Slashdot Mirror
Robotics Researcher Starts Campaign To Ban Development of Sexbots
Earthquake Retrofit writes: A robotics ethicist from the UK's De Montfort University has started a campaign to ban the development and use of sex robots. "She believes that they reinforce traditional stereotypes of women and the view that a relationship need be nothing more than physical." The campaign was spurred by news that some companies claim to be fairly far along in development of such technology. One company even plans to start selling them later this year. The campaign's goals and concerns include "We propose that the development of sex robots will further reduce human empathy that can only be developed by an experience of mutual relationship," and, "We challenge the view that the development of adults and child sex robots will have a positive benefit to society, but instead further reinforce power relations of inequality and violence."
when they pry it from my cold, dead hands...
"She believes that they reinforce traditional stereotypes of women"
Millions of gay men will hate you and your bigotry, because your arguments sucks more than a sex robot would do.
Every bit as doomed as banning porn. I'd be angry at her for trying, but since she'll accomplish precisely nothing, I think her failure will be a thoroughly satisfying punishment for the attempt.
Looking at the woman
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
It's no surprise she fears competition from robots.
too much Futurama?
Nothing like putting up crap without analysis or even a modicum of critical thought
How does choosing to have sex with a robot reinforce stereotypes about women or relationships with women?
Good luck with that...
Hectice, baby, Mercator says hello to you
I am so disgusted by my own arousal at the thought of a lifelike sex toy that I must have them band for all, lest I give into the unholy temptation and have sex with one.
--- Keep the choice with the user..
Sexbots for women and men might be the ultimate chance to remedy one humanity's greatest source of conflicts, ranging from the Troian War over annoyingly crazy teenagers to sexually frustrated housewives. They could finally stop men from objectifying women for purely sexual purposes. The effects of this change could be more beneficial than the pill and the invention of the vibrator taken together. In an age in which in-vitro fertilization is easy, it would be crazy to take away this unique chance for the evolution of humanity.
I'll support her movement as long as she also pushes to ban dildos, vibrators, clitoral stimulators, teledildonics, "fucking machines" and other female masturbation aids. No, I don't use masturbation aids, and I don't have a problem with female masturbation aids. I just have a problem with the horrific double standard. Feminists tell us that women who use masturbation aids are strong, independent and empowered, while at the same time claiming that men who use masturbation aids are disgusting perverts.
Thank you liberals.
and half of images will be of sex toy robots. If somebody wants to start sex robot line, I would suggest naming lead model 'Kathleen'.
BTW, what is 'robot ethicist'? I suppose they share university space with Post-scarcity Economics, Xenoarchology, Applied Fusion and Singularity Communication.
Try as the puritanical naggers might, they are ever against progress and are on the wrong side of history, as the battle against pornography shows.
If you don't like sex robots, don't buy one. If you don't like that people might want sex bots, then start a campaign I guess.
as we can still have the killer robots. Those do not " further reinforce power relations of inequality and violence."
This is just another utterly immoral attempt to force people to behave in ways some authoritarian POS wants them to. Whatever happened to freedom? The irony is of course that this comes form an "ethicist". Apparently one does not even need to know basic ethics to become an "ethicist".
Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
Her argumentation can be applied, without amendments, to any (self-)masturbation and any aid for it (including written, imaged or video porn). Essentially, sex robot is just that - technologically advanced masturbation device.
A few quotes from an academic without context may well produce a decent bit of clickbait, but I'd be interested to read the rest of "The Asymmetrical âRelationship: Parallels Between Prostitution and the Development of Sex Robots,".
There doesn't seem to be a lot about this "campaign" apart from a few mentions in the media.
Yet another feminist who whinges about problems that don't exist, solely so to get attention.
.....now we have ethicists as self appointed wankers.
Seriously, what a waste of space.
No more manual collection of semen...
They reinforce traditional stereotypes of men and the view that a relationship need be nothing more than physical...
Sexbots are masturbation aids, no more, no less. And I don't see anyone but the most hardcore fetishists see them as anything else but a glorified dildo or fleshlight.
