SoylentNews

1. I'd say husband-husband. Applying husband-wife to non-traditional relationships is, what's the word... heteronormative? It seems to be more of a cliché joke by heterosexuals (e.g. "Which one's the wife in the relationship? Haw haw haw!").

2. They consider it a hobby, a release, a good time, etc. although some might take it much further. There's obviously a big difference between trying to pass as a woman and wearing drag.

My gay buddy (...homie?) would talk about some of his "straight" male friends who dress up in drag, or go to clubs with drag shows, have sex with men, etc. (bit of a Greco [wikipedia.org]-Roman [wikipedia.org] attitude?). I have been to such a show myself. I didn't need eye bleach (I'm out here looking for video footage of today's mass shooting, so go figure), and there were plenty of straight women there too (some of whom could be called "fag hags" [urbandictionary.com]).

3. It might be related to brain chemistry. I have known gays who had the stereotypical feminine voice, as well as the polar opposite (buff Army guy). And some who seemed perfectly normal. One of my friends said he was a lesbian on the inside (maybe just trying to be edgy about his love for yuri?). I don't know that there is a certain curve where you have a lot of hyper-feminine and hyper-masculine. Selection biases could be in action. Someone else here could probably give you a better answer.

there will also be 'child sex bots' (and will/can child sex bots be made illegal?)... thinking about this is kind of disturbing, but i know it IS coming, sooner or later. Will something like that take care of a pedo's needs or lead to something worse?

Child sex bots are already around although they are rudimentary like most sex bots. We've had the debate [soylentnews.org] here on SN. I would not have them banned even if studies (which are likely to be irreproducible crap anyway) did link them to an increase on sexual assaults on real children. It's tantamount to restricting art, free expression, freedom to build what you want, etc. And I think research could show the opposite, sane result, with the child sex bots and sex bots in general reducing sexual assaults, violence, etc. If people want to do some weird shit that isn't harming anyone (directly), why should we ban it? If anything is going to create a mass shooter in the near future, it will be restrictions on sex bots (like this poster over here [soylentnews.org]). Frankly, I wouldn't blame them. Fetish-shamed into being stuck with the traditional relationship dynamics and low-grade tools? Go H.A.M. over that beef, little incels.

would you consider never having a relationship (such as marriage) again or just stick with sex-bot?

If the bot is just weeeeeeaaaaaak AI, then it's just an advanced masturbation aid (see also: VR sex + tools). If you throw so-called "strong AI" (aka real artificially created intelligence) into the mix, then the question could become a lot more interesting. Maybe many here will not live to see such AI.

What is a human, anyway? Humans are intelligent biological machines. Talking meatbags. Artificial intelligence will be realized eventually, especially given the work on neuromorphic architectures. The volume of a brain could hold many trillions of transitors worth of neuromorphic computing.