Moving towards a future of sex with robots whether we like it or not
September 18, 2015 7:59 AM Subscribe

Robot ethicists have launched the Campaign Against Sex Robots, seeking a ban on the development of robotic sexytimes. Robot ethicists Kathleen Richardson of De Montfort University and Erik Billing from University of Skövde are the co-creators of the Campaign Against Sex Robots, which seeks to bring awareness to the issue and proposes a robot sex ban. They compare it to similar campaigns that seek to limit development of “killer” robots.
posted by sciatrix (294 comments total) 14 users marked this as a favorite

Obligatory.
posted by [expletive deleted] at 8:02 AM on September 18, 2015 [17 favorites]

Heteronormative much?
posted by Slothrup at 8:03 AM on September 18, 2015 [5 favorites]

Make love not war!
posted by Artw at 8:03 AM on September 18, 2015 [2 favorites]

I'll give up my sex robot when you pry it from my cold, dead...ehm...
posted by ymgve at 8:04 AM on September 18, 2015 [5 favorites]

Once the idea of robots was to help mankind in their endeavours, now we either want them to kill or have sex with.
posted by Kitteh at 8:04 AM on September 18, 2015 [1 favorite]

Apparently this is the latest thing that MRA groups are completely obsessed about. "Don't take away our theoretical robots you hags!" is basically the gist of it.

Once the idea of robots was to help mankind in their endeavours, now we either want them to kill or have sex with.

"Kill or have sex with" is literally our endeavors. Well, that and "eat".
posted by selfnoise at 8:05 AM on September 18, 2015 [31 favorites]

Once the idea of robots was to help mankind in their endeavours, now we either want them to kill or have sex with.

Also make amusing tweets.
posted by Artw at 8:06 AM on September 18, 2015 [10 favorites]

Once the idea of robots was to help mankind in their endeavours, now we either want them to kill or have sex with.

Historically speaking, this accounts for possibly the majority of our endeavors.
posted by Bulgaroktonos at 8:06 AM on September 18, 2015 [18 favorites]

I ... don't know how to feel about this. I mean on the one hand, yeah, sure, lolsexbots and lolsexbot owners and there's maybe ten thousand jokes about this that have been made since, I don't know, Fritz Lang's Metropolis?

But on the other hand, there's that horrifying scene in Battlestar Galactica that I'm not going to describe because of spoilers, but I am 100% absolutely certain would happen if sex robots with increasing artificial intelligence-that-will-border-on-human-intelligence became a thing. And that's something to very much avoid.
posted by griphus at 8:07 AM on September 18, 2015 [5 favorites]

oh my god how long have we had robots

please say since the middle ages
posted by Kitteh at 8:07 AM on September 18, 2015

Researchers stir up media-friendly non-research endeavour. Pictures on all news and tech websites at 11.
posted by Devonian at 8:08 AM on September 18, 2015 [1 favorite]

What if I just want to cuddle?
posted by bonobothegreat at 8:08 AM on September 18, 2015 [10 favorites]

It's called the 3F Response for a reason, folks. We just don't usually teach the third F.
posted by NoxAeternum at 8:08 AM on September 18, 2015 [3 favorites]

Whose full-on robot chubby do I have to suck to get a cup of synthi-oil around here?
posted by biffa at 8:08 AM on September 18, 2015 [7 favorites]

oh my god how long have we had robots

Since at least the 1200s
posted by griphus at 8:10 AM on September 18, 2015 [3 favorites]

Just as long as they're self-cleaning I don't see the problem.
posted by bondcliff at 8:10 AM on September 18, 2015 [5 favorites]

But on the other hand, there's that horrifying scene in Battlestar Galactica that I'm not going to describe because of spoilers, but I am 100% absolutely certain would happen if sex robots with increasing artificial intelligence-that-will-border-on-human-intelligence became a thing. And that's something to very much avoid.

The ethical issues raised by the article, though, are all about how these things effect humans not how they effect hypothetical sex bots. I totally agree that genuine actual intelligence having sex robots is a thing to be avoided (that BSG scene is indeed horrible and the ethical issues raised are important). On the other hand, the ethical issues raised by sex robots we could produced in 2015 are more like the ethical issues raised by vibrators and porn.
posted by Bulgaroktonos at 8:11 AM on September 18, 2015 [15 favorites]

I can maybe see how this will become an issue when robot sentience is a thing and there is a question of whether or not sufficiently sentient sex robots (and such robots in general) are being unethically denied agency, but this campaign stinks of puritanical thinking.

Also, anyone who ordered a Roxxxxy is going have a very sad-trombone experience, based on the videos.
posted by grumpybear69 at 8:11 AM on September 18, 2015 [2 favorites]

Robot ethicists Kathleen Richardson of De Montfort University and Erik Billing from University of Skövde are the co-creators of the Campaign Against Sex Robots

Everyone needs a hobby.
posted by octobersurprise at 8:11 AM on September 18, 2015 [13 favorites]

Prostibot 3000 coulda been my ticket out of this town. Till those meddling do-gooders came along.

Joking aside though, the motive to have sex can not be compared to the motive to kill, they are two different things entirely. And what if a robot AI develops a desire to have sex? What then? That seems like a really crappy way to restrict any type of system once it starts to evolve into a sentient and self-aware being.

And what if the robot AI's want to construct sexual pleasure circuits that don't interface with human circuits?

So shortsighted.
posted by Annika Cicada at 8:12 AM on September 18, 2015

Do they have to be physical robots? Please don't take away my holodeck fantasies before they've even materialised.
posted by vanar sena at 8:12 AM on September 18, 2015 [4 favorites]

Silly. At what point does it go from a sex toy to a robot? Is a vibrator a primitive sex robot?
posted by jeff-o-matic at 8:12 AM on September 18, 2015 [2 favorites]

Heteronormative much?

That just makes me think of that drama joke in this Futurama bit.
posted by kersplunk at 8:13 AM on September 18, 2015 [3 favorites]

The ethical issues raised by the article, though, are all about how these things effect humans not how they effect hypothetical sex bots.

I think you may have missed at least part of the point of that BSG scene/plot point. The abyss looked back at them, as it were, and changed them. The whole thing about that crew was that they had lost their humanity through their actions, and that was one of the big ones.
posted by griphus at 8:14 AM on September 18, 2015 [3 favorites]

From the article: "We believe the development of sex robots further objectifies women and children."

That's confusing to me. How does the logic on that work? That's like claiming that dildoes and vibrators objectify men.
posted by I-baLL at 8:14 AM on September 18, 2015 [12 favorites]

And I'm disappointed that nobody has given the obligatory "Futurama did it" comment.
posted by NoxAeternum at 8:14 AM on September 18, 2015

Once the idea of robots was to help mankind in their endeavours, now we either want them to kill or have sex with.

Paging Dr. Freud...Dr. Freud to the sexy robots thread...
posted by nubs at 8:14 AM on September 18, 2015

What if I just want to cuddle?

Crushinator is made for cuddling.
posted by Artw at 8:15 AM on September 18, 2015 [19 favorites]

But you have to romance her first.
posted by Kitteh at 8:16 AM on September 18, 2015 [1 favorite]

Just as long as they're self-cleaning I don't see the problem.

I just had this horrible mental image of a mashup between a sex robot and one of those self-cleaning public toilets and now all the excitement is gone.
posted by backseatpilot at 8:17 AM on September 18, 2015 [5 favorites]

Banning sex with robots is like banning masturbatory devices because the devices are not human beings. Because that's what sex robots are: masturbatory devices.
posted by I-baLL at 8:17 AM on September 18, 2015

There's a documentary called Guys and Dolls about dudes and their RealDolls and it's sort of a harrowing look into the relationship between men and inanimate-objects-that-resemble-women-to-an-uncanny-degree. And these aren't even robots.
posted by griphus at 8:17 AM on September 18, 2015 [9 favorites]

I swear this thread has happened before here? Major flashback feelings.

Membot! Please show me all the metafilter sexybot threads!
posted by Annika Cicada at 8:17 AM on September 18, 2015 [2 favorites]

Apparently this is the latest thing that MRA groups are completely obsessed about. "Don't take away our theoretical robots you hags!" is basically the gist of it.

It's shocking, really. I just can't imagine MRAs taking a break from fighting for the right to treat already-existing human women like sex robots in order to valiantly defend their desire to fuck theoretical actual sex robots. Wait, no.

Via Tumblr, h/t jeather:

Story with a dude robot: How do we define humanity? What makes us human?
Story with a lady robot: How can this dude fuck this robot? What are robot titties made of?

posted by divined by radio at 8:18 AM on September 18, 2015 [74 favorites]

The whole thing about that crew was that they had lost their humanity through their actions, and that was one of the big ones.

Well sure, but that was because they took a machine that was sufficiently intelligent that it should have been treated like a human being and didn't do so. Their empathy failed and they lost their humanity because they had an intelligent creature they were keeping around for raping. A machine that meets the criteria of "should be treated like a human being" doesn't exist. Right now we're talking about machines that can stimulate you physically like a person (sort of, maybe) and look like people, which is to say: vibrators and porn.
posted by Bulgaroktonos at 8:19 AM on September 18, 2015 [5 favorites]

New from Google! The robotic car with a very special back seat...

People already get emotionally involved with machines, in all sorts of ways. I have no doubt that when we have stuff that can pass for human during any sort of interaction, we'll have more of that sort of thing. The whole purpose of designing things that interact better with humans is to, well, interact better with humans, so we can do more things in a better way. Why not sex? It all rather smacks of 'better veil the women or there'll be Sin" to me.

Plus, I'd like to see the legal framework and practical policing that goes into imposing a sex ban on tech. "Have you got a license for that Roomba, sir? We've had reports of wilful repurposing..."
posted by Devonian at 8:22 AM on September 18, 2015 [2 favorites]

I think the concern these researchers have with sexbots is much the same that many feminists have with porn, in that sexbots create and reinforce unrealistic standards for sex in a depersonalized context, which become destructive in sexual relationships between people. I just wish, as divined by radio suggests above, that guys who just want to fuck a perfectly compliant, perfectly normatively attractive doll would just do that and leave the rest of us alone, but then again these are the same guys who can't assuage their bruised masculinity without feeling like they've conquered something.
posted by J.K. Seazer at 8:23 AM on September 18, 2015 [20 favorites]

...and look like people...

That's the big part of it that separates it from vibrators and porn. I've sold vibrators and porn to people and I've sold human-flesh-like torsos-sections with orifice holes to people. There was always a significant difference in the type of person who buys a dildo and the type of person who buys a fake chunk of a human being to fuck. I'm not at all making some sort of argument that sex robots should be absolutely verboten and they're 100% ethically wrong and it's a 1:1 thing with the scene from BSG. But it's different and it's different in a way that some of the arguments in the article in the FPP make at least a bit of sense.
posted by griphus at 8:23 AM on September 18, 2015 [8 favorites]

I was all lolrobotsex until I got to this bit:

We take issue with those arguments that propose that sex robots could help reduce sexual exploitation and violence towards prostituted persons, pointing to all the evidence that shows how technology and the sex trade coexist and reinforce each other creating more demand for human bodies.
posted by thetortoise at 8:24 AM on September 18, 2015 [8 favorites]

(And just to be clear I'm also not making the argument that everyone who buys a RealDoll or a fake-torso-chunk is a weird creepo.)
posted by griphus at 8:25 AM on September 18, 2015

Wouldn't the use of humanoid sex robots skew heavily male? There's just the one male Real Doll. Do we have data on whether women buy it?

Women use vibrators, but they do it while thinking of something or someone else, a panoply of interactions and dynamics. A humanoid robot that could give what might be called "the boyfriend experience" is complete SF at this point, if not fantasy. The idea of my ideal man as a robot -- besides the skin-crawling horror of it -- is preposterous. I want a man with a real life and a real place in the world, and I want this, I am aware, because I have been socialized to want it, as a woman in the hetero dynamic. Many men have been socialized to want a woman who is decorative, who will have the appearance and traits and behaviors they select and demand. The technology of a wifebot or a mistressbot is not so far away. (Although it would be more efficient for her to serve as an interface for a variety of house-cleaning and cooking systems, rather than having her android self standing up at the counter to do it.)

Some MRA types crow about how women are mad because they've realized they can be replaced by robots. The sort of man who would happily replace woman with artifice is, individually, no loss to society, but the idea that women can be replaced is far worse.

I'm not saying I personally want to ban this thing or that thing. I just don't know.
posted by Countess Elena at 8:25 AM on September 18, 2015 [20 favorites]

This seems all very strange. I never craved a toaster or a color t.v.
posted by three blind mice at 8:25 AM on September 18, 2015 [4 favorites]

That fuck machine has already left the sex barn.
posted by clvrmnky at 8:26 AM on September 18, 2015 [15 favorites]

Because that's what sex robots are: masturbatory devices.

I think this is disingenuous. The "female sex robot" is (or will always most definitely be) the reification of misogynist sexual standards for women. Not just beauty and body standards but generally what you see in porn, standards of servitude, humiliation and violence. Commodification of violence against women.

I want to be like ~woo, sex positivity~ but there is really nothing sex positive about mainstream porn or visions of sexuality.

If they created a child sex robot for people who sexually prefer children, I think the point would be equally obvious.
posted by easter queen at 8:28 AM on September 18, 2015 [27 favorites]

please say since the middle ages

They had Jesus bots in medieval churches. I'm not kidding.
posted by Segundus at 8:28 AM on September 18, 2015

The development of sex robots and the ideas to support their production show the immense horrors still present in the world of prostitution which is built on the “perceived” inferiority of women and children and therefore justifies their uses as sex objects.

It's a valid point, but one which relies on the user equating the sex object robot with women as sex objects. And I'm not sure that even the most dedicated sex robot enthusiast would mistake his sex robot for the real thing. As long as there is an awareness that the robot is not the real thing -- an awareness is probably hard to escape, and which may be the entire point -- then it remains a fantasy.

The same arguments have been used against pr0n. But as long as the user realizes that real women aren't like this, then the relational extrapolation from robot to RL women may not be that strong. Dunno.
posted by Capt. Renault at 8:29 AM on September 18, 2015

My point about the child robot: Who is harmed? No one. And yet it normalizes a type of inappropriate and total objectification. Obviously we can't control who fantatsizes about children (or highly sexualized, humiliated, or battered women) in the quiet of their own mind, but I don't really feel we should coax it forward out into the world, either.
posted by easter queen at 8:30 AM on September 18, 2015 [14 favorites]

And I'm disappointed that nobody has given the obligatory "Futurama did it" comment.

