How do characters feel about Doll Chips?? [SPOILERS] + [TRIGGER WARNING]

[Ayinde_Palmer]

No because the condition of consensual sex is not satisfied by an agreement made previously at a single point in time; it requires a continuous state of mutual agreement and willingness and awareness throughout the entire duration of the act itself between the people involved.

So, for starters, both people need to be awake. One of the obvious reasons why is because it's important you're able to change your mind at any given moment for any reason. If you're asleep, drugged, or in this case chipped, you're not in a position to do any of that. You wouldn't be in any position to maintain or revoke consent, let alone maintain or revoke a "prior agreement". So if someone is having sex with a person who is in that state, it is definitely sexual assault - doesn't matter what was said or "agreed" the day, the year, the month before or whatever because it would be impossible to know if they were still wanting to have sex in that actual moment.

You can agree to allow people to do things to you while unconscious irl. Surgery, and sleep experiments fall under this category. To apply that to other things, may be immoral by some standards.

But even if you reject that concept, in the world of cyberpunk, that type of arrangement, where you give blanket consent without awareness is not uncommon.
Corporations have bio implants which feed drugs to your system to alter your mood, and mindstate for productivity. (which you don't control) even causing withdrawal and addiction.
People are required to accept cyberware enhancements (limbs)for certain jobs.
Corporations also have the ability to monitor you via your own cybereyes, and have biomonitors.

the concept of continuous consent is not a thing in the business world of cyberpunk. Once you agree, they can do whatever is in the contract, or you can quit, if they don't kill you.

So, the characters in the world might have a personal beef, but society as a whole accepts it. And, I don't think Judy see's it as always wrong. She objects to the way clouds is doing it, not to the concept. She doesn't try to change the business, just the execution. Johnny, who believes in freedom, and choice, and is extremely anti business exploitation hates it, but he is from 50 years in the past, the conundrum of 2077 is not just the exploitation, but that it has been marketed to people, and they except it as normal.

Post automatically merged: Mar 7, 2021

How am I mistaken? It literally says in the database entry that the sex worker is "completely unaware.. during the session". So, based on that, no, consent is impossible. And if Robotic_Onion is right about Judy working on a "Doll Emergency Break" system, then that would imply one doesn't exist. Where are you getting this idea the doll has control to stop a session at any time?

the wiki may be slightly wrong, I have seen errors, but the key might be that the memories are erased. That might explain the shard that evaluates their performance.

 

[CDevil]

"what entails is a non-consensual interaction between client and sex worker "

Incorrect, unless the sex worker in question was chipped against their will. If the worker knowingly was 'chipped for this kind of work, it's still consensual.

"'dolls are completely unaware of what happens to them during the session' that essentially means that every time a client sleeps with a sex worker with the chip activated, it is effectively rape. (Consent is a state that has to be consciously maintained at all times)"

Once again, incorrect. Firstly, while it may be considered a stretch of the issue, this could be considered under the standard of "implied consent" (as in performing CPR on an unconscious person) as a mitigating factor. The argument would be "I placed myself into this work environment under these specific conditions, knowing what is required of me, so therefore I consent to the actions/practices of the job, even though I will not be consciously aware of any specific acts or interactions."

**Side note, since I'm sure SOMEONE will take offense to my input, NO, I do NOT condone rape or any form of nonconsensual sex.

 

[fchopin]

The worker has already agreed to this. They also have cameras to see what happened to some of the jobs.
Also the chip can be used for other things like sending a message without the person knowing what the message is.

 

[GloriousRuse]

I think it basically comes down to this: you have, for whatever reason, decided to become a sex worker. Your basic options are:

1) Do it the old fashioned way, and get to experience every minute of it, for better or worse. Joytoys, basically. Given the CP world, probably worse. If the real world holds true, it isn't just the most attractive who will end up in little black book work (though it's obviously a useful pre-req), it'll be the ones who can provide the total package experience. There's a great anecdotal section in one of the Freakonomics books comparing a traditional streetwalker and a lady with a graduate degree, an upper middle class background, et al who decided that this line of work paid more than what you can do with a MFA. The former was a transactional exchange for rather low amounts of money, the latter essentially admitted that her job was to be the dazzling, witty (just slightly less than the client), educated conversationalist who was supportive and truly interested while giving off all the right social vibes and eventually have sex - basically in her words to be their ideal of a wife for one night. No prizes for guessing which one of these risked physical violence while working.

