Contextual negation by moral opposition: rethinking the ethics of (Rape) simulations

Understanding people’s attitudes toward sex robots will be essential to facilitate this technology’s likely assimilation into human relationships in a way that maximizes benefit and minimizes conflict within the privacy of people’s bedrooms. This online survey was developed to investigate attitudes toward sex robots. Questions were chosen to explore a variety of emotional, behavioral, and sexual variables that could potentially be pertinent to individual’s receptivity to sex with robots. There were 376 respondents, 84.1% of which were heterosexual. Self-reports of depression, social anxiety, attention deficit disorder, and Asperger’s spectrum all correlated positively with receptivity toward sex robots. Challenges with monogamy, more lifetime sex partners, higher frequency of masturbation, more pornography consumption, greater consumption of alcohol and marijuana, and more frequent use of video games also all correlated positively with receptivity toward sex robots. Curiously, receptivity toward sex robots correlated positively with both the experience of sexual pleasure with human partners and with the experience of anxiety during sex with a human partner. It is our belief that research in this area is paramount to assist psychologists, anthropologists, roboticists, and couples in navigating the intimate challenges of the future.

Prosthetic Soul Mates: Sex Robots as Media for Companionship

Generally speaking, sex robots are artificial entities designed to be humanlike in appearance and behavior, and which are primarily used for sexual purposes. In the literature on robot ethics, most work is influenced by either deontology or utilitarianism. In this article, I address some issues concerning sex robots from a Confucian standpoint. The first question that will be raised is whether sex robots can be morally permitted. Intuitively, such machines might not be morally acceptable for Confucianism since Confucians seem to hold a negative and mortifying attitude toward sexual desire. However, this intuition is likely incorrect. I argue that sexual desires guided by the heavenly principle are not immoral. Hence, from the Confucian perspective, sex robots, which are created to meet humans’ sexual desires, can at least sometimes be justified. The second question addresses what kinds of sex robots Confucianism can morally allow. As I explore, following Confucian insights, the answer to this question likely depends on the purpose for which one seeks to use sex robots. Sexual thoughts that involve incest, threesomes, fornication, and pedophilia are usually regarded as morally wrong from the Confucian perspective. Thus, it would likely be morally unacceptable to use sex robots to fulfil such illicit and inappropriate desires. By contrast, Confucianism might morally permit other kinds and uses of sex robots. In some cases, people want sex robots because they are unable to find human sexual partners. Sex robots might be able to fulfil such people’s sexual needs, while also enabling those individuals to build emotional bonds with their sex robots. The therapeutic use of sex robots can also be allowed. The paper consists of four sections. The first section demonstrates the specialty of sex robots. The second section explores the Confucian views of yin-yang theory and sex. In the third section, Confucian theories of family relations and sex are illustrated. Lastly, based on the features of Confucianism, I argue that some kinds of use of sex robots can be morally allowed by Confucians.

Part of the ethical debate about sex with robots concerns whether sex with a robot is rape of that robot. It therefore makes sense for us to debate what should be the boundaries of consent, decades from now, i.e. consent given by humans to robots. How will the sexbot landscape look in situations when it is the human who is consenting, or not, to a sexual invitation or advance by the robot? The sexbot will have responsibilities towards its human partner, and there will be moral and legal consequences if it fails to deliver on those responsibilities. An unresolved ethical argument employed by many of those who deplore the coming advent of sex robots is that robots are unable to proffer a meaningful indication of sexual consent, and therefore a human deciding to have sex with a robot is committing rape of the robot. A parallel question, as yet to be addressed, is under what circumstances should a robot be considered to be acting in a sexually inappropriate or illegal manner towards a human? And this question embraces some others, including: “How can a robot determine, with any degree of certainty, whether or not a proximate human wants or at least consents to sex?”; “What behaviours by a robot are permissible within the #MeToo context when the robot is exploring a proximate human’s current level of sexual interest in the robot?”; and “If a robot oversteps the accepted bounds of sexual behaviour with a human, who is responsible and what should be the legal consequences?” We discuss these issues and speculate on how the sex robots of the future will be able to conform to the ethics of consent.

This chapter starts with a discussion of what sex robots are and could be, distinguishing between humanoid sex robots (designed to look and act like human beings) and non-humanoid sex robots. The chapter then critically discusses two moral objections to humanoid sex robots: first, that they might reinforce negative stereotypes about—and lead to objectifying attitudes toward—human sex partners, particularly women, and, second, that sex with humanoid robots can only represent something morally bad, such as rape or ideas associated with rape culture. The chapter ends with a discussion of whether it is possible to exhibit any sexual virtues, such as temperance or tenderness, in sex that is had not with other human beings, but with humanoid sex robots.

In his seminal book “Love and Sex with Robots”, David Levy (Love and sex with robots: the evolution of human–robot relations, Harper, New York, 2007) predicted that intimate human–robot relationships will be normalized by 2050. So far, only a very small number of early adopters of love and sex robots has experienced these kinds of relationships. The majority of the population only learns about love and sex with robots through media representations, be they fictional (e.g., movies and TV series) or non-fictional (e.g., newspaper and magazine articles). The current study therefore aimed at analyzing the media representations of intimate human–robot relationships. The three research questions, based on Sexual Script Theory, addressed characteristics (1) of the involved human partner, (2) of the involved robot partner, and (3) of their mutual intimate relationship. A quota sample of N = 710 media examples from different genres (48% non-fictional, 52% fictional, originating from 1927 to 2014) was drawn and subjected to quantitative media content analysis. Results indicate that media representations of intimate human–robot relationships tend to portray the involved human partner as a man who is disadvantaged in interpersonal relationships. At the same time, media often portray the involved robot partner as a humanoid female sex robot. While non-fictional media describe intimate human–robot relationships more often in sexual terms, fictional media focus more on emotional aspects, cohabitation and even procreation between humans and robots. Overall, media representations of intimate human–robot relationships reveal stereotypical gender roles, heteronormativity and a focus on sexual versus emotional intimacy. Implications for the future development and use of love and sex robots are discussed.

What Would Happen If Sex Robots Could Replace Human Partners?