Campaign Against Sex Robots calls for standards in sexbots

“Kathleen Richardson is worried about sex robots. Now a robot ethics researcher at De Montfort University, she’s spent the last 15 years looking at robots ‘designed to take on intimate roles, that were once thought off-limits to machines—companions, friends, lovers,'” Hope Reese reports for TechRepublic. “While the concept of a robo-girlfriend may seem farfetched, there is the prediction that most of us — yes, you read that right — will be having sex with robots by the year 2050. And although sex robots are nowhere near mainstream, companies like True Companion and RealDoll have already developed strikingly realistic models (if you have any doubt about how realistic, look at the New York Times video). Some of these ‘companions’ can engage in ‘conversation,’ and can even download different personalities.”

“Earlier this year, Richardson, along with Erik Billing of the University of Skövde in Sweden, formed the Campaign Against Sex Robots, whose mission is to raise awareness about how these robots ‘are potentially harmful and will contribute to inequalities in society,'” Reese reports. “How can the existence of a robot contribute to inequalities? Richardson believes that the asymmetrical balance of power between human/sexbot is a parallel to the real-world prostitute-john relationship. The robot, like a prostitute, becomes an object for purchase.”

“While the focus of Richardson’s campaign is sexbots, her broader concern is with any robots that replace relationships with humans, including companion robots for the elderly” Reese reports. “‘Could we live in a world where we’re no longer interacting with each other? Where this machine is constructed to meet our needs, to give us what we want?” Richardson asked. “All the evidence is saying no.'”

Read more in the full article here.

MacDailyNews Take:

Wait Vanessa, I can explain. You see, I was looking for Dr. Evil when the Fembots came out and smoke started coming out of their jomblies. So I started to work my mojo, to counter their mojo; we got cross-mojulation, and their heads started exploding. — Austin Powers


    1. LOL. You know nothing about religious people. Atheist people seem to have controlling people issues. Why are so many progressives atheists? Why were Mao, Lenin, Stalin atheists?

      BTW, you do know that there’s a big difference between people voting on politicians who represent their interests, and someone putting a gun to your head right?

      As if it was about control. You keep telling yourself that so that you can avoid thinking any deeper on the issue.

      1. Actually, your question is backwards. It should be, “Why are so many atheists progressives?” One obvious reason is because the political right has affiliated itself with fundamentalist Christians. The resulting Republican platform alienates atheists, LGBT, women, scientists, environmentalists, and basically anyone who believes in reason, consistency, and compromise.

        I contend that it is the Republican Party that, despite its claim to promote personal freedom, has an agenda to legislate it Christian-based mores on the rest of us who know better than to believe in some mystic power. The Force makes more sense than the Bible.

    2. Why is it not surprising that someone with calling themselves ‘demondeathkill’ would be attempting to demonize those horrible ‘religious people’. Grow up. Christian values are what made this country great. Funny that as we see them whittled away, we see our country diminished.

        1. Which Christian value? Was it where god killed every first born child in Egypt because the pharaoh refused to listen to him? Or maybe it was how god was going to murder Moses until his wife cut off their son’s penis and rubbed it on Moses feet which turned the pervert on enough to change his mind? Exodus 4:24-26. Maybe it was all the other ridiculous mythological superstition that you ignorant portions of society believe as fact rather than the fictional stories they are.

    1. Both, why does the subject of sex robots make you think of me? You must picture me as Howard Wolowicz of something. Either that, or you have a crush, or even an unrequited love. Please go to therapy, botty. I am not for you.

      Getting back on subject, when any person or group that is against something starts talking about “standards,” you know tha what they are really talking about is legislating that issue out of existence. Although professing to be anti-regulation, botty’s political party uses this technique on a regular basis at the local, state, and federal level. You know…the type of nanny state “you don’t know what is best for you” (and we don’t like it) approach that they also deride, except when it suits their fancy.

      Another thing that botty and his ilk are fond of doing is pretending that they know what other people think or are going to do. They believe that if they say something often enough, that it will somehow become true.

      What I truly believe is that this effort by Kathleen Richardson is foolish. It will be entertaining to watch the whole scenario play out (if it ever goes anywhere besides an article or two). But there are far more important things to address in this world. For instance, gun control. Sex bots don’t kill people, but guns kill a whole lot of people.

      1. Once again, you demonstrate your own hypocrisy. You deride nanny-state-ism and then turn around and champion the state’s right to make the citizens powerless (gun control). Then you say that inanimate objects are responsible for actions. Oi vey.

        It’s even more hilarious that you conflate moral concerns with nanny-state-ism, clearly demonstrating that you’ve picked up a phrase and don’t understand what it means.

        You don’t know what you’re talking about, but please keep posting. Liberal (and libertine) stupidity makes me laugh.

        1. I am surprised that you can spell the word, Poser. You twist things around in an incredibly nonsensical fashion, don’t you?

          It should not be necessary to point out that every right has limits – freedom of speech, freedom of religion, and yes, the right to bear arms, as well. Can you (legally) purchase an RPG? It is not true that you have to go through a special process to own a machine gun? So, the issue is not whether or not there are limits, but what those limits should be. Perhaps you could explain just why it is so awful to have to register a gun? My car is registered with its VIN. My home is registered with a deed. My very self is registered with a SSN and through many other documents including my driver’s license. So, I do not find it an onerous requirement to register a hand gun or rifle. Guns are not a religion, Poser. I can freely question how they are regulated without having to answer to an online turd like you.

        1. Love to meet you someday, botty. I suspect that you are even more despicable in person than you are online. In any event, your opinion is worthless, as evidenced by the tons of shite that you post on this forum.

    1. Call me old-fashioned, but I actually want a (human) girlfriend. I don’t currently have one though, because right now I’m saving up all my money to get a really good one.


  1. “asymmetrical balance of power between human/sexbot”

    What!!!? Unless the sexbot is self-aware, that’s pretty much like talking about the balance of power between a human and a drill press, car, bike or iPhone.

    1. I think the concern, although a bit abstract, is that the more sexbots are designed to look like and act like people, the more likely the things people learn and practice with sexbots will be transferred to how people interact with each other.

  2. “a robot ethics researcher at De Montfort University”

    Want to know where all the tuition money’s going? It’s paying salaries for bullshit jobs like this.


  3. The Feminist movement asked, in light of the Pill and sperm-donors, what do women need men for?
    The sex-robot movement is now asking, in light of these robots, what do men need women for?

    They’re both wrong — our deepest desire is to be loved.

    1. You’re right. However, the feminist movement has made the personal relationship robot something more than a dream. They’ll never understand why, but basically men shy away from crazy. Feminism is nothing more than a factory that spits out deranged antisocial women.

  4. Not to take this silly article too far but it is interesting. I’ve wondered for awhile what it will do to our society and economy when unskilled workers for unskilled jobs are no longer needed. What happens when robots mow my lawn, clean my house, clean the office buildings, pick all the crops, drive the trucks, unload the trucks and now this? What will all those people do???

Reader Feedback

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.