It's a few things (for some people). One is artstyle/impressionism, another is that some of the stuff depicted is either impossible or less paletable with IRL people. Some is storytelling.

Erotic artwork has been a real thing for a while. If you want, I'll elaborate later. I might edit this after a while when I can be bothered to expand on this.

Given the existence of products like "real doll", there's some merit to it happening to humans.

I don't know enough about any of it since I'm in a relationship with someone who has a pulse, and I like it that way.

Conservatives say that's what they want, but they only really want to subjugate women. If they actually cared about population totals first, they would be working hard to make it so everyone who wanted a kid could get one.

One core problem developed countries are experiencing, in terms of demography, is the mismatch between skills development and biological fertility. It takes people into their 30s or even 40s before they're financially able to support children. For millions of couples, by the time they can financially support a child, the window has already closed. It takes so much education and experience to be competitive in advanced economies that it creates this mismatch.

Now, we could have mass government-sponsored surrogacy. But that has so many ethical problems, that there is a reason no government has tried it. Yet, there is a near-term technology that we are on the verge of, but very little research dollars are dedicated towards. That is artificial gestation.

When was the last time you heard Musk or any of the other demographics-obsessed tech bros throw a few billion at developing this tech? This technology, along with other advanced reproductive technologies, could really do a lot to raise the birth rate in developed countries. And there are other techniques that could also be leveraged with this, such as techniques to create egg and stem cells from skin samples. There's a lot of near-term reproductive technologies waiting in the wings that could have a substantial effect on the birth rate, but that we simply haven't fully developed yet.

In fact, governments could cover the entire cost of the artificial gestation process if they want more people that badly. Ideally, anyone who is in the position to raise a child should be able to fill out an application, have some gametes created via a skin biopsy, and have an infant grown in a womb tank. And have the whole thing paid for by the State Population Initiative, or whatever you want to call it.

There are millions of couples out there who have the financial means to raise a child, but simply are biologically incapable of having children. We typically flippantly tell these people, "just adopt!," as if there is some vast supply of infants in orphanages just waiting for adoption. In truth, adopting an infant involves years-long wait lists and costs a hundred grand or more. But there are millions of couples that would love to have biological children, but simply can't. They're couples with reproductive issues, LGBT couples, couples that have aged out, etc. If conservatives actually cared about demographics, they would be doing everything they can to make it cheap and easy for these millions of couples to get the children they want. And while mass surrogacy isn't really viable, a mature artificial gestation technology would be a game-changer.

And yet, you never see someone like Musk suggesting we develop these technologies, let alone pouring some of his billions to their advancement. The truth is that hand-wringing over population is just the latest dog whistle against women's rights. Their first goal is to subjugate women, the population issues are just an excuse.

Yeah its actually the opposite, anime is supposed to make people horny. - Source: i made it up

As automation/robotics/ai get better, humans transform from an asset to a liability. Fewer people means fewer protestors/rioters/revolutionaries/universal income recipients/whatever.

You wanna know or you asking for a friend?

Lola Bunny.

Rabbits can be trained to use a litterbox. When is the last time you saw a human using a litterbox?

The average human maybe.

But there is a significant overlap between the smartest rabbit and the dumbest humans.

Or was that with bears?

a portion of humans is, yes

Yes and no, the way our society is built/structured can't handle negative growth. A lot of infrastructure and way of life/quality of life would suffer massively. That being said, pop growth also can't go up forever (while limited to earth). We actually have a ton of livable land left too, cities have learned how to be so super dense that it's eating all the rural area's populations in quickly developing places (It's where all the jobs and opportunities are -cities). Estimates suggest we will top off around 10 billion people

The west is already on it, how do we propagate it elsewhere?