2) Mox up and essentially become a BD porn actor who keeps lives appearances for marketing. But there aren't that many of them.

3) You can skip to being the dazzling, soulmate modern geisha regardless of your talents, earn top eddie, and you don't have to even experience one second of it. You sit in your box living about as well as any sex worker is going to, someone tells you to take a client, and you jack in followed by waking up an hour later with it all done. Incidentally from a legal perspective you jack in with full knowledge and understanding that this is going to result in the computer running your body, the client having sex with you, and you not remembering. That would pass the requirement for positive action demonstrating consent, particularly as I'm sure the lawyers for a place like Clouds wrote a contract making it very clear that their employees acknowledge the nature of the work and probably include a "upon jacking in, I hereby grant consent for the duration of the client" clause of some variety.

------------------

Honestly, of those three options - streetwalker, mox, doll - it's no surprise that a lot choose #3. You got used for money, sure, but that was going to happen regardless based on being a prostitute. You check in for a shift, you go blank for a few hours, and you wake up for a payment. You might get beaten to death while you're "off", but in Night City getting beaten to death in Clouds is a big deal; getting beaten to death on Jig-Jig street probably doesn't even warrant a call to the NCPD.

 

[Don_the_brawler]

Normally I don't think of doll chips. Is it wrong? Bad? Uuuuuuggghhh... Yes and no? You look at what happened to Evelyn. Yeah that's very horrible.

These people getting into these jobs. Getting involved with the type of work that involves doll chips. My question. Do they know what they are getting themselves into. Even if they do, these people are desperate for work. Welcome to the grim future...

Like it or not. These chips are here to stay. People pay to have their way with dolls ergo people are gonna continue making them, and using them. I doubt most clients care about the dolls they visit when they leave to go home after a pleasurable afternoon. Sad. My sympathy towards the dolls, but... at the end of the day. It is what it is.

In some way, I think the chips are kinda neat. In a, oh my gosh that's horrible! Kinda way. Its neat learning little details like that in a video game or other story telling setting.

If I were in the game, I'd try not think about it. Being a merc or having some other relatively stable job, I would try to purge any thought of this subject from my mind. Ignorance is bliss, I guess?

 

[msxyz]

I can see the OP reasoning but I also think that many prostitutes don't pick this profession out of choice, but out of necessity or because they forced to. Isn't this also a violence? Therefore, in a dystopian society where people get regularly killed on the streets, where laws are not observed by the wealthy and powerful, one can consider this chip as a sort of 'mercy' for those who are condemned to this profession.

 

[Restlessdingo32]

I had the impression quite a number of characters had a problem with the practice. I also had the impression they felt there was very little they could do about it.

There are parallels elsewhere in the game. Snuff/murder/torture BD's, the circumstances surrounding Joshua, everything about the Scavs, etc. Having a problem with a concept and doing something about it are very different.

At least I can rest easy knowing my V tried to take action in all of these areas when the opportunies presented themselves.

Spoiler

Woodman acquired all the empirical evidence necessary to clarify whether there is or is not an afterlife after being transmuted into swiss cheese. I had an epic sword fight with Maiko where I kept thinking, "There can be only one.", in the back of my mind. A handful of Tyger Claw higher ups in a room? Queue the Denzel Washington 16 seconds scene from The Equalizer. Clouds got John Wicked. The good ole boys rolling the murder/torture BD's discovered why labeling a Tomahawk as blunt and non-lethal doesn't quite fit.

 

[Ayinde_Palmer]

I think it basically comes down to this: you have, for whatever reason, decided to become a sex worker. Your basic options are:

1) Do it the old fashioned way, and get to experience every minute of it, for better or worse. Joytoys, basically. Given the CP world, probably worse. If the real world holds true, it isn't just the most attractive who will end up in little black book work (though it's obviously a useful pre-req), it'll be the ones who can provide the total package experience. There's a great anecdotal section in one of the Freakonomics books comparing a traditional streetwalker and a lady with a graduate degree, an upper middle class background, et al who decided that this line of work paid more than what you can do with a MFA. The former was a transactional exchange for rather low amounts of money, the latter essentially admitted that her job was to be the dazzling, witty (just slightly less than the client), educated conversationalist who was supportive and truly interested while giving off all the right social vibes and eventually have sex - basically in her words to be their ideal of a wife for one night. No prizes for guessing which one of these risked physical violence while working.