Stanislaw Lem already predicted quite a few things here... read the Star Diaries, although I believe that the matching story "Die Waschmaschinentragödie") isn't included in the English versions. http://derdeutsche.twoday.net/...
welcome our new sexbot overlords.
view that a relationship need be nothing more than physical
She doesn't approve fuck buddies I guess. Relationships are what they are, all dependent of the persons/machines/animals/inanimate objects involved. There are many possibilities, and each teach something about life and death.
will further reduce human empathy that can only be developed by an experience of mutual relationship
Really? People have no inherent capabilities for empathy now?
human empathy that can only be developed by an experience of mutual relationship
So what does she have to offer or suggest to those people (men particularly) who have no opportunity to develop such an experience? In the West at least, a significant proportion of women have rejected men entirely, possible after one fling and a child. Equal wages and opportunities for women, as well as social attitudes, mean that it is no longer "essential" for a woman to find a husband as it was as recently as two generations ago. There are too many men seeking for the number of women available.
And for sex! She needs it bad!
That "robotics ethicist" is a woman, right? Can't all get a gender studies position, right?
The UK are demanding something sex related be banned again...
Why am I not even surprised?
Mal. Guy killed me, Mal. He killed me with a sword. How weird is that?
--- Liberty in our Lifetime
Where is the campaign to ban dildos. Aren't they simple sex robots that depict men who's only purpose is to sexually furfil women and then to be thrown in a draw?
It seems that she is afraid of competition from said sexbots.
Well, male sex robots are generally more complex task, but they will appear. And they will probably find wider market. Good luck to you then, stereotype fighters.
'The campaign was spurred by news that some companies claim to be fairly far along in development of such technology. One company even plans to start selling them later this year.'
Where's the link? Oh right, wouldn't want a balanced article!
no surprises... our creators momkind have us coming & going.... what a relief... tears innocence truth & mercy = justice... spirit of creation all+++++++ undefeated since/until forever....
That's a great idea! Send all the feminists to India and let them fight it out with the rapists. Wonder who would win?
instead of women?
"She believes that they reinforce traditional stereotypes of women"
Sounds more like "women will lose the powerful tool of sex deprivation to control men".
Not that anyone here will suffer from that a lot.
>campaign to ban
You are not to decide what I can or cannot do.
As long as it does not affect you - fuck off.
I'm sick of you leftist scums.
Sure let's make a million of them. For testing. Now drop them in the Middle East, the terrorist training areas. Before they are taught how to have sex with their camels. Or make homemade bombs out of fertilizer, and other household goods. Hey guys, the virgins we were promised are here, early delivery! Everybody would be trying to get these bots in unusual contortions before the bots suddenly explode, nuking the desert back to the stone age.
WARNING: Smartphones have side effects--most of them undocumented.
Must be stopped!
They'll get my AutoBlo when they pry it off my cold, dead crotch.
the industry need sexbots the same way the internet needs porn. no way around that, but thanks for bringing that forward.
can't understand normal thinking.
Because she would rather let women be exploited and pimped out instead.
Actually we just need to ban women from making decisions. The world would be a much better place. Instead of women like her wanting to do it "for the children."
welcome our new Sexbot Overlords!
I like to look at this as something of an economics issue, with sex being an economic good (or service).
Women oppose sex bots (and prostitution) because women function as something of a cartel that wants to establish a minimum price for sex. Historically, the price has been marriage but over the last 40 years or so the cartel has been willing to lower the price as the economic value of men has dropped -- women have vastly more economic opportunities and no longer see socially and legally enforced relationships with men as economically rewarding or necessary as they used to be.
They haven't completely reduced the price to free, though, as for the most part the cartel still generally demands a price that men engage in forms of courtship and relationship engagement in exchange for sex.
Women oppose prostitution and sex bots because they effectively break the cartel's monopoly. A sex bot (at least a reasonably realistic one) lowers the price below the cartel's general minimum price. They also have the economic efficiency of reducing the transaction costs below the cartel's and even below illegal prostitution and with fewer externalities, too. The cartel's price has an inherently high transaction cost and a lot of inefficiencies, although to some extent the cartel has been able to leverage technology to reduce transaction costs and efficiencies somewhat.
Sounds like Dr Kathleen Richardson has a problem with human nature. Shall I fire up the ovens?
A clip from Futurama
https://vimeo.com/12915013
This term "ego shooters" is retarded. No game is designed to make egotistical people have an advantage. They are just naturally more of an asshole and will do whatever to win. Therefore the term covers every online shooter in existence with a chat feature and is redundant so it should just be "shooter."
In short, get your ass back on GunZ so I can wreck your newgen ass.
when they pry it from my cold, dead hands...
Any sexual experience not based on a mutual relationship is bad, apparently - so they'll be taking your hands, too.
In a survey of 100 programmers, 111111 thought that duck-typing was a good idea.
