Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Constructing the Meaning of Humanoid Sex Robots

  • Original research
  • Published:
International Journal of Social Robotics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Humanoid sex robots seem to challenge the human–machine distinction because one way to engage with them is to entertain the illusion that they are human and appropriate for intimacy. This inclination is intentionally induced by robot designers, and several narratives envision and claim that robots of the future will be indistinguishable from humans. Taking an anticipatory ethics approach and using critical discourse analysis, we argue that current discourse about sex robots does not adequately recognize the sociotechnical nature of humanoid sex robot development. We challenge the idea that the human–machine distinction will inevitably dissolve because of technological advancements. Recognition of the social influences on technological development is key to understanding the coherence, or lack thereof, of many narratives of the future that are currently put forward.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Let us not forget that internet porn also presents humanoid features in the form of moving images of humans having sex, but such movements are outside the realm of robotics.

  2. However, some empirical studies seem to show that an increased human-likeness in robots can elicit more mistrust in humans [79].

  3. In order to achieve something more than simulation in robots, researchers would have to bridge the chasm between living nervous systems and brains, the locus of human consciousness, and their computational equivalents.

  4. A particular aspect of this has been noted in recognizing a phenomenon referred to as the ‘uncanny valley’ [48].

  5. Relevant films include Her [31], Ex Machina [21], Blade Runner 2049 [71]; some television series on the topic are Battlestar Galactica [36], Humans [72], Westworld [49]; science fiction authors who wrote on this subject include Asimov [2], Levin [39], and Tezuka [69]; media outlets that dealt with the theme include The New York Times [5], Slate [1] and Wired [61].

  6. Although the conventional view may be that people engage in sex primarily for pleasure and reproduction, Meston and Buss [45] document a much wider range of reasons. Rye and Meany [55] mention ‘spousely duty’ (not necessarily aimed at reproduction) and work (e.g. prostitution). To determine what counts as sex is very difficult, since there seems to be a variety of subjective interpretations even among very homgeneous social groups [57].

  7. Whitby [74] notes: “The Roman Catholic Church, the world’s largest religious organization, has clear and profound doctrinal opposition to sexual acts other than within marriage for the purpose of procreation. For this reason, the very idea of a robot lover, and maybe even a robot companion, will be completely unacceptable to them.”

References

  1. Adshade M (2018) How sex robots could revolutionize marriage—for the better. Slate https://slate.com/technology/2018/08/sex-robots-could-totally-redefine-the-institution-of-marriage.html. Last visited: February 2019

  2. Asimov I (1986) Robot dreams. Berkley Books, New York

    Google Scholar 

  3. Asfour T, Welke K, Azad P, Ude A, Dillmann R (2008) The karlsruhe humanoid head. In: Humanoids 2008—8th IEEE-RAS international conference on humanoid robots. pp 447–453

  4. Barker S, Izadi H, Crook NT, Hayatleh K, Rolf M, Hughes P, Fellows N (2017) Natural head movement for HRI with a muscular-skeletal head and neck robot. In: Proceedings of the 26th IEEE international symposium on robot and human interactive communication (RO-MAN). pp 587–592

  5. Bates L (2017) The trouble with sex robots. In: The New York times, July 17 2017. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/17/opinion/sex-robots-consent.html. Last visited: February 2019

  6. Berns K, Hirth J (2006) Control of facial expressions of the humanoid robot head ROMAN. In: Proceedings of the 2006 IEEE/RSJ international conference on intelligent robots and systems, pp 3119–3124

  7. Bołtuć P (2017) Church-turing lovers. In: Lin P, Abney K, Jenkins R (eds) Robot ethics 2.0: from autonomous cars to artificial intelligence. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 214–228

    Google Scholar 

  8. Brey PAE (2012) Anticipatory ethics for emerging technologies. NanoEthics 6(1):1–13

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Bruner J (1991) The narrative construction of reality. Crit Inq 18:1–21

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Calvo RA, D’Mello S, Gratch J, Kappas A (eds) (2014) The Oxford handbook of affective computing. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  11. Campbell L, Kohut T (2017) The use and effects of pornography in romantic relationships. Curr Opin Psychol 13:6–10

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Chen CH (2016) Handbook of pattern recognition and computer vision, 5th edn. World Scientific Publishing Co, Singapore