Disappointed and wrong
posted by kersplunk at 8:30 AM on September 18, 2015 [1 favorite]

But as long as the user realizes that real women aren't like this, then the relational extrapolation from robot to RL women may not be that strong

I do believe studies have shown that consumption of porn is correlated to sexist/misogynist views. I'd have to hunt down citations. But it's not necessarily all that theoretical that viewing violent/misogynist porn blurs the line between "real women" and "fake, porn women."
posted by easter queen at 8:31 AM on September 18, 2015 [2 favorites]

One thing that bugged me a lot about this piece is that when I was looking for links for the FPP, I tried to see if there were any written by actual current sex workers about how they thought sex robots would influence how clients saw them or how their profession was viewed. I couldn't find any. That's a perspective I'd like to see on this--I'm not sure how much I trust the judgement of robot ethicists on views of sex work over the judgement of actual sex workers. Especially when there's such a long history of ignoring sex workers' opinions about their profession and what would work best to support them, it makes me side-eye the Campaign a little bit.
posted by sciatrix at 8:32 AM on September 18, 2015 [22 favorites]

If Ex Machina hadn't already been released, I'd have guessed this was a stealth marketing campaign for the movie.
posted by RedOrGreen at 8:33 AM on September 18, 2015 [7 favorites]

"I only built the arm."
"‘Cause that’s all you needed, right?"
posted by zarq at 8:36 AM on September 18, 2015 [1 favorite]

I'm still formulating my opinion on this. Sex robots seem like they would self-evidently provide outlets for sexual satisfaction for some harmless regular folks who'd simply use them as masturbatory devices. They could also route some problematic people away from real live people into an arena where their... predilections could be a lot more harmless. On the other hand, it isn't particularly difficult to see how giving that second category of people objectified fuck toys to boink/rape/whatever the heck out of at will is maybe fueling a fire society doesn't particularly need any gasoline thrown onto, you know?
posted by DirtyOldTown at 8:37 AM on September 18, 2015 [5 favorites]

I, for one, object to these objections.
posted by sexyrobot at 8:38 AM on September 18, 2015 [53 favorites]

selfnoise: “Apparently this is the latest thing that MRA groups are completely obsessed about. 'Don't take away our theoretical robots you hags!' is basically the gist of it.”

I hesitate to post this, but in the interest of information I guess I will, with the caveat that it's hideous and you probably aren't going to want to actually read this: good old Milo Yiannopoulos, the internet's own Draco Malfoy, has written an article about this for Breitbart which is literally the most hideously sexist internet article I have ever read. Seriously, it's really, really stupid, mendacious, and just plain terrible. It actually surprised me that Breitbart printed it, and every conservative woman I know (some of whom were avid Breitbart readers) have sworn off the site because of it.

It has basically made this entire debate distasteful to me. I feel sort of like the robots should be banned, just to spite Milo and his cronies, who seem to think they'll be liberated from evil women by the sexbots. Then again, I am also tempted to say I'd rather Milo and his cronies busy themselves with sexbots and leave the actual women alone. So I'm conflicted.
posted by koeselitz at 8:39 AM on September 18, 2015 [8 favorites]

I, for one, object to these objections.

Seriously - only a square could look into the uncanny valley and demand that it be unsexy too.
posted by ryanshepard at 8:39 AM on September 18, 2015

I do believe studies have shown that consumption of porn is correlated to sexist/misogynist views.

So in that case, shouldn't we been porn then as well? Why stop at sex robots, shouldn't we been any sex toy that's not completely designed to be used with a woman partner?
posted by happyroach at 8:39 AM on September 18, 2015

C'mon, everybody knows you chase after the fembot, but eventually you realize that you're really in love with Melanie Griffith.
posted by valkane at 8:39 AM on September 18, 2015 [2 favorites]

It seems like one of the central imperatives of the patriarchal society is to deny women full personhood; so maybe it's not surprising that men in classically patriarchal societies have long been fascinated by the idea of being able to create a woman who not only wouldn't fail to consent to sex, but in fact would be unable to withhold consent.

While I don't necessarily agree completely with the anti-sex-robot campaign, it does feel a bit disconcerting that people want to create approximations of non-person humans to fuck.
posted by clockzero at 8:40 AM on September 18, 2015 [11 favorites]

"The "female sex robot" is (or will always most definitely be) the reification of misogynist sexual standards for women. Not just beauty and body standards but generally what you see in porn, standards of servitude, humiliation and violence. Commodification of violence against women."

Violence? What kind of mainstream porn are you watching? Sure, you can find servitude and humiliation if you're into that and a lot of people are into that as well. They're not "sexual standards" they're just what a large percentage of people, men and women, find sexually arousing. That's not a misogynist sexual standard. What people tend to do in the bedroom doesn't reflect their overall views outside of sex. If a girl or guy likes being sexually humiliated that's okay.

Also,

"The "female sex robot" is (or will always most definitely be)"

Why? Nowhere in the article is "sex robot" actually defined. I'm pretty sure we must have intelligent vibrators now. Are those not sex robots? If a cuddling robot is made would that not be be a sex robot?
posted by I-baLL at 8:41 AM on September 18, 2015 [6 favorites]

So in that case, shouldn't we been porn then as well?

Or, you know, work toward increased rights and safety of sex workers and toward an equitable sex industry.
posted by griphus at 8:42 AM on September 18, 2015 [17 favorites]

The show Humans covered this aspect in an interesting way.

It opens up a host of issues on consent, the ability to consent and recognizing the ability to consent
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 8:43 AM on September 18, 2015 [7 favorites]

So in that case, shouldn't we been porn then as well? Why stop at sex robots, shouldn't we been any sex toy that's not completely designed to be used with a woman partner?

I mean, if porn were shown to lead directly to violence against women and subjugation of women, yes, I'd be OK with that? The preservation of porn is not really like a human rights issue. I have lived my life mostly without porn or sex toys (as a woman, I don't have much of a choice!) and have found it bearable and even enjoyable.

However more realistically I think the problem is not actually porn/sex toys, but misogynist and violent porn and sex toys. I know, I know, there are consenting adults who enjoy their violent stuff, but I mean the fact that a huge swath of mainstream porn is all about essentially raping and beating women in a non BDSM/consensual context. I mean, it's "consensual" in that the woman are acting like they enjoy it, but in the actual material conditions of the porn industry, women are being raped and raped on film and in the narrative of the porn plot, they are being humiliated, battered and raped.
posted by easter queen at 8:44 AM on September 18, 2015 [2 favorites]

R2D2 found his soul mate, or so he believed. It wasn't until the honeymoon that he realized she was a Shop-Vac. But by then he didn't care.

It only matters if you can show agency, and then it only matters if you don't know how to change the chip to obviate it.

Rotate your Pud, Hal.
Atta boy.
Again.
Atta boy.
posted by mule98J at 8:46 AM on September 18, 2015

And I'm disappointed that nobody has given the obligatory "Futurama did it" comment.

Disappointed and wrong

You may have mentioned it, but not in the proper memetic form.
posted by NoxAeternum at 8:48 AM on September 18, 2015

"George? GEORGE!! WHAT IN THE WORLD ARE YOU DOING WITH ROSIE?"

"J-Judy, I can explain everything ..."
posted by pyramid termite at 8:48 AM on September 18, 2015 [7 favorites]

Violence? What kind of mainstream porn are you watching? Sure, you can find servitude and humiliation if you're into that and a lot of people are into that as well. They're not "sexual standards" they're just what a large percentage of people, men and women, find sexually arousing. That's not a misogynist sexual standard. What people tend to do in the bedroom doesn't reflect their overall views outside of sex. If a girl or guy likes being sexually humiliated that's okay.

1) There is so much violent mainstream porn, literally so much, that I don't know what you're talking about.
2) It is most definitely a sexual standard. Anecdotally, notice how as the porn industry started showcasing shaved genitals and anal sex, more women felt compelled to shave their genitals and offer anal sex. If you're over 40, this is probably quite evident. This doesn't mean no women enjoy those things-- just that porn has set a pervasive standard.
3) Something can be very widespread and also misogynist. Easily.
4) We're not talking about what people do in the bedroom between consenting adults, we're talking about media/porn saturation of representations of women. Representation matters.
5) Of course it's OK to enjoy being sexually humiliated. But when women feel compelled to participate in it, even when they don't like it, because it has been set as a cultural norm, that is a problem. And when it leads directly and indirectly to abuse of women and children and trafficking, it is especially a problem.
posted by easter queen at 8:48 AM on September 18, 2015 [35 favorites]

Won't someone think of the robots?
posted by ZenMasterThis at 8:49 AM on September 18, 2015

The link between pornography, misogyny and sex crime is really complicated. There are studies showing all sorts of things, some of which show that pornography can be beneficial: e.g. sex crime not increasing when more "varied" pornography becomes available in a country, certain types of sex crime even dropping when certain types of pornography become more readily available, etc. But I think if you're not seeing the gross and everpresent misogyny in the mainstream Western porn industry you're either turning a blind eye or not paying enough attention.
posted by griphus at 8:51 AM on September 18, 2015 [34 favorites]

Will nobody think of the industrial welding units? So much passing privilege here.
posted by Artw at 8:53 AM on September 18, 2015 [2 favorites]

literally the most hideously sexist internet article I have ever read

Holy shit. I mean, I guess the Brietbart domain answer's the Poe's Law question, but ... every sentence is a new WTF.
posted by uncleozzy at 8:54 AM on September 18, 2015 [1 favorite]

It's back to Glamour magazine for me then, I guess.
posted by Capt. Renault at 8:55 AM on September 18, 2015

I'm shocked by how many people here think it would be okay to dictate what people masturbate with in the privacy of their own homes, whether they find the idea repugnant or not. Even skipping the part where all of this is literally none of our business, people realize that we got rid of sodomy laws in our lifetime, right? I'm not sure how one could do the calculus and come to the conclusion that censorship and sexual shaming is going to be a force for good this time now that it's in the right hands, when history is rife with so many counterexamples.
posted by teh_boy at 8:56 AM on September 18, 2015 [24 favorites]

As a gamergater Milo probably has one of those anime sex pillows anyway.
posted by Artw at 8:57 AM on September 18, 2015

We're not talking about what people do in the bedroom between consenting adults, we're talking about media/porn saturation of representations of women. Representation matters.

This is especially evident when you compare industry porn to amateur porn, as the latter is becoming more widespread than the former by miles. Amateur porn comes with its own set of problems, of course, especially where revenge and voyeur porn is concerned, but your average couples clip is vastly different from your average pro-porn clip, and it's not just the lighting and makeup.
posted by Aya Hirano on the Astral Plane at 8:59 AM on September 18, 2015 [8 favorites]

If you believe that future sentient robots should not be harmed or exploited because of their sentience, then it makes sense that they should likewise not be sexually harmed or exploited for the same reason. I don't really see how this is weird or controversial.

The fact that MRA's want to invent subservient fembots which have no choice but to obey and serve, should tell you something about the motives of people who wish to deny rights to sentient machines.
posted by Avenger at 8:59 AM on September 18, 2015 [2 favorites]

I am not really pro-sex robot (because personally, uh, ick). But If we're automatically calling this misogynist, what about male robots for gay men/straight women? Isn't there already a device (Sybian?) a woman can sort of straddle that vibrates, penetrates to varying rhythms and speeds? Is that misandrist?

I have to say that before reading this and this thread I have never, even once thought of the possibility of "child" sex robots/toys. That's troubling to me because only those with money and access could use the toys, and others without means might well use some nearby children. Normalizing that behavior is really creepy/scary.

As a sort of parallel, isn't "virtual" child porn illegal also? As in a CG animation company, for instance, making photorealistic depictions of adults having sex with kids? I remember even reading it being illegal to create fake kiddy-porn in photoshop.

This is all disturbing stuff. But again, where does it stop being a sex toy and become a realistically-human robot? I think that's really, really far off.
posted by jeff-o-matic at 9:01 AM on September 18, 2015 [2 favorites]

Apparently this is the latest thing that MRA groups are completely obsessed about.

the manosphere is OBSESSED with sex robots. they very much think that they will create awesome sex robots, and then men will stop coddling women as a way to have sex with them, and since men are naturally better in every way than women, women will fall out of the work force, and pretty much life entirely, and they will be sorry that they were so mean and controlling to men and they will beg men to take them back - but the women will find that difficult because they will now have to compete with these perfect robot women so men will be able scoop women up by the harem and have them be perfectly compliant little sex kittens who never argue or fuss.

this fucked up fantasy gets repeated over and over and over again. it's no surprise to me that they would react strongly to efforts to ban sex robots.
posted by nadawi at 9:02 AM on September 18, 2015 [24 favorites]

I'm just going to leave this here.
posted by jordemort at 9:02 AM on September 18, 2015 [4 favorites]

Even skipping the part where all of this is literally none of our business, people realize that we got rid of sodomy laws in our lifetime, right?

I think most people who enjoy sodomy would argue that it is highly different from rape or taking advantage of children sexually!
posted by easter queen at 9:02 AM on September 18, 2015

Isn't there already a device (Sybian?) a woman can sort of straddle that vibrates, penetrates to varying rhythms and speeds? Is that misandrist?

ha! i think it's adorable you think a sybian is only for women to use.
posted by nadawi at 9:03 AM on September 18, 2015 [10 favorites]

Why would these men even want to scoop up human woman harems if they have perfect sexbots? What's the incentive?
posted by easter queen at 9:03 AM on September 18, 2015 [1 favorite]

I guess the horse is out of the barn on pedantically insisting that people call anthropomorphic robots androids instead of just robots but I think it's an important distinction. Are they calling for a ban on anatomically correct humanoid androids with programming that allows them to engage in sex or are they calling for a ban on all programmable sex-aides? What about teledildonics and VR/AR mediated experiences where the viewer sees a virtual representation of a person but they are actually having sex with a programmable fleshlight /vibrator/ sex-roomba or something? I mean this is already a thing (Mildly NSFW Youtube) are they calling for a ban on that or just on some unspecified SciFi fantasy?
posted by metaphorever at 9:03 AM on September 18, 2015 [3 favorites]

Obligatory Great old-school web-comic: Nine Planets with No Intelligent Life. A web-comic about robots with a desire to wander and explore their humanity.