She's actually probably right about sex robots not being a benefit to society, but trying to block them is like trying to stop human nature in its tracks. Good luck with that.
There's a reason why "sex toys" are sometimes referred to as "marital aids".
Some people use sex toys as a substitute for a partner, sure. But plenty of people use them as a supplement to a healthy sexual relationship.
So, I'm going to apply the same argument here as one would apply to the concept of "potential weapons": inasmuch as anything you can find can be used as a weapon, so, too, can anything be used as a sex toy.
Ergo: Ban everything.
Christ, what a limited perspective this woman must have about sex.
Some people don't believe in fairies. I don't believe in The Patriarchy.
They can take away my sexbot when they pry it off my cold, dead... um... never mind
Thing is, sexbots would be a great way to economically compete with the sex slave 'industry'. Thousands of girls are kidnapped or forced into the sex industry every year; if sexbots are cheaper to purchase and maintain, it'll effectively cut down one of the remaining great evils of society, painlessly and effectively.
She may be right (though I personally think she isn't) in that it may well poison current adult relationships. But at least you can leave an abusive relationship or talk about it. It's a little harder to talk your way out of servitude enforced by bullets.
Warbots are just fine.
My ism, it's full of beliefs.
If they make sex robots intelligent, will they withhold sex, supply all the sex their partner can handle, or find some other technique/method/path to get what they want?
Will they want diamond rings?
Who will be legally responsible when the first robot-fucks-owner-to-death occurs?
So, the "Inquisition" and "Mutaween" have become old news, and "ethicist" is the new "in" thing to be i see.
An individual with arbitrary and completely subjective and relative ethical and moral principles, attempting to dictate to society on how it should act and think; justified by an infantile and twisted self-righteousness and savior complex, supported by a slippery slope fallacy and patronizing.
Trying to dictate to people on what they should wear, what they should listen and watch, what they should or shouldn't fuck, what they do in private.
Sounds familiar. I'm surprised she didn't state that being a male homosexual is misogynist because it is unfair to women and doesn't give them a chance.
I find it ironic that the same people who should be fighting against religious fundamentalism and the radicalism that misuses morals and ethics to stifle individualism and sexual liberty,
are now doing the exact same thing, but they delude themselves into thinking it is ok when they do it because they are not a religion but a "progressive political" movement. A difference of labels standing in for the same authoritarian thought policing shit.
The old "Do as i say, not as i do." spiel.
This is hilarious. This is entertaining. This is bound to fail.
I have noticed that BBC had the guts to have open comments on any article that is feminist around 2012. Yet now they are all locked.
The reason is that the people who may have supported feminism in 2012, have witnessed the movement doing stupid and contradictory radical crap, to such a point where it has lost support from most people. To the point where even prominent accomplished feminists (i'm not talking basement feminists like Tumblr and Twitter personas, but feminists with tangible accomplishments such as Hirsi Ali) are bashing what the movement has become. It has become to Egalitarianism what Westboro Baptist Church is to Christianity.
The latest low point was when these same people shamed and bullied a scientist for his choice in what shirt he wore, gifted by a female friend to him mind you. Almost reminiscent of some Middle Eastern countries and their "religious fashion police".
This is all bull.
Look at how well banning pornography has done.
May be this should be banned before "Electrogonorrhea: the noisy killer" starts to spread
and this is the most fucked-up comment yet
And puritanical. However I think in some case we should ban sex-robots. I think if they're just a machine, without any self-awareness then I don't have a problem with them. If however a sexbots are sentient, even to a limited degree then making them is nothing more than sexual slavery. Much as Charles Stross and Greg Egan have pointed out. The trick will be how do we determine if a robot is sentience, and at what level do we say no more.
I also think that in the near future anyone with sexbot will be considered a bit of a fuck up, unable to manage even basic relationships with the opposite sex.
I think she needs to get her a$$ back in the kitchen before the robots take over that job too.
+.01, Mildly Amusing
+1, Firefly
(name withheld by request)
Asking the millions of elderly, ugly, disfigured, disabled, etc to live without in the name of empathy is ironic.
Beware of she who would deny you access to easy orgasms, for in her heart she dreams herself your mistress.
"We challenge the view that the development of adults and child sex robots will have a positive benefit to society, but instead further reinforce power relations of inequality and violence."
Is anyone else bothered by the phrase 'development of adults & child sex robots'
Kids have what to do with this???
I've seen some pretty ugly people in my days, and maybe this is all they need for the lust that they desire... They could even keep rapists off the streets.
