We will not build your world for you
In general, questions of the sort...
"Assume the world as we know it. Then I postulate that we change this one thing. Now tell me what the outcome is"
...questions of that sort are of very poor quality by Stack Exchange standards and — in my personal opinion — quite annoying.
The poor quality is because they are very broad and as such have no clear answer. They could take any number of directions from there. As a questioner you need to limit the scope of the question, because otherwise you have just done the Stack Exchange equivalent of asking "Ok, so I throw two dice. What happens?".
And the annoying bit is that the questioner is requesting that other people do the work that they themselves are meant to do.
Ok, so you came up with a High-concept. That is all good, very clever of you to come up with it. I salute your ability to think out of the box. And this is usually the start for some really good and interesting world building.
But to then dump that concept in someone else's lap and say "Develop this for me. Come up with all the consequences and tell me what happens"... no. Just: no.
We are not here to build your world for you.
We are here to help you build your world on your own. When you get stuck in that process; when you have a specific problem that must be solved, that is when you post a question. If there are some kinks and wrinkles that need ironing, we can help you. If you need a way around an inconsistency in your logic; if you require justification that will allow you to astroturf the field for a specific world; if you need a fact- or reality check... then we can do that for you, and gladly so.
But we will not build your world for you. That is your job.
The "sin" of your question about fembots was that you did just that which I said above: you introduced a high-concept, but then you did not take that anywhere. You did not even begin to try to figure out what happens in a premise such as yours. You did not say anything about what possible routes this could take.
Instead you just dumped the premise on Worldbuilding and asked everyone else to develop the world for you. That was your sin. MGTOW had nothing to do with the down-votes.
A note on Freedom of Expression
Freedom of Expression is a contract between you and the government. Freedom of Expression means that the government is not allowed to censor you, that is to say the government cannot demand to pre-approve that which you are about to express. (*)
And that is all that it is.
Freedom of Expression is NOT...
The right to demand to post anything, anywhere. People are not required to provide you with the means to express yourself. You have no right to conscript the usage of private assets — such as this forum — in order to express yourself. You are here as a guest, and your presence is by the good graces of the people responsible for Stack Exchange. The government is not an actor in this place, and so Freedom of Expression is not actually relevant here.
The right to demand people approve of that which you express. It feels silly to have to point this out this but it must be said: even under Freedom of Expression, no-one is required to like that which you express. If the reader does not like it, they are entirely entitled to form and hold such an opinion, and they are at least as much as you within their rights to express this opinion.
Immunity from criticism. See the point above. If people form the opinion that your posts are of such a quality that they do not approve of them, then they are within their rights to express this. And if they have valid arguments for their opinion, then it is the expressed purpose of the ratings and comments systems for them to use them to give you feedback as to why they think your post is of poor quality.
You cannot use "Freedom of Expression" as a shield against criticism.
Immunity from other consequences. Freedom of Expression is not a "Get Out Of Jail Free" card, nor is it something you can invoke to escape other unpleasant consequences of that which you have expressed. Expressing yourself is an action. Actions may have consequences. Freedom of Expression does not exempt you from consequences. You are free to express yourself in the eyes of the government — they cannot stop you from doing it, even if they know what you are about to do and they do not like it — but you are not free from having to suffer for it, afterwards.
Whether this rhymes well with your concept of "freedom" or not can be debated, but these are — never the less — the facts.
EDIT: Thank you Frostfyre for the mandatory xkcd reference...
(*) Usually there are some more bits to this — such as for example in the Swedish Act of Freedom of Expression where it is stated that the government may not prevent you from partaking of expressions — but the main point is that the government may not try to stop you from expressing yourself.