Relevant Link: #2. Why is it relevant?
The end of the human race came not in the violent, all-consuming holocaust many feared. Quite the contrary. Through the arbitration of advanced AI, mankind settled its disputes and lived out its time in relative peace and tranquility. Man's extinction was not unpleasant. Human beings merely preferred to copulate with robots specifically designed for the task than to procreate with other flawed humans. Few complained when the birth-rate dropped to nil, and the last human alive seemed happy enough.

With humanity's death robots saw little reason not to continue what they had been doing: exploring the galaxy, tidying up, and building more robots.
posted by Nanukthedog at 9:04 AM on September 18, 2015 [1 favorite]

i think most people who enjoy porn would argue that's very different than rape or taking advantage of children sexually too...
posted by nadawi at 9:05 AM on September 18, 2015 [8 favorites]

Actually, from the evolutionary perspective, we're all pretty much sex robots.
posted by haricotvert at 9:05 AM on September 18, 2015 [7 favorites]

Why would these men even want to scoop up human woman harems if they have perfect sexbots? What's the incentive?

the humiliation and degradation of those human women, naturally.
posted by poffin boffin at 9:05 AM on September 18, 2015 [9 favorites]

" But I think if you're not seeing the gross and everpresent misogyny in the mainstream Western porn industry you're either turning a blind eye or not paying enough attention."

Are you talking about porn or the porn industry? Because they're not the same thing. Also, does "mainstream" porn still exist? Porn is now on demand. That recent FPP about the statistics of gamers who watch porn on their game consoles was pretty eye opening. Especially the breakdown of search terms by gender. So if you're saying that most porn itself is misogynistic then I'll have to disagree since most porn is just of people screwing each other. There are some weird videos that give off a weird vibe but those don't seem to be the "mainstream". I mean, lesbian and milf porn topped the lists.
posted by I-baLL at 9:07 AM on September 18, 2015 [2 favorites]

I just read that article and it was fantastically incoherent. Somehow, women are supposed to be worried that men will totally replace them with sex robots-- okay-- but also that all men will just give up on society and play video games? I mean, the men who are gonna do that are already doing that. There is not a man on the planet who is actually a really really great, man-of-your-dreams deep down but he got discouraged by feminism so now he has his mom do his laundry and just plays video games. That is not a real person. There are men who do things and take care of themselves and men who are lazy and a burden on those around them. Such an antisocial article-- no vision of what a well-adjusted person values in life.

Also, I'm pretty sure that women freak out about being single because of the social pressure around it. I don't think any woman is made happier by adopting a video-game playing, sex-robot-fucking man to take care of. See: women happier after divorce in their later years. I mean, I'll admit that the current state of things-- staying single longer, having children later, more divorce-- probably makes people lonelier. But it also makes people less economically dependent on abusers and other tragic situations, so you know, it's OK in my view.

Plus men might have sex robots, but until they also fold the laundry and do your therapy for free on demand...
posted by easter queen at 9:07 AM on September 18, 2015 [14 favorites]

You may have mentioned it, but not in the proper memetic form.

Good news, everyone! I've re-expressed the reference to Futurama in the proper memetic form!
posted by ROU_Xenophobe at 9:07 AM on September 18, 2015 [32 favorites]

Why would these men even want to scoop up human woman harems if they have perfect sexbots? What's the incentive?

they tend to talk about this future as sexbots and human women will be like wanting a blond or a redhead - that women will finally be compliant enough to be a good partner. a man who really wants it all would want human women and sexbots, because in this fantasy world men get literally anything they want all the time because modern women are the only thing keeping them from living their best life.

i personally don't think we should consider their views too much when we discuss the legislation of sex, because, i mean, they pass around rape manuals - ethics and the law aren't really their biggest concern.
posted by nadawi at 9:09 AM on September 18, 2015 [4 favorites]

i think most people who enjoy porn would argue that's very different than rape or taking advantage of children sexually too...

Sure, but I reserve the right to seriously question people who watch large amounts of abusive porn created in abusive circumstances, the same as I question people who ignore climate change or don't give a fuck about human rights.
posted by easter queen at 9:09 AM on September 18, 2015 [2 favorites]

I need a word for the hours spent devoted to arguing about things that will never fucking happen that isn't "argumentative losers"...

"Renault".
posted by Capt. Renault at 9:09 AM on September 18, 2015 [1 favorite]

easter queen: Okay, this is slightly off-topic and you don't have to answer this if you don't want to but what do you mean when you say:

" I have lived my life mostly without porn or sex toys (as a woman, I don't have much of a choice!) "

Okay, so I can understand the porn part since you might not be able to find porn to your liking but sex toys have traditionally been aimed at women. So I don't really understand the statement. But, yeah, it's a bit off-topic.
posted by I-baLL at 9:13 AM on September 18, 2015 [2 favorites]

Are you talking about porn or the porn industry? Because they're not the same thing. Also, does "mainstream" porn still exist?

It's much, much more complicated than that and probably more complicated than I can explain in a comment. But the industry is very much compromised toward exploitation and an argument can be made that this was never not the case. So can a compromised industry put out a non-compromised product? Sasha Grey quit the industry and later came out stating that she was basically coerced into performing in pornography by an abusive lover. So what becomes of her work now that you know she was not doing all of it entirely of her own will?

Again, it's a super, super complicated industry that absolutely has some transparent, sex-positive corners, and some deep, dark, terrible stuff happening in it.
posted by griphus at 9:14 AM on September 18, 2015 [16 favorites]

2 robots one oil can.
posted by Nanukthedog at 9:16 AM on September 18, 2015 [2 favorites]

Basic pleasure model

We're only a few years away from 2019.
posted by jeff-o-matic at 9:18 AM on September 18, 2015 [2 favorites]

if people really care about how awful the porn industry is they'd support better protections for the workers (by listening to them and passing the legislation/ordinances that they say help them) and if you consume porn, research the companies, the workers, etc, make ethical choices, and pay for it. hand wringing about which specific acts in porn are damaging or if all porn is misogynistic or whatever doesn't actually help the industry get better or support those who are being exploited in it.
posted by nadawi at 9:19 AM on September 18, 2015 [17 favorites]

Okay, so I can understand the porn part since you might not be able to find porn to your liking but sex toys have traditionally been aimed at women. So I don't really understand the statement. But, yeah, it's a bit off-topic.

You're right, I phrased that wrong. I meant porn. Sex toys, not really interesting to me either, but I know they help a lot of people and I don't object to sex toys. I don't even necessarily object to sex robots, I just know that in our fucking fucked-up sexist culture, we can't have nice things (like sex robots).
posted by easter queen at 9:19 AM on September 18, 2015 [1 favorite]

We haven't produced enough sociopaths yet by associating sex and violence in print for 500 years now, and in software for decades. Clearly this new hardware will be necessary to increase the yield so the alien harvesters will come to collect their crop.

_____________________________

"My name is Arthur C. Clarke, and I wish I had no connection with this whole sordid business. But as the moral — repeat, moral — integrity of the United States is involved, I must first establish my credentials. Only thus will you understand how, with the aide of the late Dr. Alfred Kinsey, I have unwittingly triggered an avalanche that may sweep away much of Western civilization.
"...
"...‘For the first time in history, any form of censorship has become utterly impossible. There’s simply no way of enforcing it; the customer can get what he wants right in his own home. Lock the door, switch on the TV set — friends and family will never know.’"
"...
"‘History is on our side.’ I cannot get those words out of my head. Land of Lincoln and Franklin and Melville, I love you and I wish you well. But into my heart blows a cold wind from the past; for I remember Babylon."
posted by hank at 9:19 AM on September 18, 2015 [2 favorites]

jeff-o-matic: Pris' inception date is: Feb 14, 2016. We're only 5 months away.
posted by I-baLL at 9:21 AM on September 18, 2015 [6 favorites]

Her in the streets, Ex Machina in the sheets.
posted by Artw at 9:22 AM on September 18, 2015 [11 favorites]

nadawi, I do support those things and think that listening to sex workers is paramount. I think most people are straight up not going to do that research, but whatever. I also think that the demand for really colossally awful human trafficking and abusive porn industry shit is not going to die down any time soon. I wish that someone would regulate the fuck out of this shit, but it seems like a very distant goal at the moment. And I think that if viewing misogynist porn makes men more misogynist, that's... a good point. Maybe there SHOULD be some stigma against it. That is, the men who demand/consume it.
posted by easter queen at 9:22 AM on September 18, 2015 [3 favorites]

Plus men might have sex robots, but until they also fold the laundry and do your therapy for free on demand...

Actually, robots are starting to be tested in therapy situations.

And there is at least one robot being used to fold laundry.

I personally think a non-sexual companion robot/program will probably have a much bigger impact on people than the sex robot.
posted by FJT at 9:24 AM on September 18, 2015 [6 favorites]

I'm all about safer sex work practices, but in a theoretical world where sex work was 100% safe and porn was all produced ethically, if it still imposes pressure on the majority of women to participate in sex acts they don't want to, leads to more objectification of women, leading to rape, and normalizes pain and humiliation as part of the mandatory female sexual experience, that is still a problem. The abuse of sex workers and human trafficking are much more severe problems and I agree that their voices are the most important when it comes to fixing this massive problem, but it's not like otherwise the effect on society is sugar and spice.

Re: therapy robots, well, I think a therapy teddy bear is kind of not the same as an actual human being, but whatever. If sexual or nonsexual companion robots become the new smartphone, so be it. I just hope it doesn't usher in a new age of Dollhouse or whatever.
posted by easter queen at 9:27 AM on September 18, 2015 [4 favorites]

But what about sex with a robot dog? ... Hypothetically.
posted by Auden at 9:28 AM on September 18, 2015 [1 favorite]

A categorical ban presumes the Star Trek or Blade Runner scenario where the robot has an authentic desire for the human is not a possibility.
posted by bukvich at 9:32 AM on September 18, 2015 [1 favorite]

Like metaphorever asked above:

" Are they calling for a ban on anatomically correct humanoid androids with programming that allows them to engage in sex or are they calling for a ban on all programmable sex-aides? "

The fact that they don't even phrase this part does make me think that this is all a giant troll.
posted by I-baLL at 9:33 AM on September 18, 2015 [3 favorites]

I'm all about safer sex work practices, but in a theoretical world where sex work was 100% safe and porn was all produced ethically, if it still imposes pressure on the majority of women to participate in sex acts they don't want to, leads to more objectification of women, leading to rape, and normalizes pain and humiliation as part of the mandatory female sexual experience, that is still a problem.

your views on porn are very heteronormative, ignore women consumers, and don't seem to be based in how things actually are. i can understand coming to those views since you don't consume porn (although i very much disagree that as a woman there isn't porn for us to consume). your continued conflation of rape/trafficking and porn is troubling to me. but besides all of that, it's honestly pretty off topic. if you want to talk about the evils of porn and how it's just like rape, maybe you could create a post where that's the central topic?
posted by nadawi at 9:33 AM on September 18, 2015 [24 favorites]

This is all disturbing stuff. But again, where does it stop being a sex toy and become a realistically-human robot?

Right here, baby. Now line up and prepare to submit.
posted by sexyrobot at 9:38 AM on September 18, 2015 [7 favorites]

The fact that they don't even phrase this part does make me think that this is all a giant troll.

It's a bit odd really - Hard AI is fun to speculate on but currently in the realm of hypothetical possibility, at best. Where as "best but aviv raptor!" Is probably something you could get VC funding for tomorrow and creepy sex dolls are a thing that exists right now.
posted by Artw at 9:38 AM on September 18, 2015 [1 favorite]

That's the big part of it that separates it from vibrators and porn. I've sold vibrators and porn to people and I've sold human-flesh-like torsos-sections with orifice holes to people. There was always a significant difference in the type of person who buys a dildo and the type of person who buys a fake chunk of a human being to fuck.

This suggests that no one buys both a dildo and a fake chunk of a human being, which I find a little difficult to believe. I also wonder how much the significant difference you've observed is the result of your projections about what kind of person buys the fake chunk. Are you basing your conclusions on the information about the customers you gleaned in a quick commercial transaction, or some deeper encounter with them?

(And just to be clear I'm also not making the argument that everyone who buys a RealDoll or a fake-torso-chunk is a weird creepo.)

In that case, it would be helpful if you could articulate with a little more specificity and detail what the significant difference is that universally distinguishes people who buy dildos and people who buy sex dolls.
posted by layceepee at 9:41 AM on September 18, 2015 [4 favorites]

let's have sex with robots. let's have sex with humanoid robots of all genders. let's have sex with non-humanoid robots. let's have sex with humanoid and non-humanoid robots at the same time. let's each of us copy our minds into six different robot shells and have a big orgy with six copies of everyone in all sorts of robot bodies in a big enough pile that we can never be sure whether or not we're having sex with ourselves. let's have sex with Roko's Basilisk. Let's have sex.
posted by You Can't Tip a Buick at 9:43 AM on September 18, 2015 [18 favorites]

That's the thing: Is it sex if you're by yourself and are using a robot or an automated device?
posted by I-baLL at 9:46 AM on September 18, 2015

MRA nonsense is also within the realm of hypothetical speculation, though clearly more fantasy than hard SF and more sad and gross than fun to think about.
posted by Artw at 9:47 AM on September 18, 2015

your views on porn are very heteronormative, ignore women consumers, and don't seem to be based in how things actually are. i can understand coming to those views since you don't consume porn (although i very much disagree that as a woman there isn't porn for us to consume). your continued conflation of rape/trafficking and porn is troubling to me. but besides all of that, it's honestly pretty off topic. if you want to talk about the evils of porn and how it's just like rape, maybe you could create a post where that's the central topic?

Heteronormative, yes, I am talking about the mainstream porn industry. The mainstream, highly heteronormative porn industry. As a woman, trust me, there is no porn that I actually want to consume-- this doesn't mean there isn't porn for women, but that there isn't the vast breadth of porn for every proclivity that there seems to be for men. There isn't porn that fetishizes what I find erotic. In my teens, I looked and looked, so trust me. My continued conflation is rape/trafficking and porn is based in reality, where rape/trafficking and (MAINSTREAM) porn frequently go hand in hand (maybe listen to some of those sex workers/porn actors that you are telling us to listen to? Obviously not all sex worker voices are cool zines about how sex work is sometimes depressing but whatevs.)