In a way, you all remind me of the insects that get fooled into thinking they are having sex, when all they're really doing is pollinating some plant. Except you all aren't even accomplishing that much.
I say this as someone who has a good relationship with my wife. You are gloating over the fact that you've fooled the system, cheated the divorce attorneys, and outsmarted the other gender. At the same time, you are depriving yourself of an entire aspect of being human that much of humanity up until now has enjoyed. I realize the legal climate has ruined the institution of marriage for men, and both sides are now reacting in the only logical way: fire up the machines to get those biological urges satisfied! You are proving her point that it's just a physical/biochemical act now.
There is very little that is remotely as sexually objectifying as a dildo. Reducing a man to his sex organ.
Well, doc? Why the outrage against sex bots? Maybe you should start with a campaign against dildos?
But ... I've seen you. I dare say that you probably are quite happy that they exist.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Women have been treated like sex objects since the 1960's "sexual revolution"
NOW you're trying to say there is a such thing as sexual ethics? Ridiculous. You'll have to somehow manage to convince the 1960's hippies running the society.
Good luck on that! Won't happen.
If you make sex bots that look too realistic, and this causes men to objectify women, then perhaps this would carry over into how they treat real women. (Mind you, in that case, the genes that lead to this behavior would be eliminated from the gene pool.)
On the other hand, some men just have higher sex drive and just need to deal with some physical discomfort, unconnected with their emotional relationships with women. If they get their excess needs met somehow, then they might not be total horn dogs when they are around real women and would treat them with more respect as human beings.
Some artiificial ban on some specific technology isn't going to change people's nature. On the other hand, it might help a lot if we were to educate people from a young age that they need to treat other human beings with dignity and respect.
Wait for artificial wombs. The same people oppose those too.
"She believes that they reinforce traditional stereotypes of women and the view that a relationship need be nothing more than physical."
I don't believe a word she says. I think she's one of those anti-AI types and is just using the sex/exploitation angle as an obfuscating excuse to quell the one branch of the industry that is likely to pass the Turing test first.
Free, as in your money being freed from the confines of your account.
So if a woman has breast cancer, and wants a breast reconstruction - all those red buttons go off - demeaning yada yada
What about reconstructions and a tidy up downstairs. Picket those Brazilian places. The demand for boob jobs - wanna ban those too, all requested from her sisterhood, along with botox and face peels and torture at slimming clinics.
Market supply and demand will sort it out.
Saw a story on this yesterday. It seems that because she can draw some tenuous parallels between sexbot production and prostitution, and because she thinks there's something fundamentally terrible about prostitution(?), sexbot production is wrong. :-\
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
"The objectification of women is directly correlated to the fact that men are animals driven by their testicles. To remedy this situation, I propose that we castrate all men, thus removing sexual desires altogether and subsequently eliminating the objectification of women." - Hillmary ClitBomb
NOTICE: All characters appearing in this work are fictitious. Any resemblance to real persons, living or dead, is purely coincidental.
"She believes that they reinforce traditional stereotypes of women and the view that a relationship need be nothing more than physical."
It was no surprise at all to find that this comes from a female researcher. Anything that gives men pleasure is viewed with suspicion, and doubly-so anything that might make guys less dependent on women for sexual gratification.
She wants to ban this sort of thing not because it's wrong, but because she's offended by it.
Honestly, can you imagine a male researcher making these statements and suggesting we ban vibrators or female-oriented sex toys? Me neither.
Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
Break the va-jay-jay cartel! Free men from ever having to put up with a woman's crap to get laid ever again.
A lot of women should be terrified, they might have to get by on their personality.
Oh....suddenly, this idea isn't acceptable to women now?
I mean, denigrated men to a single part of their body.
I'm pretty sure the term comes from ego-perspective, as opposed to little pixel figures fighting each other. At a time that was something brand new in 3d graphics.
Listen, and understand! That Copulator is out there! It can't be bargained with. It can't be reasoned with. It doesn't feel pity, or remorse, or fear, and it absolutely will not stop, ever, until you are dead.
On the upside, after that much sex, men will want to deal with women on a basis that is ANYTHING but physical.
Simulated relationships have been around for a while too.
If we go down this route we'll end up banning harem anime/manga, and then to be equal we'll have to ban romance novels and soap operas, and then all of fiction to exterminate the waifus and husbandos.
My wife had a good point, why would the researcher assume sex robots would only be for men. Seems like vibrators tend to be built for women so why not a sex robot. Some of these extreme feminists are as bad as the bible thumpers preaching their own versions of morality as the only option.
We call those "first person" in the developed world. Where are you guys from? England?
yeah f that. i'd make one today if i could,regardless if it's illegal. beats having to try to charm someone that doesn't think highly of you to no avail, or to settle for something out of the animal kingdom.
A bunch of aluminum and silicone robot used for sex... or the actual degradation of real women used as prostitutes.
Make up your minds!
I'll stop objectifying people when you stop personifying objects.
That kinda ad hominem nonsense just creates a faulty "argument" that her theories would have been more valid if she were younger and thinner.
Wind the time back and she's this nerdy chick with raven hair and pretty eyes who's into robots. How cool is that, right?
The woman is pushing 40(ish) and has excess weight.
Yeah... no one on slashdot has ever been or will ever be in those shoes. We're all fit and perma-young.
Should she lose weight and get sexier lighting, background and clothes - will her theories suddenly become more valid?
How about if she were a guy?
I know, I know... It's a joke.
But it's a lame one and it opens the door to the whole "her theory is laughed at on account of her being a woman" argument.
When the real reason it is laughable is cause it is based on a faulty premise of humans being nothing but sex-bots made of flesh and then making a bunch of logical leaps based on premises as faulty as that one.
I.e. This is some wonderful circular thinking:
The vision for sex robots is underscored by reference to prostitute-john exchange which relies on recognizing only the needs and wants of the buyers of sex, the sellers of sex are not attributed subjectivity and reduced to a thing (just like the robot).
Sex robots are like prostitutes. Which is bad. Cause prostitution treats prostitutes like robots.
Ergo, treating robots like prostitutes is bad - CAUSE THAT WOULD BE TREATING ROBOTS LIKE ROBOTS!
Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
Why does she assume all sexbots are feminine and meant for heterosexual cis males? Why does she think they are necessarily gendered at all? What a fucking sexist asshole.
Sexable bots will act as a mating disruptor.
That being said, feminists should be all for this kind of thing... after all, it sets women free of having to put up with men, doesn't it? Think of how much females can achieve when they are no longer providing domestic support for a man much less raise children!
Bots designed by women FOR women would be at least as difficult for a man to compete with as a feminine bot for men and who says women won't have at least two such bots so that, while one is doing the cooking, the other(s) can be doing the cleaning.
I wonder what other changes would occur when there is no scarcity for men when it comes to sex.
And, of course, if there's enough (ahem) penetration of such bots, eventually we will have world peace as the human race becomes extinct.
Women already have sexbots, just because we men prefer a more 'complete' full-build solution doesn't mean it should be banned. I eagerly await the delivery of my Lucy Lu.
I don't pay the escort for relationship or sex, I pay her to leave and not raise a stink about it when the "date" is over.
We both know and accept this is how it goes. I bet she's just as happy to be leaving as I am she is gone. Win-win.
This strikes me as similar thing as people who dislike e-cigs. Sure it isn't exactly healthy to fuck a robot or suck down nicotine, but is it really worse than the possible alternatives. Fucking a child and/or someone forced into prostitution; or smoking tobacco? I think not.
All sex toys save one I've ever seen were for women. How did she come to the conclusion that sex bots would be built for men? Sex bots for women are much more likely and, I dare say, almost exist already.
Maybe they should just build an unisex fuckbot with industry-standard extension slots which can be fitted with either a dildo or a fleshlight? Then everybody could objectify in peace and equality! Of course there's a very real danger that the fuckbots would just pair off with each others and give us the finger ;)
If a train station is a place where a train stops, what's a workstation?
I submit that this is an astroturfing campaign from the SexBot Manufacturers Industry Association!
... and consider that a sexbot, which could easily be made stronger than a human, would spend a lot of its time around humans in distracted and/or exhausted condition.
"The goal of feminism is to remove all constraints on female sexuality while maximally restricting male sexuality."
The abusive comments on the YouTube channel that featured Dr. Richardson were, in my opinion, uncalled for, and probably just reinforce her beliefs. We can have diverse opinions about issues like this, and I, for one, am glad someone's at least thinking about this. As robots come into general familiarity, we're all going to have to do some soul searching.
While I don't agree with the outright banning of this technology, I do understand her point - I just don't think technology, in and of itself, is good or evil.
