, 28 April 2024 (UTC)

It doesn't. I have deleted it. 𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 18:50, 28 April 2024 (UTC)

Citation 25 and the preceding paragraph cite fictional story

Source is author's resume, which categorizes the work as fiction. It becomes obvious when the work is read in full. ToxicSmurf (talk) 17:17, 27 September 2024 (UTC)

@ToxicSmurf: Source 25 is Yazdani, Masoud; Ajit Narayanan (1984). Artificial intelligence: human effects. E. Horwood. pp. 276–277. ISBN 978-0-85312-577-8., which seems straightforwardly factual? I don't see Forsyth cited anywhere. Can you clarify? 𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 16:04, 29 September 2024 (UTC)

That is the book that contains the story written by Forsyth.Here are pages 276-277 on archive.org, This story is fictional and is broadly paraphrased as fact in the paragraph preceding citation 25. ToxicSmurf (talk) 05:04, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

Ah, ok, I see now what you mean. At first glance, it looks like a regular journal article. I will delete. 𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 08:19, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

 Done. For late comers, be advised that the new citation 25 (due to moving everything up one) is valid. 𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 08:26, 1 October 2024 (UTC)