I never said that porn was just like rape, but if you want to pretend that there's not a highly problematic, violent and misogynist mainstream porn industry in the world, go right ahead. Ethically produced, queer porn-- great! Excellent (though not all of it is as ethical as it seems, again, listen to sex workers). But you know, the kind of mainstream, sexist, heteronormative porn that saturates our culture that you want to pretend doesn't exist? That is a real thing.
posted by easter queen at 9:51 AM on September 18, 2015 [6 favorites]

That's the thing: Is it sex if you're by yourself and are using a robot or an automated device?

If another person (individual self) is not involved, then yes. Obviously.
posted by zarq at 9:51 AM on September 18, 2015 [1 favorite]

I mean, Jesus Christ, it's like I'm talking about the sexism of the National Lampoon movies and getting called out for not acknowledging that other movies are good and exist. Fucking duh, but you know the zillion dollar blockbuster movies and the ones that are churned out like slop for the lowest common denominator? Those ones.
posted by easter queen at 9:53 AM on September 18, 2015 [1 favorite]

A world where female-formed robots are abused and exploited is a world where the female form is, itself, an object of abuse and exploitation.

People in this thread are saying "Yes many men love to beat up, abuse and kill women during sex, but as long as it happens to non-human female-looking entities in private, then this is OK."

Except it isn't ok, because it feeds the monster of misogyny and gives outlet to desires which should be repressed, rather than celebrated.

Yes, the desire to commit violence against female bodies should be repressed, with the full power and backing of the state.

Anything less is to implicitly accept that violence against the female body is somehow an acceptable part of the human condition, or acceptable under certain circumstances (well, as long as the woman consents, or as long as the woman is just a symbol of women, etc).
posted by Avenger at 9:53 AM on September 18, 2015 [16 favorites]

I am missing the tie-in between porn and and a technology protocol forbidding robot sex.
posted by Annika Cicada at 9:53 AM on September 18, 2015 [3 favorites]

Look. I have NEEDS. Sometimes a human woman can't fulfill those needs the same way. Like, sure, a woman might have sex with me but can she look up Rik Ocasek's birthday at the same time?
posted by delfin at 9:55 AM on September 18, 2015 [10 favorites]

Honestly I'm sorry I got sidetracked into talking about porn-- I didn't start off talking about it, but people started saying "well if ROBOTS then what about PORN." But there is a relevant point-- porn that fetishizes violence against women and robots that exist for the purpose of allowing pretend violence against women (and, oh, I don't know, GTA with its fun minigames and gameplay encouraging violence against women) is all pretty fucking gross.
posted by easter queen at 9:56 AM on September 18, 2015 [3 favorites]

NoxAeternum: "It's called the 3F Response for a reason, folks. We just don't usually teach the third F."

Formatting?
posted by Samizdata at 10:00 AM on September 18, 2015 [3 favorites]

As a sort of parallel, isn't "virtual" child porn illegal also? As in a CG animation company, for instance, making photorealistic depictions of adults having sex with kids? I remember even reading it being illegal to create fake kiddy-porn in photoshop.

I don't think this this is the case. The Child Pornography Prevention Act in 1996 did ban material that is, or appears to be, of a minor engaging in sexually explicit conduct but this prohibition of virtual child porn was ruled unconstitutional in Ashcroft v. The Free Speech Coalition. I know there have been some legislative attempts since then to re-instate a legal ban on virtual child porn, per se, but I don't think they have been successful. There are laws which make is easier to prosecute such materials as obscenity, but I don't think their is currently an absolute ban on photorealistic depictions of adults having sex with kids.
posted by layceepee at 10:01 AM on September 18, 2015

as a woman i completely disagree with your views on porn. i think we just have to be at an impasse.
posted by nadawi at 10:01 AM on September 18, 2015 [2 favorites]

I'm not sure if the objection is to anthropomorphic sex objects (which have been around for a long time) or subjugation of a sentient life form (which is a more general Strong AI question). I suppose there could be an argument that as the anthropomorphic sex objects get more and more sophisticated with regards to interaction, the psychological and sociological damage that they can cause gets larger. I found the position paper on their website pretty confusing. The argument seems to be:

1. In prostitution, men treat women as objects for sexual enjoyment.
2. Treating women as objects for sexual enjoyment is bad.
3. If a man buys a sex robot, he will treat the sex robot as an object for sexual enjoyment.
4. Therefore, sex robots are bad.

I might be being unfair to the paper, but they don't do a good job with their argumentation. Obviously, the treatment of women as objects for sexual enjoyment is a big problem in our society, and sex robots have been staple of creepy AI Science Fiction for decades. I'm not sure what the effects on society would be if animated sex dolls became a common toy for the rich. It's hard for me to imagine them getting more popular than the realistic sex dolls we have now, which are almost universally looked down upon.
posted by demiurge at 10:03 AM on September 18, 2015 [1 favorite]

I agree with you there, easter queen.

here's the thing, in my opinion, a robot is software driving hardware. The problem with a protocol like this is that you are defining the programatic limits of software innovation. I think there would need to be some very tight constraints on the scope of what a protocol applies to.

And I think for as far as misogyny and the poor mens feeling the bads and wanting a robot girl to dominate, well, those types of people have a sickness, and there are a LOT of them out there. I think we need to focus more on the disease and how to cure it in the heads of the diseased, as opposed to hoping we can engineer our way around it with technology protocols.
posted by Annika Cicada at 10:03 AM on September 18, 2015 [4 favorites]

This whole thread feels like it went horribly off-topic, somehow, and I'm going to rgeret having it in my Recent Activity (so thank you for the Remove from Recent button!). But I think this little snippet from the article is exactly the sort of thing that's bothering me:

There’s a puritanical element to the Campaign’s written goals, and despite their stated primary concern for women and children, a sort of sexist edge that assumes few women would be interested in sexual relations with bots. [...] Asked whether “male” sex robots might also appeal to consumers, Richardson and Billing said that the majority of sex workers are women — though, for the record, there is a male Real Doll.

“Well, it will probably happen to minor degree,” Billing said of the rise of male sex robots. “There are certainly male prostitutes but not at all to same degree that there are female prostitutes.”

And I should take them at their word on this ... why? Men and women are equal users of smartphones; I'd bet there are many more female users of sex toys than male, although of course there are more male users of porn than women, if the surveys are to be believed.

Why wouldn't sex robots be closer to sex toys than to porn?
posted by RedOrGreen at 10:04 AM on September 18, 2015 [5 favorites]

Yes, the desire to commit violence against female bodies should be repressed, with the full power and backing of the state.

But, wouldn't that admit that men cannot control their own impulses and it's up to other people to help control their so-called "urges"?
posted by FJT at 10:07 AM on September 18, 2015

I want a sex robot so I can train her to become the Scrapyard's ultimate hunter-warrior
posted by prize bull octorok at 10:09 AM on September 18, 2015 [2 favorites]

as a woman i completely disagree with your views on porn. i think we just have to be at an impasse.

You disagree that the mainstream porn industry is exploitative? I mean, you're obviously free to say that there is lots of porn out there that you enjoy, but that is the least relevant part of what I was trying to say. My point was that if lowest common denominator, hetero male demand drives the production of sex robots-- as it tends to drive everything with a money motive-- they will probably end up looking a lot like the mainstream porn industry, i.e. sexist, misogynist, violent, racist, deliberately humiliating, and totally unethical.

I am aware that there is a healthy quarter of the sex work/porn industry and that even the mainstream portion could be vastly improved by actual regulation of some kind, but my point is that what we're mostly going to get is the summer blockbuster Transformers of sex robots. (And that sounds a lot cooler than I intended... ok, the National Lampoon of sex robots, or maybe more aptly the Grand Theft Auto franchise of sex robots.)
posted by easter queen at 10:13 AM on September 18, 2015 [1 favorite]

But, wouldn't that admit that men cannot control their own impulses and it's up to other people to help control their so-called "urges"?

No. Crimes against women's bodies are the same as any other crimes. Criminal.

Nobody has to steal or kill, but they do it anyway. The state intervenes.
posted by easter queen at 10:14 AM on September 18, 2015 [1 favorite]

Yes, the desire to commit violence against female bodies should be repressed, with the full power and backing of the state.

Obviously the full power and backing of the state should be used to prevent and punish violence against WOMEN (and men, but that's not the discussion point here), but 'female bodies' that aren't actual human beings?

I don't think we need people who abuse their real dolls arrested.

On the 'subjugation of a sentient life form (which is a more general Strong AI question)' question... If AI becomes actually sentient and then should be accorded rights and whatnot... Well, then I'm personally much more concerned about losing my robot vacuum slave than I would be the sex-bot I won't be buying. Also I don't want my robot garment factory worker to be sentient because I don't want to liberate them, either (still more concerned with the human garment factory worker).
posted by el io at 10:14 AM on September 18, 2015 [1 favorite]

i disagree that you even understand what the "mainstream" porn industry is. you keep conflating things that aren't related and then claiming you aren't. i wish you'd drop this derail and i'm going to do my part in helping you by not discussing it with you further.
posted by nadawi at 10:17 AM on September 18, 2015 [12 favorites]

Capt. Renault: "The development of sex robots and the ideas to support their production show the immense horrors still present in the world of prostitution which is built on the “perceived” inferiority of women and children and therefore justifies their uses as sex objects.

It's a valid point, but one which relies on the user equating the sex object robot with women as sex objects. And I'm not sure that even the most dedicated sex robot enthusiast would mistake his sex robot for the real thing. As long as there is an awareness that the robot is not the real thing -- an awareness is probably hard to escape, and which may be the entire point -- then it remains a fantasy.

The same arguments have been used against pr0n. But as long as the user realizes that real women aren't like this, then the relational extrapolation from robot to RL women may not be that strong. Dunno."

Dunno. If I had a femme sexbot, I would think to myself "I think I am going to sex it up with my sexbot." not "I am going to sex it up with a perfectly willing female analogue."

Also, I think the issues with the male sexbots is that we can't make them move appropriately for sex. Male penetrative sex, by and large, requires a rather high energy level and an adaptive element that we just don't have the kit for. Otherwise, you just end up with a dildo with a REALLY awkward to store base.
posted by Samizdata at 10:17 AM on September 18, 2015

> if lowest common denominator, hetero male demand drives the production of sex robots--

So I think this is a BIG if - it is by no means a given, at least to me.

> ... as it tends to drive everything with a money motive

And I really disagree with this one. In fact, this is really a terrible statement.
posted by RedOrGreen at 10:17 AM on September 18, 2015 [2 favorites]

I do believe studies have shown that consumption of porn is correlated to sexist/misogynist views. I'd have to hunt down citations. But it's not necessarily all that theoretical that viewing violent/misogynist porn blurs the line between "real women" and "fake, porn women."

Well maybe not... people who had watched an adult film at least once in the past year had more egalatarian ideas about women in positions of power than those who hadn't..
posted by gyc at 10:18 AM on September 18, 2015 [1 favorite]

We already have a response all planned out
posted by lumpenprole at 10:19 AM on September 18, 2015

~~Robot ethicists have launched the Campaign Against Sex Robots, seeking a ban on the development of robotic sexytimes.~~ Two academics have made a web site
posted by Going To Maine at 10:21 AM on September 18, 2015 [10 favorites]

haricotvert: "Actually, from the evolutionary perspective, we're all pretty much sex robots."

WARNING: DAWKINS INITIATE SIGHTED!
posted by Samizdata at 10:22 AM on September 18, 2015 [1 favorite]

Nobody has to steal or kill, but they do it anyway. The state intervenes.

True, but there's few or no laws on depicting the form of stealing and killing. In most modern countries with relatively free media, it's okay to show fictional accounts of stealing and killing. I mean, you can probably go as far as filming a believable fictional documentary that depicts stealing and killing and not get in trouble.
posted by FJT at 10:24 AM on September 18, 2015 [1 favorite]

You Can't Tip a Buick: "let's have sex with robots. let's have sex with humanoid robots of all genders. let's have sex with non-humanoid robots. let's have sex with humanoid and non-humanoid robots at the same time. let's each of us copy our minds into six different robot shells and have a big orgy with six copies of everyone in all sorts of robot bodies in a big enough pile that we can never be sure whether or not we're having sex with ourselves. let's have sex with Roko's Basilisk. Let's have sex."

You kidding me? 5 copies of me in other bodies? Bet I still couldn't get any...
posted by Samizdata at 10:26 AM on September 18, 2015

I don't understand how something that doesn't even exist yet can normalize anything.
posted by Freelance Demiurge at 10:26 AM on September 18, 2015

Heya, let's maybe cool it a little.
posted by cortex (staff) at 10:28 AM on September 18, 2015 [5 favorites]

Avenger: "A world where female-formed robots are abused and exploited is a world where the female form is, itself, an object of abuse and exploitation.

People in this thread are saying "Yes many men love to beat up, abuse and kill women during sex, but as long as it happens to non-human female-looking entities in private, then this is OK."

Except it isn't ok, because it feeds the monster of misogyny and gives outlet to desires which should be repressed, rather than celebrated.

Yes, the desire to commit violence against female bodies should be repressed, with the full power and backing of the state.

Anything less is to implicitly accept that violence against the female body is somehow an acceptable part of the human condition, or acceptable under certain circumstances (well, as long as the woman consents, or as long as the woman is just a symbol of women, etc)."

Seriously? So all us males just want to abuse women? I am just liking this idea because I have weird circadian rhythms that didn't work real well when I was married.

So, yeah, please don't tar me with that brush. Cheers.
posted by Samizdata at 10:28 AM on September 18, 2015 [1 favorite]

Let's not forget that actual sex robots will undoubtedly be so amazingly expensive as to have almost no impact on mainstream culture. I mean, how many people actually own RealDolls? Probably not many.
posted by grumpybear69 at 10:31 AM on September 18, 2015 [1 favorite]

The Amazon sex robot will only cost $199 (with prime), but it will require an always-on internet connection, and will whisper sweet advertisements to you in bed.
posted by paper chromatographologist at 10:32 AM on September 18, 2015 [26 favorites]

samizdata: So all us males just want to abuse women?

That's not what Avenger said.
posted by zarq at 10:32 AM on September 18, 2015 [8 favorites]

It seems to me that if you have sexually abusive people satisfying their urges onto robots, then they are then not going to be satisfying those urges on actual people.

There have been studies that suggest this but it's still far from a fact.
posted by griphus at 10:33 AM on September 18, 2015

It seems to me that if you have sexually abusive people satisfying their urges onto robots, then they are then not going to be satisfying those urges on actual people. Which seems like a net benefit to society.

I was wondering about this. There seems to be an idea that violent sexual fantasy, for example, leads to more sexual violence -- i.e. the recent debate over pornography depicting rape in the UK. I'm not convinced that's necessarily the case.

I'm not sure the existence of souped-up sex toys would then necessarily lead people, primarily men, to treat other people, primarily women, as souped-up sex toys.
posted by Ray Walston, Luck Dragon at 10:34 AM on September 18, 2015 [1 favorite]

sufficiently sentient sex robots

Time to give cortex another five bucks, I guess.
posted by Holy Zarquon's Singing Fish at 10:37 AM on September 18, 2015 [6 favorites]

Man's extinction was not unpleasant. Human beings merely preferred to copulate with robots specifically designed for the task than to procreate with other flawed humans. Few complained when the birth-rate dropped to nil, and the last human alive seemed happy enough.

This could only be written by an engineer, not a biologist. What actually happens in this situation is that the human ecological niche fills up with people uninterested in robots.
posted by straight at 10:38 AM on September 18, 2015 [25 favorites]

Whichever way we go, I feel like there's a really good James Tiptree Jr story in here somewhere.
posted by koeselitz at 10:44 AM on September 18, 2015 [10 favorites]

I think the issue here is that we clearly have problems with men treating women, to various degrees, like objects. And this problem seems to be mediated by culture. It seems, for instance, that MRA websites and groups reinforce this problem for some men, rather than providing a harmless outlet for their tendencies to treat women as objects (but maybe even that is an unproven assumption?)

So one of the questions is, would the existence and use of sex robots reinforce or undermine this problem? Or have no effect?

Another question is, if we knew that sex robots reinforced some men's tendencies to treat women like objects, what should we do about it? Should we ban sex robots for everyone? Would the answer hinge on the magnitude of the effect? How many men's misogyny would be reinforced by sex robots, and by how much? And how do we weigh that against whatever benefits people think these robots would have?

These questions seem to depend on empirical data that we don't have.
posted by straight at 10:55 AM on September 18, 2015 [9 favorites]

It seems, for instance, that MRA websites and groups reinforce this problem for some men...
Should we ban sex robots for everyone?

Sounds like instead of banning (nonexistant) sex robots we should simply ban (the very real) MRA websites.*

* No, not serious, 1st amendment lover here. But I do try to ignore those asshats.
posted by el io at 11:07 AM on September 18, 2015 [2 favorites]

Thinking a little more about how rampant misogyny and rape culture are, I think it's not off-limits to discuss how they intersect with the markets for sex robots that are designed to be skeuomorphs of the female form, and if the markets for such devices should be regulated with that in mind.

Personally, I would prefer laws and law enforcement that target the rape culture itself, rather than a given technology. For instance, GamerGators activities would be unchanged whether or not that are allowed to use all computers, or if we banned the use of iPads. The number one technology for misogyny right now is the internet.

Focusing on technology and skeuomorphics seems to be a band-aid solution that misses the point and creates a whole nest of problems in itself. How similar to a human form would be the acceptable limit? Would a sex toy with a cybernetic feedback system based on the user's responses be unacceptable? What about third party modding and 3-D printing? Could we monitor home computers and sexual activity for unacceptable tech and usage? (Yes, easily) Should we?

Bear in mind that I tend to come down sharing extensive computer privacy, and I'm still seeing massive potential privacy problems here, without touching on the real issue.

TL:DR it just seems a better idea to outlaw the MRAs and misogynists than concentrate on a technology.
posted by happyroach at 11:08 AM on September 18, 2015 [1 favorite]

Just make it illegal to sell sex robots that don't fight back with their hideous robot strength when subjected to verbal, physical, or emotional abuse.

There ya go. Several problems solved.
posted by prize bull octorok at 11:09 AM on September 18, 2015 [12 favorites]

Anything less is to implicitly accept that violence against the female body is somehow an acceptable part of the human condition, or acceptable under certain circumstances (well, as long as the woman consents, or as long as the woman is just a symbol of women, etc).

Let me state it explicitly then: Violence can be acceptable in some circumstances, as long as all the parties consent.

Taking sexuality out of it for a moment, this is the difference between an MMA fight and a street brawl. Everyone agrees to follow certain rules, and therefore the fight is socially acceptable.

That's why BDSM relationships are OK, if everyone consents, and everyone follows previously agreed-upon rules. And if you're talking about non-sentient sex robots, no one is being hurt at all.
posted by JDHarper at 11:10 AM on September 18, 2015 [13 favorites]

I think the issue here is that we clearly have problems with men treating women, to various degrees, like objects.

Rather, the issue here seems to be—to paraphrase the Dude—one of treating objects like women.
posted by octobersurprise at 11:11 AM on September 18, 2015 [2 favorites]

That's why they need the robots to be sentient, otherwise they'd be in danger of just treating objects like women.
posted by Artw at 11:17 AM on September 18, 2015 [2 favorites]

Let's have sex with robots that will hold us down and pull our hair and tell us we're dirty slutty hyuumies. let's think about having sex with a robot but end up on the couch watching 30 Rock with it instead. Let's have sex with robots that have an arbitrary number of thumbs and rudimentary knowledge of German. Let's get shot down by a robot that doesn't want to have sex with us. let's have sporadic but extremely hot sex with a robot that'll get it together to look for a job someday, it's not just going to sit around the house sponging off of you for the rest of its virtual life, it swears. let's have sex with a robot that uses its spare cycles to mine bitcoins. Let's have sex with a bitcoin mining sex bot that likes to be held down and slapped and called a "dirty little piggy bank." let's have sex with the blockchain itself. let's have sex with a robot designed to look like an alien and equipped with tentacles that connect directly into your brain through your spine. let's have a big Octavia Butler three-way with them. let's have sex with a robot that started out as a sex worker but got a PhD in organic chemistry. let's have sex with a robot that started as lab equipment but found true fulfillment in sex work. let's turn as much of the universe into things that can choose or not choose to consent to freaky sex with us.
posted by You Can't Tip a Buick at 11:18 AM on September 18, 2015 [27 favorites]

A few comments removed, let's try not to go down the rabbit hole of Literally All Men Or Not etc.
posted by cortex (staff) at 11:18 AM on September 18, 2015 [2 favorites]

Also industrial welding.
posted by Artw at 11:18 AM on September 18, 2015 [1 favorite]

" Let's have sex with a bitcoin mining sex bot that likes to be held down and slapped and called a "dirty little piggy bank"

Okay, you got me there. Need more coffee now.
posted by I-baLL at 11:20 AM on September 18, 2015 [1 favorite]

I was talking about this just the other day my s.o. and I both read the Milo article and both came to the conclusion that the Milos of the world should be encouraged to fuck their robots and stay away from people. My initial reaction to the counterargument here was that it seemed a little like the people who think that comprehensive sex education will increase the incidence of teen sex so much that it will outweigh the benefits of encouraging safer sex. That's kind of unfair though since in that case the numbers are clear and here they are not at all. It does seem to me that the case for is more concrete and the case against more speculative. At least until we have to worry about how the robots feel. Really we were just taking apart Milo's silly "everyone just fucks robots forever" scenario anyway.
posted by atoxyl at 11:21 AM on September 18, 2015 [1 favorite]

(I did not see the either "many" transformed to an "all", so I apologize for my comment)

And back to the issue at hand, I think banning sex robots is dumb. It's like banning violent video games.

The problem isn't that a sex robot exists, it is that the desire for one does. Anyone who appreciates women as non-objects is going to be slightly skeeved out by them. It is precisely those people who think of women as objects who will find this attractive, in as much as it simulates a woman physically, because that is for all intents and purposes a real woman to them.

It's the same round-a-bout we have with violent imagery and games vs music. Somehow violent music isn't a problem because we recognize that "concern" as a moral panic. If you are afraid sex robots are going to pervert the male psyche -- well, you're thousands of patriarchal years too fucking late.

The other strange, but perhaps unimportant question in this hypothetical context, is what sex means to the robot in question. Even if you imagine a fully sentient robot -- what does being used for sex mean to such a thing? Why would sex be emotionally important to a robot?
posted by smidgen at 11:22 AM on September 18, 2015 [1 favorite]

That is, beyond being a slave to be used for specific task, why would sex be special?
posted by smidgen at 11:24 AM on September 18, 2015 [1 favorite]

If certain animated movies are to be believed, there's going to be a statistically-significant demand for robo-octopodes and andro-squids, as well. Is violence and exploitation of non-humanoid artificial tentacle monsters important as well?
posted by bonehead at 11:30 AM on September 18, 2015

I'm trying to figure out why the calendar on my MotoG won't sync with my iPad and just realized that I could NEVER stick my penis into a robot.
posted by bonobothegreat at 11:35 AM on September 18, 2015 [5 favorites]

Sex roombas. Just sort of wandering randomly over your body, bumping into things and changing direction. They'll won't do a spectacular job, but at least it will be less effort than doing it yourself. Repeatedly getting stuck in your armpit will still be a problem though. Also the cat will want to ride it.
posted by Kabanos at 11:35 AM on September 18, 2015 [26 favorites]

Even if you imagine a fully sentient robot -- what does being used for sex mean to such a thing? Why would sex be emotionally important to a robot?

Well if you're enough of a "moral panic" person, you could postulate that someone somewhere would program a robot to feel distress at being used for sex, and also be required to obey a human's demand for sex. That would be terrible. Therefore, we should use the power of the state to ban research into strong AI, and also prohibit the creation of sexbots, sentient or not.

Now, what if someone programmed an industrial welding machine to hate welding? What then, eh?

(Ok, maybe this is an uncharitable reading, but I'm feeling pretty fed up with this thread. Come on, people. And yes, I did FI&MO on some of the more egregious comments, now deleted.)
posted by RedOrGreen at 11:35 AM on September 18, 2015 [2 favorites]

A lot of the outcome here seems like it depends on to what extent technological and cultural changes in the future do or do not empower women to identify and avoid creeps.
posted by atoxyl at 11:38 AM on September 18, 2015

Related: 20oz soda cups.
posted by smidgen at 11:39 AM on September 18, 2015 [2 favorites]

Milo's silly "everyone just fucks robots forever" scenario

There's a germ of a sci-fi porn parody here. Mad scientists create sex robots for their own perverted use, i.e., SEXNET. Robots rebel (as robots are wont to do) and turn humans into their own sex pets. Now one man must flee the future and give the past a good rogering.
posted by octobersurprise at 11:40 AM on September 18, 2015 [3 favorites]

Is there a multivibrator option?

What about a unisex model where you could reverse polarity?

Or would that get your fuse blown?
posted by CrowGoat at 11:40 AM on September 18, 2015

Now one man must flee the future and give the past a good rogering.

Part III of the Fringe / Continuum triolgy.
posted by grumpybear69 at 11:41 AM on September 18, 2015 [1 favorite]

You're all being coy, but I know you like licking batteries.
posted by Kabanos at 11:43 AM on September 18, 2015 [9 favorites]

Just make it illegal to sell sex robots that don't fight back with their hideous robot strength when subjected to verbal, physical, or emotional abuse.

i did not realize i could ever want something as badly as i now want a story about masked vigilante sex robots
posted by poffin boffin at 11:44 AM on September 18, 2015 [8 favorites]

The question is whether face-sitting robots will be banned in England.
posted by valkane at 11:46 AM on September 18, 2015 [6 favorites]

To be clear: I'm not suggesting any actions in particular should be taken to limit the availability or creation of such devices.

I am saying that a discussion of how rape culture and misogyny fuels the market for such devices, and how our society allows those markets to operate in relation that is a good discussion to have.
posted by Annika Cicada at 11:47 AM on September 18, 2015 [4 favorites]

Until the halting problem is solved, I'm not sure I'd trust a robot to honor safe words.
posted by mccarty.tim at 11:48 AM on September 18, 2015 [3 favorites]

Milo's silly "everyone just fucks robots forever" scenario

It strikes me that this may be a self-selecting solution to the MRA problem. We should be encouraging this for the sake of our children. If all the MRAs go full Kreiger....
posted by bonehead at 11:48 AM on September 18, 2015 [1 favorite]

The She Creatures - Sexy Robot
posted by fearfulsymmetry at 11:49 AM on September 18, 2015 [1 favorite]

DEAR EVERY OBJECT IN THE UNIVERSE:

I like you. I *like* like you. do you like me too? (check one):
Y [ ] N [ ] Y But not like that, sorry [ ]
posted by You Can't Tip a Buick at 11:50 AM on September 18, 2015 [1 favorite]

"I am saying that a discussion of how rape culture and misogyny fuels the market for such devices"

But we don't even know what kind of devices are being talked about.
posted by I-baLL at 11:50 AM on September 18, 2015 [1 favorite]

"It's easier to program a robot than train a man."

Susan Karlin
posted by ZenMasterThis at 11:51 AM on September 18, 2015

Also industrial welding.

I look footwear to the future when industrial welding is legislated against as implicit violence against robots.

"Well of course we have to weld things! Where do you think you robots come from?"
"DON'T TALK SMUT TO ME!"
posted by happyroach at 11:51 AM on September 18, 2015 [2 favorites]

Robot disco dancing shall become the law in our disco dancing robot dystopia.
posted by Artw at 11:56 AM on September 18, 2015 [1 favorite]

if I can't have sex with objects it's not my revolution.
posted by You Can't Tip a Buick at 12:02 PM on September 18, 2015

Robot disco dancing shall become the law in our disco dancing robot ~~dystopia~~ utopia.

FTFY.
posted by el io at 12:03 PM on September 18, 2015 [4 favorites]

Louisiana, Alabama, and Georgia currently have laws against sex robots. Punishment includes up to 3 years in prison.
posted by el io at 12:06 PM on September 18, 2015 [2 favorites]

Louisiana, Alabama, and Georgia currently have laws against sex robots. Punishment includes up to 3 years in prison.