    Book  MATH  Google Scholar 

  13. Cheok AD, Levy D, Karunanayaka K (2016) Lovotics: love and sex with robots. In: Karpouzis K, Yannakakis G (eds) Emotion in games, socio-affective computing, vol 4. Springer, Berlin, pp 303–328

    Google Scholar 

  14. Darling K (2016) Extending legal protection to social robots: the effects of anthropomorphism, empathy, and violent behavior towards robotic objects. In: Calo R, Froomkin AM, Kerr I (eds) Robot law. Edward Elgar Publishing, Cheltenham, pp 213–234

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  15. DiSalvo CF, Gemperle F, Forlizzi J, Kiesler S (2002) All robots are not created equal: the design and perception of humanoid robot heads. In: Proceedings of the 4th conference on designing interactive systems: processes, practices, methods, and techniques, pp 321–326

  16. Döring N, Poeschl S (2018) Sex toys, sex dolls, sex robots: our under-researched bed-fellows. Sexologies 27(3):51–55

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Döring N, Poeschl S (2019) Love and sex with robots: a content analysis of media representations. Int J Soc Robotics. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-019-00517-y

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Ficht G, Farazi H, Brandenburger A, Rodriguez D, Pavlichenko D, Allgeuer P, Hosseini M, Behnke S (2018) Nimbro-OP2x: adult-sized open-source 3D printed humanoid robot. In: Proceedings of the 2018 IEEE-RAS 18th international conference on humanoid robots (humanoids), pp 1–9

  19. Fiorio L, Scalzo A, Natale L, Metta G, Parmiggiani A (2017) A parallel kinematic mechanism for the torso of a humanoid robot: design, construction and validation. In: Proceedings of the 2017 IEEE/RSJ international conference on intelligent robots and systems (IROS), pp 681–688

  20. Frank LilyE, Nyholm Sven (2017) Robot sex and consent: Is consent to sex between a robot and a human conceivable, possible, and desirable? Artif Intell Law 25(3):305–323

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Garland A (2014) Ex machina [Motion picture]. Universal Pictures, Universal City

    Google Scholar 

  22. Gunkel DJ (2018) Robot rights. MIT Press, Cambridge

    Book  Google Scholar 

  23. Guston DH (2014) Understanding ‘anticipatory governance’. Soc Stud Sci 44(2):218–242

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Haddadin S, Croft E (2016) Physical human–robot interaction. In: Siciliano B, Khatib O (eds) Springer handbook of robotics. Springer, Berlin, pp 1835–1874

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  25. Hanson R (2019) Sophia. https://www.hansonrobotics.com/sophia/. Last visit: February 2019

  26. Hauskeller M (2016) Automatic sweethearts. In: Mythologies of transhumanism. Palgrave Macmillan, pp 181–199

  27. Hirschberg J, Manning CD (2015) Advances in natural language processing. Science 349(6245):261–266

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  28. Ishiguro H (2019) Hiroshi Ishiguro Laboratories. http://www.geminoid.jp/en/index.html. Last visit: February 2019

  29. Johnson DG (2011) Software agents, anticipatory ethics, and accountability. In: The growing gap between emerging technologies and legal-ethical oversight. Springer, pp 61–76

  30. Johnson DG, Verdicchio M (2017) Reframing AI discourse. Minds Mach 27(4):575–590

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Jonez S (2013) Her [Motion picture]. Annapurna Pictures, Los Angeles

    Google Scholar 

  32. Kaneko K, Harada K, Kanehiro F, Miyamori G, Akachi K (2008) Humanoid robot HRP-3. In: Proceedings of the 2008 IEEE/RSJ international conference on intelligent robots and systems, pp 2471–2478

  33. Kim J-Y, Park I-W, Lee J, Kim M-S, Cho B-K, Oh J-H (2005) System design and dynamic walking of humanoid robot KHR-2. In: Proceedings of the 2005 IEEE international conference on robotics and automation, pp 1431–1436

  34. KinkySdolls (2019) Factory. https://www.kinkysdolls.com/factory. Last visit: February 2019

  35. Kuindersma S, Deits R, Fallon M, Valenzuela A, Dai H, Permenter F, Koolen T, Marion P, Tedrake R (2016) Optimization-based locomotion planning, estimation, and control design for the atlas humanoid robot. Auton Robots 40(3):429–455