2) Mox up and essentially become a BD porn actor who keeps lives appearances for marketing. But there aren't that many of them.

3) You can skip to being the dazzling, soulmate modern geisha regardless of your talents, earn top eddie, and you don't have to even experience one second of it. You sit in your box living about as well as any sex worker is going to, someone tells you to take a client, and you jack in followed by waking up an hour later with it all done. Incidentally from a legal perspective you jack in with full knowledge and understanding that this is going to result in the computer running your body, the client having sex with you, and you not remembering. That would pass the requirement for positive action demonstrating consent, particularly as I'm sure the lawyers for a place like Clouds wrote a contract making it very clear that their employees acknowledge the nature of the work and probably include a "upon jacking in, I hereby grant consent for the duration of the client" clause of some variety.

------------------

Honestly, of those three options - streetwalker, mox, doll - it's no surprise that a lot choose #3. You got used for money, sure, but that was going to happen regardless based on being a prostitute. You check in for a shift, you go blank for a few hours, and you wake up for a payment. You might get beaten to death while you're "off", but in Night City getting beaten to death in Clouds is a big deal; getting beaten to death on Jig-Jig street probably doesn't even warrant a call to the NCPD.

I forget where, but some where in game I saw the doll chip has a pretty high install fail rate, And it can lead to severe emotional/mental problems. SOOO its not that easy. That said, it appears if it doesn't ruin your brain, you get a better class of living than your average joytoy, maybe better than the mox.

 

[koalahugs]

But even if you reject that concept, in the world of cyberpunk, that type of arrangement, where you give blanket consent without awareness is not uncommon.

...

So, the characters in the world might have a personal beef, but society as a whole accepts it.

Hmm, I don't know why this keeps coming up, so to be ultra clear - there is zero confusion or denial that it's considered normal in CP. I don't even doubt that it's probably deemed legal in Night City. No one was arguing otherwise.

Acknowledging that the doll chip enables rape is not a denial of those facts. Nor is explaining what consensual sex physically is (I wasn't talking in legal terms).

I'm amazed people are debating whether or not the doll-chip is okay with respect to that - it clearly isn't meant to be, that's sort of the whole point in CP, it's full of bad things and it's meant to be a "warning".

The question I had wasn't about whether or not it's okay, it was about how successfully or unsuccessfully the story challenges the issue. As others have pointed out though, it's largely glossed over, and only barely hinted at, so the answer is, "not really".

The reason I brought it up is because generally when you have a story that depicts terrible things, as a warning, then it's natural to judge how successful it is in achieving that. I.e. does it manage to show why the terrible things are terrible? Do we get a clear sense of how it's affecting the characters? IMO there was a missed opportunity to show that.
A good example is 12 Years a Slave, which doesn't merely depict slavery, it shows you how it affected the people directly involved (regardless of the fact it was "normal")

Another great example could be Aaron Paul in Breaking Bad:

I get that this is sort of a taste thing or something, but in my view the story would've benefited from a moment like that given what some of these characters have to go through. It would've been amazing if Evelyn's arc was more fleshed out and had a moment like that.

Re: Surgery. You know no one needs to explain how that is completely different right?

 

[Ayinde_Palmer]

Hmm, I don't know why this keeps coming up, so to be ultra clear - there is zero confusion or denial that it's considered normal in CP. I don't even doubt that it's probably deemed legal in Night City. No one was arguing otherwise.

Acknowledging that the doll chip enables rape is not a denial of those facts. Nor is explaining what consensual sex physically is (I wasn't talking in legal terms).

I'm amazed people are debating whether or not the doll-chip is okay with respect to that - it clearly isn't meant to be, that's sort of the whole point in CP, it's full of bad things and it's meant to be a "warning".

The question I had wasn't about whether or not it's okay, it was about how successfully or unsuccessfully the story challenges the issue. As others have pointed out though, it's largely glossed over, and only barely hinted at, so the answer is, "not really".

The reason I brought it up is because generally when you have a story that depicts terrible things, as a warning, then it's natural to judge how successful it is in achieving that. I.e. does it manage to show why the terrible things are terrible? Do we get a clear sense of how it's affecting the characters? IMO there was a missed opportunity to show that.
A good example is 12 Years a Slave, which doesn't merely depict slavery, it shows you how it affected the people directly involved (regardless of the fact it was "normal")

Another great example could be Aaron Paul in Breaking Bad:

I get that this is sort of a taste thing or something, but in my view the story would've benefited from a moment like that given what some of these characters have to go through. It would've been amazing if Evelyn's arc was more fleshed out and had a moment like that.

Re: Surgery. You know no one needs to explain how that is completely different right?

It appeared to me, your question was why most characters had no reaction to this.

Ok, your focus is how it handles these type of issues. I think their point is that everyone except a 50 years dead rebel has no reaction at all. They are showing the logical extension of (irl)existing values in modern society, and how nobody will even question it in such a society.

Also, they are using the, show, don't preach style of narrative discourse. They do it for almost everything. They show the player the situation and let them ask themselves, is this how it should be?

Now I will agree, it may work, it may not. It feels like most of the things it shows people go over their heads. They even had an article by a major gaming magazine that said Cyberpunk has nothing to say. People say Johnny just rants corpo is bad for no reason, even though the whole entire game shows the negative results of a society where there is no moral base to society. A society where everything is an extension of corporate values like, anything people agree to is fair, and what is most profitable determines the rules of society.

Its also interesting that people focus mostly on the VDBs for what happened to Evelyn, when all they did was screw up her chip for a few days. (according to Judy, the chip fix worked). The existing system destroyed her. The owners wanted to kill her, the "caretaker" raped her, the medical system made one attempt to physically fix her (ignoring her mental health) then sold her (through wakako, whom V works with). Then even when they move heaven and earth to get her back, there is no resource to care for her, no mental health experts, and then when she suicides, no ambulances, they won't even pick up her body until the next day. If you are weak for two days in this world, it spits you out, and its all normal. People focus on the VDB attack, and ignore that its how society responded that ultimately destroyed Evelyn.

And even when they do see it, they don't recognize that we aren't as far from it as we'd like to think.

 

[Jetro30087]

It's a mind control chip used in organized crime brothels...

 

[Ayinde_Palmer]

It's a mind control chip used in organized crime brothels...

actually its not a crime here, its legal

 

[Jetro30087]

actually its not a crime here, its legal

It's still run by organized crime and it's a mind control chip. That adds up to exploitation regardless if Night City let's it slide. What don't they let slide?

 

[Don_the_brawler]

Remember that cop and the tortoise mission near V's apartment?

Spoiler: Just in case...

I'm pretty sure literally everyone has done this mission, but I'll add spoilers just in case.

One of the cops says a maelstrom ganger kills a child right in front of a police officer, but the officer can't do anything about it because the gang member has corpo protection.

The corpos paid off the police chief, and the newspapers read that the boy shot his own brains out.

I love this mission because it's a great example of just how corrupt the world has become. Money can buy anything. Anyone can get off the hook for anything if they have the money for it.

 

[koalahugs]

It appeared to me, your question was why most characters had no reaction to this.

Ok, your focus is how it handles these type of issues. I think their point is that everyone except a 50 years dead rebel has no reaction at all. They are showing the logical extension of (irl)existing values in modern society, and how nobody will even question it in such a society.

Also, they are using the, show, don't preach style of narrative discourse. They do it for almost everything. They show the player the situation and let them ask themselves, is this how it should be?

Now I will agree, it may work, it may not. It feels like most of the things it shows people go over their heads. They even had an article by a major gaming magazine that said Cyberpunk has nothing to say. People say Johnny just rants corpo is bad for no reason, even though the whole entire game shows the negative results of a society where there is no moral base to society. A society where everything is an extension of corporate values like, anything people agree to is fair, and what is most profitable determines the rules of society.

Its also interesting that people focus mostly on the VDBs for what happened to Evelyn, when all they did was screw up her chip for a few days. (according to Judy, the chip fix worked). The existing system destroyed her. The owners wanted to kill her, the "caretaker" raped her, the medical system made one attempt to physically fix her (ignoring her mental health) then sold her (through wakako, whom V works with). Then even when they move heaven and earth to get her back, there is no resource to care for her, no mental health experts, and then when she suicides, no ambulances, they won't even pick up her body until the next day. If you are weak for two days in this world, it spits you out, and its all normal. People focus on the VDB attack, and ignore that its how society responded that ultimately destroyed Evelyn.

And even when they do see it, they don't recognize that we aren't as far from it as we'd like to think.

No, you're right, that was my question - I was just trying to clarify what it was about because IMO you kinda need to show how characters are negatively affected by things to demonstrate there's a problem.

So, with respect to the doll chip, I honestly didn't realise just how problematic it was at first, because none of the characters seem to care; it's only because I read the database entry that I realised, "oh wow, this is even more terrible than I realised". Otherwise there's no way I would have known it was that bad.

Which is really on the writers and execution of things, so you're right, a lot of things probably do over people's heads - this particular thing certainly went over mine.

I don't agree that only Johnny reacts to stuff though. We see Jackie open up in the car on the way to Arasaka about how he's "never going back". That was a very clear reaction to and awareness of his situation. We also see Judy break down when Evelyn dies. So, people clearly harbour pain and are responsive to bad things happening around them, even if they're common. As for the doll chip though, although it makes total sense for the general population to be apathetic, it still seems a bit iffy having the people directly involved appear so placid about it.

I don't think they had to resort to a "preach style narrative" to show us how dolls really feel about it though (not quite sure what you mean by that - like an Attenborough documentary or something?). Breaking Bad and 12 Years a Slave aren't making statements in that way if that's what you mean - they're just showing things. I think the difference is that the depiction of characters in those stories aren't shallow. I'm not saying CP doesn't ever penentrate a little further - like I said, it has its vulnerable moments, like with Jackie or Judy, just not with this particular thing.

That being said, I can totally appreciate if we put this down as, "we simply haven't spent enough time with Evelyn/Judy/her pals" to see any of them have a mental breakdown over their jobs or whatever. It just would've helped me empathise with those characters more and made it much clearer that the doll chip is actually bad.

 

[Ayinde_Palmer]

No, you're right, that was my question - I was just trying to clarify what it was about because IMO you kinda need to show how characters are negatively affected by things to demonstrate there's a problem.

So, with respect to the doll chip, I honestly didn't realise just how problematic it was at first, because none of the characters seem to care; it's only because I read the database entry that I realised, "oh wow, this is even more terrible than I realised". Otherwise there's no way I would have known it was that bad.

Which is really on the writers and execution of things, so you're right, a lot of things probably do over people's heads - this particular thing certainly went over mine.

I don't agree that only Johnny reacts to stuff though. We see Jackie open up in the car on the way to Arasaka about how he's "never going back". That was a very clear reaction to and awareness of his situation. We also see Judy break down when Evelyn dies. So, people clearly harbour pain and are responsive to bad things happening around them, even if they're common. As for the doll chip though, although it makes total sense for the general population to be apathetic, it still seems a bit iffy having the people directly involved appear so placid about it.

I don't think they had to resort to a "preach style narrative" to show us how dolls really feel about it though (not quite sure what you mean by that - like an Attenborough documentary or something?). Breaking Bad and 12 Years a Slave aren't making statements in that way if that's what you mean - they're just showing things. I think the difference is that the depiction of characters in those stories aren't shallow. I'm not saying CP doesn't ever penentrate a little further - like I said, it has its vulnerable moments, like with Jackie or Judy, just not with this particular thing.

That being said, I can totally appreciate if we put this down as, "we simply haven't spent enough time with Evelyn/Judy/her pals" to see any of them have a mental breakdown over their jobs or whatever. It just would've helped me empathise with those characters more and made it much clearer that the doll chip is actually bad.

ok, you are saying the writing isn't good because its too subtle, I think its a choice. I think they showed you exactly what you are saying they should show you.

I think Judy's whole narrative is to show how someone close to the issue reacts. On one side, Judy works in the industry, she knows and are friends with people who live this life, and she can't exactly consciously say their choices are wrong, at the same time when this happens it fills her with so much sadness and rage that she can't bear to live where she has spent most of her life. She is leaving every thing and every one behind because she can't deal with it anymore. She breaks down crying in the house by the water. (and its implied this happens in her home as well) She murders Woodman and feels unsatisfied. She focuses her anger on night city, and escapes as a method of coping.

this is what an emotional breakdown looks like for a lot of people. What more could they do, other than having a charachter literally explain point by point how society is failing.


the difference between Jackie and Judy vs Johnny. is that Jackie and Judy are still trying to work within the framework, whereas Johnny recognizes that the framework itself is the problem.