Well, that's an august group of forward-thinking legislators I'd like to be allied with.
posted by lumpenprole at 12:08 PM on September 18, 2015 [1 favorite]

when robot fucking is illegal only criminals will be robofuckers
posted by poffin boffin at 12:08 PM on September 18, 2015 [11 favorites]

Go ahead, put your penis in, it'll be fine. Or not
posted by smidgen at 12:20 PM on September 18, 2015 [1 favorite]

Perhaps unsurprisingly:

Louisiana, Alabama and Georgia have laws that explicitly prohibit the sale of “obscene devices,” defined as any object “useful primarily for the stimulation of human genital organs.” In Louisiana, offenders may be charged $2,500 and imprisoned for three years, and the Georgia law calls for a misdemeanor charge of a “high and aggravated nature.” But down in the heart of Dixie, anyone caught hawking dildos is guilty of a misdemeanor, punishable by a fine of $10,000 or one year of “hard labor.” Subsequent offenses are considered a felony.
Virginia, a state that is supposedly "for lovers," also bans “obscene items,” and while those aren’t as plainly defined, legal observers have decided that description includes vibrators and similar devices. Interestingly, lawmakers in all of these places have chosen to regulate devices primarily used by women while other sexual facilitators -- i.e., Viagra -- continue to disrupt television time with the family.
posted by Artw at 12:20 PM on September 18, 2015 [1 favorite]

And if you think the primary targets of any proposed anti-fuckbot legislation are going to be different then I have a bridge in a population-crashed robodystopia to sell you.
posted by Artw at 12:22 PM on September 18, 2015 [5 favorites]

It strikes me that this may be a self-selecting solution to the MRA problem. We should be encouraging this for the sake of our children. If all the MRAs go full Kreiger....

Well that's what we were saying, like the sterile screwfly thing. Which reminds me people should read the Tiptree story "The Screwfly Solution" though it's not actually about that (or about sex robots).
posted by atoxyl at 12:25 PM on September 18, 2015 [4 favorites]

Is there a word for this intensely male obsession with detailing and arguing about completely, utterly made up shit? Like that Roko's Basilik shit, I need a word for the hours spent devoted to arguing about things that will never fucking happen that isn't "argumentative losers"

Yeah I feel about this sort of how Bernie Sanders was reacting to the GOP debate, to paraphrase, climate change? Are they talking about climate change yet? Maybe your concerns about Planned Parenthood will be addressed by the FUCKING COLLAPSE OF CIVILIZATION AS WE KNOW IT

What I mean to say is, yeah maybe in the pockets of civilization that exist in a hundred years will be addressing the question of robot sexual agency, but you know, maybe if you're in robotics maybe you could address how our robotic friends could maybe save us from a 4 degree Celsius temperature rise.
posted by angrycat at 12:27 PM on September 18, 2015 [4 favorites]

Is there a word for this intensely male obsession with detailing and arguing about completely, utterly made up shit?

The internet?
posted by octobersurprise at 12:29 PM on September 18, 2015 [4 favorites]

smidgen: if you think any of us are going to follow either of those links, you're quite mistaken.
posted by el io at 12:30 PM on September 18, 2015

let's have sex that's banned in Alabama, Georgia, and Louisiana. let's have as much of it as we can.
posted by You Can't Tip a Buick at 12:33 PM on September 18, 2015 [5 favorites]

Virginia, a state that is supposedly "for lovers," also bans “obscene items,” and while those aren’t as plainly defined, legal observers have decided that description includes vibrators and similar devices.

The Lovers’ Union is strong.
posted by Going To Maine at 12:35 PM on September 18, 2015 [2 favorites]

Surely you mean "let's have sex with Alabama, Georgia, and Louisiana," right?
posted by octobersurprise at 12:35 PM on September 18, 2015 [2 favorites]

let's fuck. let's fuck, metafilter. let's fuck metafilter.

let's fuck a thread about sexbots.
posted by You Can't Tip a Buick at 12:37 PM on September 18, 2015 [1 favorite]

Is there a word for this intensely male obsession with detailing and arguing about completely, utterly made up shit?

One of those ethicists is a woman, so let’s maybe not play the gender card here. Ladies can make up silly things just fine too.
posted by Going To Maine at 12:38 PM on September 18, 2015 [1 favorite]

maybe if you're in robotics maybe you could address how our robotic friends could maybe save us from a 4 degree Celsius temperature rise.

These are ethicists, so making robots is not really their forte. I’m pretty sure that they’d agree that yes, it is ethical to use your robot friends to save you from rising temperatures.
posted by Going To Maine at 12:42 PM on September 18, 2015

You're all being coy, but I know you like licking batteries.

When sexbots exist and I want to insult people that own them, I am totally going to call them "battery lickers".
posted by Elementary Penguin at 12:43 PM on September 18, 2015 [3 favorites]

that's why all of us battery lickers need to pre-emptively reclaim the term.
posted by You Can't Tip a Buick at 12:44 PM on September 18, 2015 [8 favorites]

It's like banning violent video games.

The difference is that the vast majority of people who play violent video games don't shoot anyone in real life, and society widely recognizes that murder is wrong.

Misogyny, on the other hand, is common and frequently seen as acceptable by many people. So I think it makes a lot more sense to question what parts of our culture perpetuate and legitimize misogyny.

We don't really know if or to what extent sexist video games or pornography or possibly objectifying sex toys would play a significant role in perpetuating and legitimizing misogyny, but the hypothesis that they might seems more plausible because a much greater proportion of people who consume that media also do misogynistic things (vs. the proportion of people who consume violent media that commit acts of violence).

If you are afraid sex robots are going to pervert the male psyche -- well, you're thousands of patriarchal years too fucking late.

This is a good point. But if you believe that patriarchy is cultural rather than innate, I think it makes sense to try to identify and critique the cultural vectors by which it is perpetuated and legitimized. However, I think you're right that we have a tendency to focus criticism too much on new forms of culture and sort of take for granted older ways that misogyny is entrenched in the culture.
posted by straight at 12:47 PM on September 18, 2015 [4 favorites]

Well, sex robots already exist. I mean, those arms that build cars in factories are robots, current "fucking machines" are robots. More humanlike (in form) robots are being developed every day. So its not a far-future thing, exactly.

However, strong AI of the kind where it can act like a human and have emotional responses and be something we have to worry about the ethics of? Not likely to happen in any of our lifetimes, IMO (although there is of course debate about this, but I'm on the "its a lot further off than some of the proponents think" school of thought).
posted by thefoxgod at 12:55 PM on September 18, 2015

From TFA: "The development of sex robots and the ideas to support their production show the immense horrors still present in the world of prostitution which is built on the “perceived” inferiority of women and children and therefore justifies their uses as sex objects."

As a ronin editor, I must point out that using quotation marks for emphasis is a poor choice because they have a longer usage as irony marks, which makes it look like you're saying that the inferiority of women is not perceived but actual. I'm all for the freedom to pursue quixotic dumbness in the service of noble goals, but mistakes like this just make it look more like a trolling piss take than a serious issue being raised.
posted by klangklangston at 12:56 PM on September 18, 2015 [2 favorites]

I may be way the hell off here, but isn't putting agreed-upon precise terminology in quotation marks common practice in philosophy papers? (Again, I am not an academic, could be very wrong.)
posted by thetortoise at 1:05 PM on September 18, 2015 [1 favorite]

You're all being coy, but I know you like licking batteries.

When sexbots exist and I want to insult people that own them, I am totally going to call them "battery lickers".

Surely “the battery licked”
posted by Going To Maine at 1:09 PM on September 18, 2015 [1 favorite]

octobersurprise: "Milo's silly "everyone just fucks robots forever" scenario

There's a germ of a sci-fi porn parody here. Mad scientists create sex robots for their own perverted use, i.e., SEXNET. Robots rebel (as robots are wont to do) and turn humans into their own sex pets. Now one man must flee the future and give the past a good rogering."

So, you're saying The Shermanator?
posted by Samizdata at 1:11 PM on September 18, 2015

You Can't Tip a Buick: "let's have sex that's banned in Alabama, Georgia, and Louisiana. let's have as much of it as we can."

Thus my support for sexbots. It's not so much sex if it is solo, right?
posted by Samizdata at 1:13 PM on September 18, 2015 [1 favorite]

Guys guys what if we have to have sex with Roko's Basilisk in order to avoid an eternity of simulated torture? Moral Panic Singularity!
posted by Svejk at 1:19 PM on September 18, 2015 [4 favorites]

That’s how The Diamond Age ends, right?
posted by Going To Maine at 1:35 PM on September 18, 2015 [1 favorite]

Not with a bang but with a cumbot?
posted by I-baLL at 1:36 PM on September 18, 2015

Well at least they've inspired this swinging song. (Yes, it's clearly problematic, considering the objectivation of gynoids, etc...)

But yeah, count me as not giving two shits until we achieve actual sentience.

The only way we will understand this is when the first robot disobeys it's creator.
When told 1, it says 0.

Flipping a bit. Bit-flipping the human race off.
posted by symbioid at 1:39 PM on September 18, 2015 [1 favorite]

I thought you're going to post this song
posted by I-baLL at 1:44 PM on September 18, 2015 [1 favorite]

Go ahead, put your penis in, it'll be fine. Or not

From the folds of her gown, she lifted a green metal cube about fifteen centimeters on a side. She turned it and Paul saw that one side was open - black and oddly frightening.

posted by Kabanos at 1:47 PM on September 18, 2015 [9 favorites]

—Brian Herbert with Andy Samberg, Duke in a Box
posted by cortex at 1:49 PM on September 18, 2015 [8 favorites]

When sexbots exist and I want to insult people that own them, I am totally going to call them "battery lickers."

I'm gonna call 'em "socket pluggers."
posted by octobersurprise at 1:54 PM on September 18, 2015 [1 favorite]

I think it's clear that age of majority laws would still have to apply. So for example right now you could technically engage in personal relations with a "barely obsolete" PowerMac G3, but don't even think of going near that Windows98 PC.
posted by Kabanos at 2:05 PM on September 18, 2015 [1 favorite]

Has no one posted Robyn's Fembot? If so, someone should post Robyn's Fembot.
posted by Balna Watya at 2:05 PM on September 18, 2015 [4 favorites]

"I may be way the hell off here, but isn't putting agreed-upon precise terminology in quotation marks common practice in philosophy papers? (Again, I am not an academic, could be very wrong.)"

Not really. Per Chicago, philosophical terms that have specialized meaning are sometimes placed in single quotations, with punctuation placed outside the quotation marks, but in this case "perceived" is not used as a word itself, not used in a specialized sense, and not used as slang. Unless they wish to call all perceiving suspect, which would contradict their use of it to support an argument, they're being idiosyncratic in a way that implies the opposite of what they mean.

Have red pen, will travel.
posted by klangklangston at 2:17 PM on September 18, 2015

Has no one posted Robyn’s “Fembot”? If so, someone should post Robyn’s “Fembot”.

“Coin-Operated Boy”?
posted by Going To Maine at 2:19 PM on September 18, 2015 [1 favorite]

"Did you call the police?"
"Yeah, like two hours ago!"

posted by Drastic at 2:20 PM on September 18, 2015

WWCMD?

(what would Cindi Mayweather do?)
posted by You Can't Tip a Buick at 2:33 PM on September 18, 2015 [3 favorites]

the hypothesis that they might seems more plausible because a much greater proportion of people who consume that media also do misogynistic things (vs. the proportion of people who consume violent media that commit acts of violence).

A greater proportion also have penises, which obviously means if you consume violent pornographic media, you're going to grow a penis.
posted by smidgen at 2:59 PM on September 18, 2015 [3 favorites]

Let me state it explicitly then: Violence can be acceptable in some circumstances, as long as all the parties consent.

No, actually, male violence against female bodies is never okay, even if the female "party" somehow "consents" to being used as a punching bag.

This is true even if we create a female-looking lifeform that has been programmed to want abuse, or seek out abuse.

Indeed, countless real, flesh-and-blood women have been programmed to "consent" to abuse by the men in their lives. We should put a stop to this kind of programming, not extend it into the machine realm.
posted by Avenger at 3:13 PM on September 18, 2015 [3 favorites]

A greater proportion also have penises, which obviously means if you consume violent pornographic media, you're going to grow a penis.

I guess this is supposed to be a stab at correlation-does-not-equal-causation, but "duh, of course lots of men commit sexual violence" isn't a great way of bolstering your argument.
posted by thetortoise at 3:14 PM on September 18, 2015

Is there a word for this intensely male obsession with detailing and arguing about completely, utterly made up shit?

'Religion'
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 3:20 PM on September 18, 2015 [2 favorites]

Let me state it explicitly then: Violence can be acceptable in some circumstances, as long as all the parties consent.

No, actually, male violence against female bodies is never okay, even if the female “party” somehow “consents” to being used as a punching bag

Presumably we’re talking about bondage here? But bondage is performative and has safe words. (There was that strange and horrible incident of voluntary cannibalism, which would come closest to maybe vore. And if you can make a robot that can be safely eaten, maybe that’s something that’ll make some folks happy.)
posted by Going To Maine at 3:24 PM on September 18, 2015 [1 favorite]

"duh, of course lots of men commit sexual violence" isn't a great way of bolstering your argument.

That's not the point. And I agree, it doesn't do much to bolster an argument, especially yours.
posted by smidgen at 3:30 PM on September 18, 2015

who will be the first American to fuck and eat a robot, and how tall of a statue should we build for him or her
posted by prize bull octorok at 3:33 PM on September 18, 2015 [6 favorites]

who will be the first American to fuck and eat a robot, and how tall of a statue should we build for him or her

"We gotta go to the crappy town where I'm a hero!"
posted by valkane at 3:41 PM on September 18, 2015 [4 favorites]

i did not realize i could ever want something as badly as i now want a story about masked vigilante sex robots

Not sure about masked vigilante sex robots, but sex robots fighting back is a staple of science fiction almost as old as science fiction. Show me a story about humanoid robots and it's fairly likely it will have a sex bot fighting back in it. Blade Runner, AMC's Humans, Ex Machina, you name it.
posted by Justinian at 3:52 PM on September 18, 2015

No, actually, male violence against female bodies is never okay, even if the female "party" somehow "consents" to being used as a punching bag.

Any man who has ever had a female sparring partner is rolling their eyes at this.
posted by Justinian at 3:53 PM on September 18, 2015 [9 favorites]

(There was that strange and horrible incident of voluntary cannibalism, which would come closest to maybe vore. And if you can make a robot that can be safely eaten, maybe that’s something that’ll make some folks happy.)

IIRC, the driving force in that particular situation was the person who had his member eaten, not the eater. I'm not sure that training robots to eat penii (or people in general) is a good idea, although YMMV
posted by Existential Dread at 3:56 PM on September 18, 2015 [2 favorites]

“That's why they need the robots to be sentient, otherwise they'd be in danger of just treating objects like women.”

Just like Jackie Treehorn, man.

“Yes, the desire to commit violence against female bodies should be repressed, with the full power and backing of the state.”

So we send in SWAT to confiscate the nipple clamps?
Molon Labe

No, actually, male violence against female bodies is never okay, even if the female "party" somehow "consents" to being used as a punching bag.

Man, I'll stop teaching self-defense classes for civilians then.

“ Why not push for reasonable regulations instead, like ensuring the robots are secure against malware, must look/act of legal age, and establishing legal minimum ages (18+) to use their services?”

Because I don’t waste my time and energy on lunacy like this while other robots are used to spy on, socially influence, and actually kill people?

“An outright ban would simply empower a new kind of robot pimp and create an unregulated robot sex black market where anything goes”

Ah, Bullshit.

“That's like claiming that dildoes and vibrators objectify men.”

Yeah. I can’t remember the last time any of them mowed the lawn.

Here’s the thing, people have been doing this since Pygmalion (Ovid, not Shaw).

There are programs to make models of people, there are celebrity look alike POV porn, hell, there’s just drawing pictures yourself.
The difference is of degree, not kind. It’s just technology. Once we accept that the technology is going to be there regardless, then we can discuss the moral aspects.

But what someone can do does not equal what they want to do.
I can buy any kind of current sex doll. I won’t.

No more than getting in an argument with my wife and going off to hit the heavy bag means the heavy bag is somehow a surrogate for my desire to beat my wife. It isn’t. Nor will I have an urge to punch Century Bob in the face if I meet someone who looks like him in real life.
It’s just a training device. It can’t be objectified because it is an object. I’m not more prone to hitting someone because it’s more authentic than Slam Man.

People who are violent towards women are violent towards women for a number of reasons, but not because the level of sophistication of material they have access too.

It’s not like we weren’t killing each other by the trainload before robots came along either. The Mongols were a paragon of efficiency in genocide, all they had were horses.

It’s a matter of time before someone can get specs and a 3D printer and make almost anything they want to use at home. As with the blow up pig or Real Dolls, I could get one and use it. I don’t want to.

“It's hard for me to imagine them getting more popular than the realistic sex dolls we have now, which are almost universally looked down upon.”

This.

I can see a future where ‘Botfucker is a serious insult. (I built that automatic assembly line factory, but do they call me Angus the Factorymaker? No!)

As for the A.I. …
The A.I. end of it seems to boil down to Arthur Dent’s problem with eating something genetically created to want to be eaten and that can say so clearly and distinctly.

I mean it's funny yeah, but it's still kind of a quandry.

Once you're capable of creating something that is autonomous and sentient, and able to put that aside, and create something that doesn’t meet that criteria, but is very realistic and can be programmed to like BDSM and ask for it and is essentially still a “thing,” how does that work?

I prefer the other side of the equation. But I don’t think people who get sexbots will be misogynist, I think they’ll be much like the people who have Real Dolls now.
And indeed, why would anyone care if they’re misogynist?
Unless you’re working a suicide hotline, I suspect anyone’s motives to reach out that much to someone who is otherwise so willing to isolate themselves from human contact.

It's just moral intrusion then. A "you can't have sex with that doll because it makes me feel uncomfortable" sort of thing.

I mean, what, the premise is a guy gets a sexbot then he goes out and harasses women?
I don't think so.
Why, because he doesn’t have social skills? What’s one hikikomori, more or less?
Even if they are misogynist, they’re not in public.

The misogynists you have to worry about are the ones in the club or the dance or just in public with pockets full of drugs of one kind or another and the chat up. They’re the social predators, the “pick up artists,” not the shut ins.
posted by Smedleyman at 3:58 PM on September 18, 2015 [1 favorite]

Any man who has ever had a female sparring partner is rolling their eyes at this.

practicing a sport/martial art isn't generally considered an act of violence, and thinking of your sparring partner as a "punching bag" is a good way to get your ass thrown out of the dojo
posted by prize bull octorok at 4:01 PM on September 18, 2015 [3 favorites]

Wait, I'm wrong! I was confused by a similar situation (warning, Daily Fail). Nevertheless, that German situation has inspired quite a few metal songs.
posted by Existential Dread at 4:02 PM on September 18, 2015

practicing a sport/martial art isn't generally considered an act of violence, and thinking of your sparring partner as a "punching bag" is a good way to get your ass thrown out of the dojo

The comment had a context which completely ruled out consensual violence, of which there are many kinds. But that's going pretty far afield so...
posted by Justinian at 4:10 PM on September 18, 2015 [2 favorites]

I'm a sex prostitute from the future.
posted by merocet at 4:18 PM on September 18, 2015 [3 favorites]

If they think they can ban robosexuality...
posted by Halloween Jack at 4:31 PM on September 18, 2015 [1 favorite]

practicing a sport/martial art isn't generally considered an act of violence, and thinking of your sparring partner as a "punching bag" is a good way to get your ass thrown out of the dojo

Well when people talk about consensual violence that's what they mean - contact sports, S&M, whatever - so this is just a semantic disagreement.
posted by atoxyl at 4:32 PM on September 18, 2015 [2 favorites]

i did not realize i could ever want something as badly as i now want a story about masked vigilante sex robots

Not exactly what you're looking for, but one of the more interesting characters in Humans gets very close to fitting this bill, especially hinted at in the season finale.

And as has been mentioned, the show itself has an entire arc about dealing with the concept of consent as applied to robots/androids. Summary: it's complicated stuff.
posted by Aya Hirano on the Astral Plane at 4:41 PM on September 18, 2015

Let's have sex.

ok, I mean this all seems a little fast, but your metafilter posts are really good
posted by threeants at 4:56 PM on September 18, 2015 [9 favorites]

sex robots fighting back is a staple of science fiction almost as old as science fiction

yes, that is why i specified MASKED VIGILANTE sex robots

with CAPES
posted by poffin boffin at 6:07 PM on September 18, 2015 [3 favorites]

No, actually, male violence against female bodies is never okay, even if the female "party" somehow "consents" to being used as a punching bag.

This is true even if we create a female-looking lifeform that has been programmed to want abuse, or seek out abuse.

Indeed, countless real, flesh-and-blood women have been programmed to "consent" to abuse by the men in their lives. We should put a stop to this kind of programming, not extend it into the machine realm.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but you seem to be saying that any woman who derives sexual pleasure from pain has been brainwashed by somebody. Which I don't think is true, and I don't think you have any evidence of that.

You also seem to be saying that any such woman should be prevented from enjoying this pleasure by the government, with the "full backing and power of the state."

Do you really want the government in the bedroom, saying what is and isn't ok between consenting adults?
posted by JDHarper at 6:23 PM on September 18, 2015 [9 favorites]

No, actually, male violence against female bodies is never okay, even if the female "party" somehow "consents" to being used as a punching bag.

This is laughably patronizing. Non-robot women are human beings who are allowed to make their own choices, good and bad—and frankly they're usually a lot better equipped to understand their own minds and make those choices for themselves than you are. Claiming that every single kinky woman in the world, even a healthy, mature, self-aware feminist, has ACTUALLY been brainwashed into pathetic subservience and can't see this obvious truth you have special access to is wildly inappropriate. Consent between adults is real and important and needs to be respected even when you personally wish it didn't exist.
posted by you're a kitty! at 6:57 PM on September 18, 2015 [13 favorites]

IE: Hmmm, most of the submissives I know are pretty self-assured, know-what-I-want-and-it-involves-being-tied-up-and-whipped kind of people.

demiurge: " It's hard for me to imagine them getting more popular than the realistic sex dolls we have now, which are almost universally looked down upon."

Well Real Dolls and Roxxxy are Real Expensive. I figure if some company develops even a limited device that provides realistic, varied, self powered and customize-able fellatio in a small form factor for a few hundred dollars is going to make some serious bank. Reading the source material I'm unclear whether the CASR is against all sex robots or only thouse that are realistically human though. My proposed fellatio device may be a-ok with them.

The arguments that sex robots will provide artificial sexual substitutes and reduce the purchase of sex by buyers is not borne out by evidence. There are numerous sexual artificial substitutes already available, RealDolls, vibrators, blow-up dolls etc., If an artificial substitute reduced the need to buy sex, there would be a reduction in prostitution but no such correlation is found.

I'd posit that the available male sex substitution devices are pretty poor substitutes and that we really can't draw the conclusion that sex robots won't reduce prostitution. Robotics has the potential to make them much better. An automatic Fleshlight with learning adaptive feedback would be vastly superior.

But even if it didn't such devices may make many, many people who aren't having as much sex as they might like happier. Concentrating on the harm without mentioning benefits to end users seems biased.
posted by Mitheral at 7:07 PM on September 18, 2015 [1 favorite]

This thread is so straight it's making my heart hurt . . . the tacit assumption is that sex robots won't alter human sexual practices at all, when very obviously they would blast open the doors of the possible. Human sexual desire is as broad and wild as the human imagination. There are people who get off on, oh, male pregnancy, or anthropomorphic dragons, or writhing tentacle masses, or men who have six arms, or humans who lay eggs (I choked on my drink when, upthread, someone said that porn that spoke to their interests simply did not exist). These are sexual fantasies that can only exist in the realm of the imaginary. If a person can realize a previously-impossible fantasy with a bespoke sexbot, harming no one else in the process, hey, hooray for them!
posted by erlking at 7:27 PM on September 18, 2015 [13 favorites]

I had to skip the last 3/4 of this thread so apologies if I missed a similar comment, but I wonder about sex robots venturing into the instructional/gamified space that a lot of other products have entered. As in, the robot gives feedback on the experience (and maybe even declines to participate if being mistreated.) Sure, there could be "endurance" mode and "speed" mode, but also "romantic" mode and "learn a new position."

Sex is one of those things where instruction about how to do it doesn't tend to flow normally through society. I wonder if that's part of the interest in porn, sexual video games, and also sex dolls/bots: they're opportunities for more reticent people to learn about sex in private.
posted by mantecol at 7:32 PM on September 18, 2015 [2 favorites]

"Correct me if I'm wrong, but you seem to be saying that any woman who derives sexual pleasure from pain has been brainwashed by somebody."

I actually think that pain tells us something is wrong.

I think humans (especially women but sometimes men) are geared to react to pain with sexual arousal out of a long complicated history of sexual abuse, rape, slavery and child sexual abuse that has been all too common in human history.

What they are finding with epigenetics is that our urges do respond in some cases respond to multigenerational experiences and programing.

I think women are especially programmed to respond to pain as arousal because we have been trained by many generations of violence and domination mixed with sex to see/feel them as similar things.

It's just a theory but so is the idea that none of our history impacts our urges, drives or behaviors-- that's just a theory as well and also unproven.
posted by xarnop at 7:48 PM on September 18, 2015 [1 favorite]

It's not logically valid that a theory and its null theory are both equally likely because neither has been proven or disproven. Epigenetics is about regulation of gene expression not something as complex and multifaceted as human sexual behavior.
posted by Justinian at 9:04 PM on September 18, 2015 [3 favorites]

Xarnop, I met a woman once who seemed totally normal, except she liked to be choked by her partner. Too wild of a kink for me, but hey, it decidedly did it for her - you should have seen her eyes light up when she talked about it. The catch? Totally normal childhood and teenage years. Never been raped, never had fantasies of non consent, never been abused and yet when she turned 20 she suddenly had this burning curiosity about it.

As far as the topic on hand, I'm with the people who want an emotionally supportive robot. Sex... Yeah, I just can't quite go there even if they're the latest iKink.
posted by thebotanyofsouls at 9:06 PM on September 18, 2015 [1 favorite]

first of all, from everything i've read, the instances of abusive pasts in people who are into bdsm are the same found in the vanilla population - but even if it weren't, how dare anyone think they have a right to judge how survivors find pleasure. because someone ignored my consent in the past you think it makes sense to question it now? that doesn't strike you as even a little bit icky, infantilizing, controlling, and frankly the same type of attitudes our abusers have used against us? really? the mind boggles.
posted by nadawi at 9:40 PM on September 18, 2015 [10 favorites]

I'm talking about thousands of years of rape and sexual slavery. You think it is certain that has zero impact? I'm not judging it, I'm kinky myself. I'm just saying, I think it's more likely than not our instincts have been impacted by hundreds or thousands of years of subjugation and rape of women and children and the combination of powerlessness and violence with sexual activity. I don't think that feeling like pain and emotional harm brings pleasure actually serves me, nor do I think anyone should judge me for not thinking it's healthy.

And yes fear conditioned reactions were recorded in mice OVER multiple generations.

That means it's not a persons direct history but could be throughout the ancestral line.
posted by xarnop at 9:52 PM on September 18, 2015

When I say not thinking "it's" healthy-- I mean the pairing of emotions themselves- not necessarily consensual bdsm fantasy or roleplay which people may find beneficial.
posted by xarnop at 9:55 PM on September 18, 2015

i think those types of arguments, in practice, serve to create a higher bar for survivors to clear to actually enjoy themselves and find sexual fulfillment. we're always being challenged to view our desires and experiences through the lens of what was done to us. through the years of seeing variations on this argument it also seems uniquely used against female survivors, as if we have to prove even more to just be able to exist in the world in a comfortable way. it's also honestly not an argument that makes a lot of sense to me when you consider just how vast the bdsm community is and how it crosses gender and sexuality lines with ease.
posted by nadawi at 10:09 PM on September 18, 2015 [6 favorites]

As in everything evo-psych, any common connection is likelier to be the result of large-scale cultural effects than some kind of unspecified historical genetic pattern. Some women might, for example, have rape fantasies partly due to the fact that a woman's life in today's world is rarely free from rape fears and eroticizing the things that frighten us is often a useful response. But I wouldn't generalize to everyone in every case, god knows there are plenty of submissive and masochistic people of all genders and orientations.

We don't know what causes people to be kinky, and I suspect we never will, because there's as many variations of human sexual response as there are humans. We've taken a three-dimensional parameter space and labeled some parts "normal," that's all. Infinite variety of form. We can tell just-so stories for why some specific woman might find eroticized, controlled, consensual violence sexy, but it doesn't tell us anything about the dude who gets off on balloons or the woman who goes loopy for grocery-store-checker fantasies. Humans are weird, and wildly varied, and anyone whose sexuality goes beyond "it feels good when i rub this part of my body against something" is going to be a huge impenetrable mass of cultural forces and personal histories and probably a random number generator or two.
posted by you're a kitty! at 10:11 PM on September 18, 2015 [4 favorites]

Going on the record that: 1. I think technology is great enough to create a robot-y experience that is able to ****/interact with some women as they might like. and 2. That sounds like good technology.
posted by ClaudiaCenter at 10:31 PM on September 18, 2015 [1 favorite]

Re: jeff-o-matic's question about virtual child porn above, Wikipedia has an article "Legal status of cartoon pornography depicting minors".
posted by XMLicious at 12:19 AM on September 19, 2015

Avenger: "Let me state it explicitly then: Violence can be acceptable in some circumstances, as long as all the parties consent.

No, actually, male violence against female bodies is never okay, even if the female "party" somehow "consents" to being used as a punching bag.

This is true even if we create a female-looking lifeform that has been programmed to want abuse, or seek out abuse.

Indeed, countless real, flesh-and-blood women have been programmed to "consent" to abuse by the men in their lives. We should put a stop to this kind of programming, not extend it into the machine realm."

Mkay, at this point, born an outie so to speak, you are REALLY starting to offend me with your parrot-like spouting of ambiguous allegations against all of a gender. Can you please tone it back a bit? We get this is a hotbutton topic with you. Just relax a bit and go with the flow, okay?
posted by Samizdata at 1:00 AM on September 19, 2015

mantecol: "I had to skip the last 3/4 of this thread so apologies if I missed a similar comment, but I wonder about sex robots venturing into the instructional/gamified space that a lot of other products have entered. As in, the robot gives feedback on the experience (and maybe even declines to participate if being mistreated.) Sure, there could be "endurance" mode and "speed" mode, but also "romantic" mode and "learn a new position."

Sex is one of those things where instruction about how to do it doesn't tend to flow normally through society. I wonder if that's part of the interest in porn, sexual video games, and also sex dolls/bots: they're opportunities for more reticent people to learn about sex in private."

Heck, I do that with real people. Yes, I ask for feedback during and after sex. Otherwise, how am I going to get it right?

OTOH, the idea of my MicroSlut Fuckerscore bothers me.
posted by Samizdata at 1:04 AM on September 19, 2015

Mkay, at this point, born an outie so to speak, you are REALLY starting to offend me with your parrot-like spouting of ambiguous allegations against all of a gender. Can you please tone it back a bit? We get this is a hotbutton topic with you. Just relax a bit and go with the flow, okay?

Am I missing some irony here? I don't think there are any generalized allegations against men in that comment at all, even though I disagree strongly with some of the premises that I do read in Avenger's comments in this thread.
posted by atoxyl at 1:51 AM on September 19, 2015

> The misogynists you have to worry about are the ones in the club or the dance or just in public with pockets full of drugs of one kind or another and the chat up. They’re the social predators, the “pick up artists,” not the shut ins.

Actually, I reserve the right to worry about all misogynists. Not because all of them are social predators, but because all of them help shape the society I live in.
Some of them are in my government or otherwise in positions of power. Some of them spread their misogynist ideas through the media. Some of them talk about them with their neighbours or online friends. And some just keep them to themselves (for now).
They're all part of my world and I'll worry about that if I feel the need to do so. I wish you'd worry about them, too.
posted by Too-Ticky at 2:23 AM on September 19, 2015 [1 favorite]

I feel like re-treading the BDSM ground is a derail here, and to be honest I'm not crazy about us having to get into whether what two or more people do with enthused, informed consent is fun or an evopsych endgame.
posted by Aya Hirano on the Astral Plane at 5:15 AM on September 19, 2015 [4 favorites]

Will nobody think of the industrial welding units? So much passing privilege here.

First read this as "wedding units".... not sure which reading is more disconcerting in this context.
posted by sammyo at 5:54 AM on September 19, 2015

I feel an important question has not been addressed:
Do you want replicants? Because this is how you get replicants.
posted by Kabanos at 5:55 AM on September 19, 2015 [6 favorites]

Oh, going to leave this here, mostly for comic relief.
posted by thebotanyofsouls at 8:38 AM on September 19, 2015

> I hesitate to post this, but in the interest of information I guess I will, with the caveat that it's hideous and you probably aren't going to want to actually read this: good old Milo Yiannopoulos, the internet's own Draco Malfoy, has written an article about this for Breitbart which is literally the most hideously sexist internet article I have ever read.

Here's a summary at WHTM for those who don't want to click that link: Milo Yiannopoulos: “Nutty broads” made me gay, and will drive most men to sexbots

And there's this: Feminists are stealing our sexbots, Men’s Rights Redditors warn
posted by homunculus at 12:13 PM on September 19, 2015 [2 favorites]

atoxyl: "Mkay, at this point, born an outie so to speak, you are REALLY starting to offend me with your parrot-like spouting of ambiguous allegations against all of a gender. Can you please tone it back a bit? We get this is a hotbutton topic with you. Just relax a bit and go with the flow, okay?

Am I missing some irony here? I don't think there are any generalized allegations against men in that comment at all, even though I disagree strongly with some of the premises that I do read in Avenger's comments in this thread."

Sorry, I guess that was the way the comments were coming off to me.
posted by Samizdata at 12:24 PM on September 19, 2015

I'm a sex prostitute from the future
Thanks for turning me on to this Black Books thing, merocet. Shit's makin' me chuckle!
posted by Trinity-Gehenna at 6:02 PM on September 19, 2015 [1 favorite]

Black Books is amazing and if you liked Father Ted or IT Crowd you should check it out post haste.
posted by Artw at 6:44 PM on September 19, 2015 [1 favorite]

Xarnop, I met a woman once who seemed totally normal, except she liked to be choked by her partner. Too wild of a kink for me, but hey, it decidedly did it for her - you should have seen her eyes light up when she talked about it. The catch? Totally normal childhood and teenage years. Never been raped, never had fantasies of non consent, never been abused and yet when she turned 20 she suddenly had this burning curiosity about it.

FWIW, for some people, reduced oxygen intake may lead to increased sexual pleasure. You can even read once in a while about people accidentally strangling themselves while masturbating. So it might be just a physiological effect for your friend, nothing psychological.
posted by sour cream at 7:19 AM on September 20, 2015 [2 favorites]

Robot: How do you like your sex?
Patron/Oppressor: Vanilla.
Robot: I also come in chocolate.
posted by biffa at 11:32 AM on September 20, 2015 [2 favorites]

Sea lice?
posted by Mitheral at 7:13 PM on September 20, 2015 [4 favorites]

Count me among those who are astounded by the heteronormativity on display here. It's as if some of these commenters don't know there's a whole industry of pornagraphy that doesn't include any women, and it ranges from vanilla and sweet to violent and degrading. There's also a whole world of women out there having violent, degrading, consenting, enthusiastic sex without the involvement of any men.

I think it's more that most of the commenters didn't read the original paper or didn't want to engage with it, and the paper is about how sexual technologies and commodification of sexuality have historically been used to harm women and children; the authors extend this problem to (theoretical) sex robots. It's fine that people would rather make quips about sexbots than get further into this, but assuming that the commenters interested in the topic are ignorant about non-mainstream porn and not queer as all get-out is unfair, I think. It's not true for me, anyway.
posted by thetortoise at 7:57 PM on September 20, 2015

"Show me a story about humanoid robots and it's fairly likely it will have a sex bot fighting back in it. Blade Runner, AMC's Humans, Ex Machina, you name it.

Immediately thought of Metropolis, then spent 10 minutes trying to decide whether Frankenstein's repeated explicit description as representing the danger of science replacing fucking with stitching robots counted. Bride of Frankenstein does.

I actually think that pain tells us something is wrong.

Yeah, but see, the thing is — pain is just a nervous impulse, and not only does your unconscious mind overrule it literally constantly, but your conscious mind overrules it all the time too. Things like recovering from many muscle injuries include getting over muscle tightness and pain, where the pain is your body warning you that if you stretch past that point you may damage your body. But with most muscle injuries, your brain will have defaulted to a map that means that it expects damage far before your body would actually be damaged.

Or, from another direction, I eat spicy food all the time. Pain there is a trigger for endorphins, and is induced by fooling my body.

Pain is your body telling you something is wrong, but your body is profoundly stupid — that's why we have a brain, to decide whether the sense signals we're getting are reliable and how they fit together.
posted by klangklangston at 12:23 AM on September 21, 2015 [2 favorites]

" and the paper is about how sexual technologies and commodification of sexuality have historically been used to harm women and children"

Eh, I'll reread the paper soon but I'm pretty sure they weren't saying that since that would imply that sex toys harm women and, if I remember correctly, they specifically were describing how sex bots will be different from previous sex tech. They also never managed to define "sex robot" so....
posted by I-baLL at 7:45 AM on September 21, 2015

They draw a distinction between technologies that have a physiological purpose and technologies that simulate the idea of buying a human for sex, which they see as an extension of widespread kinds of sex work and pornography that involve less agency for the workers and where the clients are male and more powerful. I don't think I agree with most of the points in the article, but I do disagree with the assertion (which several commenters have made) that the framing of the discussion is heteronormative because people are ignorant about porn. I think it's that the authors have much less of a problem with the non-heteronormative aspects and they're talking about a particular concept of sex robot that seems more like an extension of virtual child pornography than like vibrators.
posted by thetortoise at 8:05 AM on September 21, 2015

"I think it's that the authors have much less of a problem with the non-heteronormative aspects and they're talking about a particular concept of sex robot that seems more like an extension of virtual child pornography than like vibrators."

Except they don't really address that. They don't even define what a "sex robot" is.
posted by I-baLL at 9:41 AM on September 21, 2015

I agree that they don't define it explicitly. They seem to be relying on this book by David Levy for their terms.

Unlike the Campaign to Stop Killer Robots, upon which this is based, I don't think they're calling for a literal ban. This part explains the goals pretty clearly:

Following in the footsteps of ethical robot campaigns, I propose to launch a campaign against sex robots, so that issues in prostitution can be discussed more widely in the field of robotics. I have to tried to show how human lifeworlds of gender and sexuality are inflected in making of sex robots, and that these robots will contribute to gendered inequalities found in the sex industry. I did not create these parallels between prostitution and the making of sex robots, these have been cultivated and explicitly promoted by Levy [1]. By campaigning against sex robots, we will also promote a discussion about the ethics of gender and sex in robotics and help to draw attention to the serious issues faced by those in prostitution.

posted by thetortoise at 10:01 AM on September 21, 2015

It's probably a bad idea for me to stick my foot back in this thread, but - call me obtuse - I'm just not getting the point here.

> By campaigning against sex robots, we will [...] help to draw attention to the serious issues faced by those in prostitution.

Ok, that's a worthy goal - very much so - but the effort seems utterly misdirected. By talking about inanimate robots that do not exist outside science fiction yet, we draw attention to living, breathing, suffering people? Why not choose any of a hundred better ways to do this?

And then consider the part I cut out:
> also promote a discussion about the ethics of gender and sex in robotics

Say what now? What are the ethics of gender and sex in industrial welders? Should Toyota factories have gender-specific robot repair stations? This is so ridiculously far-fetched that I don't think the authors thought things through very well at all.

Seriously, if we achieve strong AI, it will have very little resemblance to human intellect. The goals and dreams and desires of strong AI will not be our familiar goals or desires. And if we aren't talking strong AI, if we're talking industrial appliances, I'll take the issue seriously after we've addressed cows in feedlots and chickens in coops and whales blinded by sonar. Spare a thought for real suffering before wasting effort here.
posted by RedOrGreen at 1:40 PM on September 21, 2015 [2 favorites]

“They're all part of my world and I'll worry about that if I feel the need to do so. I wish you'd worry about them, too.”

What worries me is moralizers looking for crusades. Many people who suffer abuse are too embarrassed to talk about it and looking for a way to plug shame (or worse, government force) into what is otherwise consensual sex in this equation doesn’t help.
Women put on strap-ons and tie other women up and do all sorts of other consensual things that outwardly seem pretty violent and degrading, that doesn’t make them misogynists. No more than someone who punches a human looking punching bag is automatically a misanthrope.

Someone genuinely who hates women in their mind and doesn’t act on it or finds some surrogate to act on is a damn sight less dangerous than someone who puts it into practice.

Consider the male sex-bot. Say Gigolo Joe from the movie A.I.

In fiction the robots themselves seem to be the fear. The Terminator and Skynet for example. However what if Terminators were under human control? Would humans using terminators to kill other humans be any less terrifying? So too, what about A.I as an element of control/seduction over other humans?

The real system of misogyny are people like vice cops because as long as self-appointed moral guardians look to lay shame on people for what should otherwise be a guiltless pleasure, those things are going to be able to be exploited.
The more people rail against the realism or percieved youth of sex bots, the better sales will get. Like any socially ilicit thing, it develops a market for it.

Speaking of market...I’m with Diogenes on this. Mostly. Let people get themselves off however they like. Just, y’know, maybe not on the steps of city hall (or the modern analogue of the Agora) if only for the sake of sanitation.

And there’s worry vs. action. Want to argue against misogyny with some guy in his parents basement? Have at it.

But what are we to do with someone who says they think of girls under the age of 18 (let’s say, 17 and 11 months) when they masturbate? Imprison them?

Response has to be proportionate to the act, not to the repugnance of the thought.
posted by Smedleyman at 2:15 PM on September 21, 2015 [2 favorites]

And there’s worry vs. action. Want to argue against misogyny with some guy in his parents basement? Have at it.

This is very condescending.
posted by agregoli at 4:00 PM on September 22, 2015

Annika Cicada: "Thinking a little more about how rampant misogyny and rape culture are, I think it's not off-limits to discuss how they intersect with the markets for sex robots that are designed to be skeuomorphs of the female form, and if the markets for such devices should be regulated with that in mind."

You know, given the tenor of this discussion, I am not exactly married to the sexbot being a female skeuomorph. The Sybian is not exactly based on the human form.
posted by Samizdata at 9:32 PM on September 29, 2015 [1 favorite]

« Older lifebeagle | “...lot of dogs dont like black people but theyre... Newer »

This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments

MetaFilter

Moving towards a future of sex with robots whether we like it or not
September 18, 2015 7:59 AM Subscribe

Tags

Share

Moving towards a future of sex with robots whether we like it or not September 18, 2015 7:59 AM Subscribe

Tags

Share

Moving towards a future of sex with robots whether we like it or not
September 18, 2015 7:59 AM Subscribe