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Larson GA, Moore RD (2004) Battlestar Galactica [television series]. NBC Universal Television, Universal City

    Google Scholar 

  37. Laschi C, Mazzolai B, Cianchetti M (2016) Soft robotics: technologies and systems pushing the boundaries of robot abilities. Sci Robotics 1(1):1–11

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Laumond J-P (ed) (1998) Robot motion planning and control. Springer, Berlin

    Google Scholar 

  39. Levin I (1972) The Stepford Wives. Random House, New York

    Google Scholar 

  40. Levy D (2011) The ethics of robot prostitutes. In: Lin P, Abney K, Bekey GA (eds) Robots ethics: the ethical and social implications of robotics. MIT Press, Cambridge, pp 223–231

    Google Scholar 

  41. Lopes M, Beira R, Praça M, Santos-Victor J (2004) An anthropomorphic robot torso for imitation: design and experiments. In: Proceedings of the 2004 IEEE/RSJ international conference on intelligent robots and systems (IROS), vol 1. pp 661–667

  42. Mackenzie Robin (2018) Sexbots: customizing them to suit us versus an ethical duty to created sentient beings to minimize suffering. Robotics 7(4):70

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Meacham D, Studley M (2017) Could a robot care? It’s all in the movement. In: Lin P, Abney K, Jenkins R (eds) Robot ethics 20: from autonomous cars to artificial intelligence. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 97–113

    Google Scholar 

  44. Megahed SM (1993) Principles of robot modelling and simulation. Wiley, Hoboken

    Google Scholar 

  45. Meston CM, Buss DM (2007) Why humans have sex. Arch Sex Behav 36(4):477–507

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Miller HI (1999) The real curse of Frankenfood. Nat Biotechnol 17:113

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Miller KW, Grodzinsky F, Wolf MJ (2009) Why turing shouldn’t have to guess. In: 5th Asia-Pacific computing and philosophy conference (AP-CAP 2009), Tokyo, Japan, October 1–2, 2009

  48. Mori M, MacDorman KF, Kageki N (2012) The uncanny valley [from the field]. IEEE Robot Autom Mag 19(2):98–100

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Nolan J, Joy L (2016) Westworld [television series]. Bad Robot Productions, Santa Monica

    Google Scholar 

  50. Pages J, Marchionni L, Ferro F (2016) Tiago: the modular robot that adapts to different research needs. In: International workshop on robot modularity, IROS

  51. Papenfuss M (2017) Hello, Westworld: sex doll brothel opens in Barcelona. In: Huffington post, March 2 2017. https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/sex-doll-barcelona-brothel_us_58b8ad10e4b0d2821b4cddb8. Last visit: February 2019

  52. Realbotix (2019) FAQ. https://realbotix.com/FAQ. Last visit: February 2019

  53. Richardson K (2015) The asymmetrical ‘relationship’: parallels between prostitution and the development of sex robots. ACM SIGCAS Comput Soc 45(3):290–293

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. Russell ACB (2009) Blurring the love lines: the legal implications of intimacy with machines. Comput Law Secur Rev 25:455–463

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. Rye BJ, Meaney GJ (2007) The pursuit of sexual pleasure. Sex Cult 11(1):28–51

    Article  Google Scholar 

  56. Sakagami Y, Watanabe R, Aoyama C, Matsunaga S, Higaki N, Fujimura K (2002) The intelligent ASIMO: system overview and integration. In: Proceedings of the IEEE/RSJ international conference on intelligent robots and systems, vol 3, pp 2478–2483

  57. Sanders SA, Reinisch JM (1999) Would you say you had sex if…? J Am Med Assoc 281(3):275–277

    Article  Google Scholar 

  58. Schaal Stefan (1999) Is imitation learning the route to humanoid robots? Trends Cogn Sci 3(6):233–242

    Article  Google Scholar 

  59. Scheutz M (2011) The inherent dangers of unidirectional emotional bonds between humans and social robots. In: Lin P, Abney K, Bekey GA (eds) Robots ethics: the ethical and social implications of robotics. MIT Press, Cambridge, pp 205–222

    Google Scholar 

  60. Shannon J (2019) Proposed ‘sex robot brothel’ blocked by Houston government: ‘We are not Sin City’. In: USA today, October 4 2018. https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation-now/2018/10/03/sex-robot-brothel-blocked-houston-texas/1518298002/. Last visited: February 2019

