Scott Adams, Technological Rapist

We here at TCBH, the Too-Cleverians, have had it up to HERE with technocrats insisting that we'll all be machines someday, or that machines will rule us, or that machines are people too, or that, well, machines already rule us:

"Technically, you're already a cyborg. If you keep your cell phone with you most of the time, especially if the earpiece is in place, I think we can call that arrangement an exobrain. Don't protest that your cellphone isn't part of your body just because you can leave it in your other pants. If a cyborg can remove its digital eye and leave it on a shelf as a surveillance device, and I think we all agree that it can, then your cellphone qualifies as part of your body. In fact, one of the benefits of being a cyborg is that you can remove and upgrade parts easily. So don't give me that "It's not attached to me" argument. You're already a cyborg. Deal with it."

Just real briefly, because I have already ranted about these fascistic motherfuckers before, the persistent, all-out push to have humanity acknowledge its dependence on (and hence, subservience to) technology is a sick fucking obsession with these people and their crusade to get everyone to "deal with it" is not unlike a rapist who wants you to admit you "asked for it" and "liked it." A wholly unfair and weird characterization? Maybe. But that's what I thought of, so that's what you have here.

The real question, to quote Diane Rehm, then becomes, not whether we are truly cyborgian, but why in hell's name it's so important to tech-douches for all of us to admit that we are. What is the significance of the admission? Is it psychic payback of some kind?