Health researchers have published an editorial examining research related to the use of sex robots:
Science fiction aside, advanced sex robots are currently heating up the market, with several companies now offering more and more life-like artificial partners, mostly ones mimicking women. Skeptics fear the desirable droids could escalate misogyny and violence against women, ignite deviant urges in pedophiles, or further isolate the sexually frustrated. Sexbot makers, on the other hand, have been pumping their health claims into advertisements, including that the amorous androids could reduce the spread of sexually transmitted disease, aid in sex therapies, and curb deviant desires in pedophiles and other sex offenders.
So far, those claims are "rather specious," according to health researchers Chantal Cox-George of St George's University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust in London and Susan Bewley of King's College London. In an editorial [DOI: 10.11336/bmjsrh-2017-200012] [DX] published Monday in BMJ Sexual & Reproductive Health, the pair highlight that there are virtually no studies that help bang out the validity of the many health arguments surging around sexbots—arguments both for and against them.
That data dry-spell doesn't let doctors off the hook, though, Cox-George and Bewley write. They call for researchers to get busy setting up studies that will nail the answers. In the meantime, "an absence of evidence does not excuse the medical profession from discussing and debating the issues, as there will inevitably be consequences for physical, mental and social well-being."
Sex technology is already an estimated $30 billion industry, they note. At least four companies are now making adult female sexbots, costing $5,000 to $50,000, and at least one is making "pedobots." The mannequins come with variable ages, features, and even programmable personalities, along with customizable oral, vaginal, and anal openings. Male sexbots are said to be in the works.
An Australian forensic criminologist goes further, speculating that "pedobots" may be illegal down under (archive):
Sexbots, and that includes pedobots, have been developed to allow users to play out sexual fantasies. In the child sexual abuse cases I have worked on, you see an escalation in activity in some cases—from an offender sourcing online child sexual abuse material, to actively seeking a physical interaction with a child when the online material does not bring the same sexual gratification. Pedobots could easily fit into this continuum of escalation.
It's also worth highlighting that Australia's legal definition of child pornography (material that describes or depicts a person under 16 years of age, or who appears to be less than 16, in a manner that would offend a reasonable adult) does not capture all images or representations that someone with an interest in children may find sexually arousing. With no evidence to the contrary, my experience tells me that the sexualization of children—be that in cartoons, songs, robots, or whatever form—will increase the desires of some who find children attractive, and put more children at risk, not less.
[...] It remains debatable whether pedobots would fall under the category of child pornography. As the law stands, child pornography can be created without directly involving a real person—child sexual abuse material can include images, text, and three-dimensional objects. This would appear to include pedobots. However, the notion of a life-like child robot produced for the sexual gratification of adults, I would argue, would offend most reasonable adults.
Should a harmless activity (fooling around with a sex robot) be banned for its potential to cause "escalation"? Should "pedobot" buyers get added to a watchlist?
(Score: 4, Insightful) by Bobs on Wednesday June 06 2018, @04:13PM (9 children)
I suspect this study will be cited to help justify the need for funding academic studies about the utility and efficacy of sex bots.
More work for college undergrads!
(Score: 3, Funny) by AssCork on Wednesday June 06 2018, @04:21PM (4 children)
Let me know if they need project-manager types for hearding volunteers and observing test-scenarios.
Just popped-out of a tight spot. Came out mostly clean, too.
(Score: 4, Funny) by takyon on Wednesday June 06 2018, @04:44PM (3 children)
Congratulations, you've been hired to "fill" the Robotic Anal Management (RAM) "opening".
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 2) by BsAtHome on Wednesday June 06 2018, @05:30PM (1 child)
The fact that sooo many (good and bad) jokes are being made here is a testimony to the absolute necessity to have sex robots!
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday June 06 2018, @07:39PM
How cum?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday June 06 2018, @10:02PM
Don't forget DRAM (Dick Robotic Anal Management), SRAM (Shitty Robotic Anal Management), SDRAM (Shitty Dick Robotic Anal Management).
(Score: 2) by DeathMonkey on Wednesday June 06 2018, @05:42PM (1 child)
I suspect this study will be cited to help justify the need for funding academic studies about the utility and efficacy of sex bots.
(leaving aside the fact this is an editorial and not a study)
Isn't that how it's supposed to work? Identify an area lacking study and then study it?
(Score: 2) by realDonaldTrump on Wednesday June 06 2018, @10:42PM
You know, it's always "more study required." Whether it's sexy robots or anything. They do a discovery, it has to be investigated. They investigate it, it has to be confirmed. They confirm it, time to do another discovery. Just like when you're in politics you're always campaigning. It never ends!!!
(Score: 1, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday June 06 2018, @05:58PM (1 child)
Indeed. Now, in addition to college freshmen and sophomores being used for psychological studies, they will be recruited for various tests of sex robots. The times, they are a-changing!
(Score: 4, Funny) by bob_super on Wednesday June 06 2018, @06:31PM
The internet called, to remind you that "college student has sex with toy" is not a new field of study.