  61. Simon M (2018) We need to talk about robots trying to pass as humans. In: Wired, June 7 2018. https://www.wired.com/story/we-need-to-talk-about-robots-trying-to-pass-as-humans/. Last visited: February 2019

  62. Sparrow R (2017) Robots, rape, and representation. Int J Soc Robotics 9(4):465–477

    Article  Google Scholar 

  63. Specian A, Eckenstein N, Yim M, Mead R, McDorman B, Kim S, Matarić M (2018) Preliminary system and hardware design for Quori, a low-cost, modular, socially interactive robot. In: Workshop on social robots in the wild

  64. Spielberg S (2001) Artificial intelligence [Motion picture]. Warner Bros, Burbank

    Google Scholar 

  65. Sweet LM, Good MC (1984) Re-definition of the robot motion control problem: effects of plant dynamics, drive systems constraints, and user requirements. In: Proceedings of the 23rd conference on decision and control Las Vegas, NV, pp 724–732

  66. Szczuka JM, Krämer NC (2017) Not only the lonely: how men explicitly and implicitly evaluate the attractiveness of sex robots in comparison to the attractiveness of women, and personal characteristics influencing this evaluation. Multimodal Technol Interact 1(1):3

    Article  Google Scholar 

  67. Szczuka JM, Krämer NC (2018) Jealousy 4.0? an empirical study on jealousy-related discomfort of women evoked by other women and gynoid robots. Paladyn J Behav Robotics 9(1):323–336

    Article  Google Scholar 

  68. Takanishi A, Sato K, Segawa K, Tokanobu H, Miwa H (2000) An anthropomorphic head-eye robot expressing emotions based on equations of emotion. In: Proceedings of the 2000 IEEE international conference on robotics and automation, vol 3, pp 2243–2249

  69. Tezuka O (1952) Tetsuwan atom. Kōbunsha, Tokyo

    Google Scholar 

  70. Trout C (2018) Sex robot hands-on at CES 2018. YouTube video published on January 10 2018. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gO9KrOhJ5NM. Last visit: September 2019

  71. Villeneuve D (2017) Blade runner 2049 [Motion picture]. Sony Pictures, Culver City

    Google Scholar 

  72. Vincent S, Brackley J (2015) Humans [Television series]. Channel 4 Television Corporation, London

    Google Scholar 

  73. White A (2018) On the cover: are we ready for robot sex? In: New York press room, May 2018. http://nymag.com/press/2018/05/on-the-cover-are-we-ready-for-robot-sex.html. Last visit: September 2019

  74. Whitby B (2011) Do you want a robot lover? In: Lin P, Abney K, Bekey GA (eds) Robot ethics: the ethical and social implications of robotics intelligent robotics and autonomous agents. MIT Press, Cambridge, pp 233–249

    Google Scholar 

  75. Wodak R, Meyer M (eds) (2015) Methods of critical discourse studies. Sage, Thousand Oaks

    Google Scholar 

  76. Wood LJ, Zaraki A, Walters ML, Novanda O, Robins B, Dautenhahn K (2017) The iterative development of the humanoid robot kaspar: an assistive robot for children with autism. In: Social robotics, 9th international conference, ICSR 2017. Springer, pp 53–63

  77. Yeoman I, Mars M (2012) Robots, men and sex tourism. Futures 44:365–371

    Article  Google Scholar 

  78. Zakipour M, Meghdari A, Alemi M (2016) RASA: a low-cost upper-torso social robot acting as a sign language teaching assistant. In: Social robotics, 8th international conference, ICSR 2016. Springer, pp 630–639

  79. Złotowski J, Sumioka H, Nishio S, Glas DF, Bartneck C, Ishiguro H (2016) Appearance of a robot affects the impact of its behaviour on perceived trustworthiness and empathy. Paladyn J Behav Robotics 7(1):55–66

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Virginia, Charlottesville, USA

    Deborah G. Johnson

  2. University of Bergamo, Bergamo, Italy

    Mario Verdicchio

Authors
  1. Deborah G. Johnson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Mario Verdicchio
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mario Verdicchio.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Johnson, D.G., Verdicchio, M. Constructing the Meaning of Humanoid Sex Robots. Int J of Soc Robotics 12, 415–424 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-019-00586-z

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-019-00586-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation