Abstract
AbstractIn early 2015, Kathleen Richardson announced the arrival of the world’s largest, organised resistance group against the production of sex robots in society: The Campaign Against Sex Robots (CASR). Since the birth of the CASR, Richardson and other feminists have manipulated a combination of radical feminist rhetoric and sex industry abolitionist narratives, in order to promote the criminalisation of sex robots. Moreover, the CASR and Richardson have also made some rather unique claims regarding the “similarities” between sex workers and sex robots, which have not previously surfaced within the narratives of radical feminists in recent years. This article seeks to analyse if their analogous reference to sex workers and sex robots has credibility and viability in the context of the digitalised sex industry and in the wider teledildonic and sex robot market. Furthermore, this article will also formulate solutions for the ethical and social contentions surrounding the merge of sex dolls and robots within the contemporary sex industry. In order to disentangle the radical feminist arguments surrounding sex robots and the sex industry, the following contentions will be addressed:Is moral objection to female sex robots using client-sex worker analogies from feminists justified?Is opposition to sex robots based on informed opinion about the digitalised sex industry?To what extent are the positive considerations around sex robots/dolls and sex-technology ignored in the narratives of radical feminists and the CASR?What practical applications recommendations can be made to the sex robot industry from the stipulations of the CASR and the current state of sex dolls/robots in the sex industry?
Highlights
As much as my reasoning for writing this article is to advocate for the potential benefits of future sex-technology and sex robots, it is been composed in order to justify some of the considerations that surround sex workers in the debate around sex robots and their morality
The aim of this article is to evaluate the arguments made against sex robots by the Campaign Against Sex Robots (CASR) and “debunk” some of the claims, as well as shining light on some of the issues in sex-technology, which will no doubt impact the future of sex robots
I argue that the CASR makes some valuable considerations, it is evident that there are many inaccurate and/or exaggerated claims made about sex robots that stem from misunderstandings about the sex industry
Summary
I would like to set the parameters of this debate by drawing focus to the definition of the terminology: “sex worker” and “sex work.” This article takes a neo-liberalist and feminist view on sex work, defining it as an exchange of sexual services between two (or multiple) beneficiaries for financial payment. In relation to the definition of the sex industry within the parameters of this debate, this article takes a post-modernist view on the sex industry and only references sex work within the parameters of the digitalised sex industry. This can include brothels that use the internet for marketing and advertising. Throughout this article, the terms “radical feminist” and “abolitionist” will be frequented, as they are central concepts in the Campaign Against Sex Robots’s (CASR’s) objectives and advocacy It is worth presenting in full what is meant by these terms in the framework of this argument, as the definition of a radical feminist can be somewhat subjective. It draws focus to the complexities within the sex industry and considers how sex workers may consider the merge of their own industry with that of sex robots
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