 

[Steph285]

How am I mistaken? It literally says in the database entry that the sex worker is "completely unaware.. during the session". So, based on that, no, consent is impossible. And if Robotic_Onion is right about Judy working on a "Doll Emergency Break" system, then that would imply one doesn't exist. Where are you getting this idea the doll has control to stop a session at any time?

That assumes that Night City follows the same law as the current day United States. It depends on what the dolls consent too. They are not consenting to just sex, they are consenting to become the doll which can but does not necessarily include sex. If it was just sex i would agree, but it is not, so the continues awareness clause does not apply. Vs session with Clouds for example is pep talk and cuddle as far as i recall.I know in our mindset it is apple and oranges but this is a different world to cyberpunk, that is the point of the world. A cautionary tale. It is like surgery, you give consent to doctors to do what they required to do while under anaesthetic, they are just limited by the mandate of the surgery and preservation of life. I imagine that in clouds, that the client going beyond the set customized program set to the dolls, is a sort of preach of contract. However contract is between Cloud and the customer with the doll (as in the unconscious body) as the product.

 

[Jetro30087]

That assumes that Night City follows the same law as the current day United States. It depends on what the dolls consent too. They are not consenting to just sex, they are consenting to become the doll which can but does not necessarily include sex. If it was just sex i would agree, but it is not, so the continues awareness clause does not apply. Vs session with Clouds for example is pep talk and cuddle as far as i recall.I know in our mindset it is apple and oranges but this is a different world to cyberpunk, that is the point of the world. A cautionary tale. It is like surgery, you give consent to doctors to do what they required to do while under anaesthetic, they are just limited by the mandate of the surgery and preservation of life. I imagine that in clouds, that the client going beyond the set customized program set to the dolls, is a sort of preach of contract. However contract is between Cloud and the customer with the doll (as in the unconscious body) as the product.

In the United States of America if a person is in a condition that leaves them mentally impaired their stated consent doesn't necessarily translated into legal consent, especially if they say otherwise after they're no longer impaired. Note their "customers" can deactivate the doll with a safe word, the person becoming a doll has no consent in that matter.

But Night City doesn't follow current day US law.

 

[Ayinde_Palmer]

In the United States of America if a person is in a condition that leaves them mentally impaired their stated consent doesn't necessarily translated into legal consent, especially if they say otherwise after they're no longer impaired. Note their "customers" can deactivate the doll with a safe word, the person becoming a doll has no consent in that matter.

But Night City doesn't follow current day US law.

you are talking about consent with relation to sex, but the game is talking about contractual consent. Contractual consent is often not able to be withdrawn regardless of the consciousness of the individual. Thats why contractual consent in our society is generally limited by only legal actions, and subject to judicial review. But in a society where the legal system is in service to corporate interests, you won't have any moral based laws. Making the contract the only law that matters.


I think the discussion is too focused on whats legal, our laws frame of reference, or theirs. When the real question is, Is this right? and if it isn't right, why do most people accept it?

 

[koalahugs]

That assumes that Night City follows the same law as the current day United States. It depends on what the dolls consent too. They are not consenting to just sex, they are consenting to become the doll which can but does not necessarily include sex. If it was just sex i would agree, but it is not, so the continues awareness clause does not apply. Vs session with Clouds for example is pep talk and cuddle as far as i recall.I know in our mindset it is apple and oranges but this is a different world to cyberpunk, that is the point of the world. A cautionary tale. It is like surgery, you give consent to doctors to do what they required to do while under anaesthetic, they are just limited by the mandate of the surgery and preservation of life. I imagine that in clouds, that the client going beyond the set customized program set to the dolls, is a sort of preach of contract. However contract is between Cloud and the customer with the doll (as in the unconscious body) as the product.

Couldn't care less what the law says. People are getting way too hung up on that. Water is wet, Earth is round, having sex with someone who is unconscious and unable to revoke consent is rape. This is a bit of a distraction to the whole discussion but, just to be clear, I wasn't defining consensual sex by any given legal system, fictional or otherwise; I was defining it by what it actually is and what it physically requires.