This was my (somewhat lengthy response to her):
I think that we can have a discussion here without such personal derision. I wonder, Dr., how you feel about places like China where the men outnumber the women by over 30%. Or in Japan, where women's increased demands for an 'acceptable' mate have lowered their birthrate to non-sustainable levels. Already there are men there who use RealDoll-like toys - some who literally make them part of their social lives. What options are available to them that would be acceptable to you?
In addition, and closer to Western world, not all men are capable of having or maintaining a sexual relationship with women - but this doesn't necessarily limit their sex drive. Men with severe appearance deficits or low intelligence may never have the opportunity to have a mate.
While it is often easy for women to dismiss sex for men as being a disconnected act, this is certainly not always true (it isn't with me), and I believe there is an equally important biological need for acceptance and love. This is demonstrated differently with different men.
While I do believe there is some merit in your argument, I also believe that sexual expression IS different between men and women, regardless of relationship status.
Imagine the outrage over the removal of Disney 'Princess' movies, romantic novels (essentially word-based pornography), or sex toys for women would cause! And yet, these things unquestionably also color women's perception of relationships with men - and their expectations.
As feminists scream for equality, the truth is that women are the ones who do the choosing, as they feel the need to be specially selective about their mates. This can be seen in the animal kingdom as well. It is understandable (especially when the production of children is involved), but this is, at least, an example of how men and women are not only different, but unequal.
Doesn't this, in and of itself, color an unfortunate man's opinion of woman? How better to address that than by providing men with the next best thing?
Advanced robotics is going to even the playing field somewhat for those disenfranchised men, not among the lucky to be selected by a 'real' woman. Eventually, it may offer these rejected men another side altogether of women, providing them with a 'loving' partner, fulfilling their need to be loved. Obviously, the reality of the 'love' expressed will be proportional to the level of technology and the skill of AI programmers.
Certainly, early forms of this will be no more than machine-assisted masturbation, but this will be a short-lived period of time, as Moore's Law and the determination of science has previously demonstrated.
As with any technology, the possibility for good and evil will exist. I suggest letting things progress as they will until direct evidence against ANY positive use exists.
"...Well, there's egg and bacon; egg sausage and bacon; egg and spam; egg bacon and spam; egg bacon sausage and spam..."
Think about it. The main reason human trafficking exists is for the sex trade. After sex-bots became commonplace there wouldn't be as large a market for human sex-slaves. Sure there will always be a small number of people who, due to their fucked up minds, wont be satisfied with a robot and will continue to seek to buy other humans for sex toys or baby makers.
Personally I love the idea, especially if they come with a AI that allowed them to do things outside the bedroom, like just sit at the kitchen table and interact with me over breakfast. I've been married once, almost twice and in both cases I had my trust and loyalty betrayed. As a result I'm caught in the "Hedgehog's dilemma", I want to get close but I'm afraid of getting hurt,
Most men actually want female companions. How about a ban on robots and drones that kill people?
Democracy Now! - your daily, uncensored, corporate-free
Probably Germany.
The real money will be in virtual sex. When they can build sex robots that are connected to the internet (or whatever replaces it) and the bots can transmit whatever they experience to another human in real time, that's when things will get interesting. Note that such an arrangement would appear to invalidate a good bit of the argument against sexbots described in TFA.
I'm going to have my sexbot fashioned in the likeness of her image O_o
Bitch, don't tell me what to do. Go suck some dick.
If you are going to decry the possibility of unhealthy stereotype reinforcement due to sexbots you should also address the mental and physical health effects of those who are less able to enjoy a healthy relationship (including sex) for WHATEVER reason. Fundamentally, as others have pointed out, you are saying that physical release shouldn't happen outside a human to human relationship- so no toys, in extremis no hands either. IMHO a healthy relationship is built on a strong foundation of having a fundamental understanding of how your own sexuality works, specifically how YOU personally can achieve comfortable intimacy and/or orgasm. If you don't know how you work how the F can you expect others to?? How many mass murders have been caused by loners who were rejected by women. I can think of several.
The development of this technology can never be stopped, as every inventor knows that this invention will make him a millionaire in about 10 minutes.
This was predicted by Sam Kinison years ago:
http://youtu.be/ybrENRGq8TM?list=PLFDE09C76C7CFE15A
Feminazis will ban, imprison, gas, incinerate, whatever to perpetuate alpha fucks/beta bucks.
Let's ban vibrators too then. Ooooohhh... Booyyyaaaa!
This research doctor wants to avoid "ethics of robots" but she seems to be more afraid of ending rapes, child prostitution and sexually transmitted diseases.
(Almost) everything about this topic has already been explained here: http://www.adultswim.com/video...