Academia.eduAcademia.edu

Outline

Title
Abstract
Introduction
Synthesis and (Evolutionary) Hypothesis
Future Applications
Conclusion
References
All Topics
Computer Science
Human-Computer Interaction

Foundations of Erobotics

Profile image of Simon DubéSimon Dubé

International Journal of Social Robotics

https://doi.org/10.1007/S12369-020-00706-0
visibility

…

description

29 pages

link

1 file

Abstract

Technology is giving rise to artificial erotic agents, which we call erobots (erôs + bot). Erobots, such as virtual or augmented partners, erotic chatbots, and sex robots, increasingly expose humans to the possibility of intimacy and sexuality with artificial agents. Their advent has sparked academic and public debates: some denounce their risks (e.g., promotion of harmful sociosexual norms), while others defend their potential benefits (e.g., health, education, and research applications). Yet, the scientific study of human-machine erotic interaction is limited; no comprehensive theoretical models have been proposed and the empirical literature remains scarce. The current research programs investigating erotic technologies tend to focus on the risks and benefits of erobots, rather than providing solutions to resolve the former and enhance the latter. Moreover, we feel that these programs underestimate how humans and machines unpredictably interact and co-evolve, as well as the influence of sociocultural processes on technological development and meaning attribution. To comprehensively explore human-machine erotic interaction and co-evolution, we argue that we need a new unified transdisciplinary field of research-grounded in sexuality and technology positive frameworks-focusing on human-erobot interaction and co-evolution as well as guiding the development of beneficial erotic machines. We call this field Erobotics. As a first contribution to this new discipline, this article defines Erobotics and its related concepts; proposes a model of human-erobot interaction and co-evolution; and suggests a path to design beneficial erotic machines that could mitigate risks and enhance human well-being. Keywords Erobots • Erobotics • Human-machine erotic interaction • Co-evolution • Beneficial machines Socrates: "The only thing I say I know, is the art of love (ta erôtika)".

Related papers

From Sex Robots to Love Robots: Is Mutual Love with a Robot Possible
Lily Frank
View PDFchevron_right
It Loves Me, It Loves Me Not: Is It Morally Problematic to Design Sex Robots that appear to Love Their Owners
Lily Frank

Techne, 2019

Drawing on insights from robotics, psychology, and human-computer interaction, developers of sex robots are currently aiming to create emotional bonds of attachment and even love between human users and their products. This is done by creating robots that can exhibit a range of facial expressions, that are made with human-like artificial skin, and that possess a rich vocabulary with many conversational possibilities. In light of the human tendency to anthropomorphize artefacts, we can expect that designers will have some success and that this will lead to the attribution of mental states to the robot that the robot does not actually have, as well as the inducement of significant emotional responses in the user. This raises the question of whether it might be ethically problematic to try to develop robots that appear to love their users. We discuss three possible ethical concerns about this aim: first, that designers may be taking advantage of users' emotional vulnerability; second, that users may be deceived; and, third, that relationships with robots may block off the possibility of more meaningful relationships with other humans. We argue that developers should attend to the ethical constraints suggested by these concerns in their development of increasingly humanoid sex robots. We discuss two different ways in which they might do so.

View PDFchevron_right
Sex Robots: Ethical Issues Arising and their Potential Impact on Human Intimacy
Akintunde Agunbiade

2022

As AI and robotics become more common in our everyday lives, they pose a challenge to long-settled definitions, principles, and concepts that govern our daily lives. Robots have been defined as 'force through intelligence' or 'where AI meets the real world'. Sex robots are a variant of social robots whose primary purpose is to provide sexual gratification and intimacy for humans. Sex robots come in different forms with unique functionalities, which are covered in this paper. Human intimacy in this paper focuses on heterosexual relationships, as this is what the use of sex robots is modelled after. In this paper, mention is made of robots that can refuse or simulate the rejection of sexual intimacy with the user. Several ethical dilemmas are also presented, which are by no means conclusive of all the various ways sex robots can be exploited or developed.

View PDFchevron_right
"The Perfect Companion": From Cyborgs to Gynoids- Sex Robots and The Commodification of Authentic Intimate Experience
Chloé Locatelli

2018

The prevalence of discussions regarding sex robots shows a growing anxiety around human-robot interactions (HRI) (Scheutz & Arnold, 2016). The growing field of ‘Lovotics’ seeks to explore the romantic potential of harmonizing love, sex and robotics with HRI (Levy, Cheok & Devlin, 2016). Feminists exploring technology’s potential as a tool to establish gender equality also recognise the problematic nature of the globalized and capitalist market’s potential to impede progress, as explored in Donna Haraway’s A Cyborg Manifesto and Rosi Braidotti’s The Posthuman (1991) (2013). As technology advances, Realbotix aim to pioneers in the sex-robot field, attempting to create “The Perfect Companion”. Firstly with “Harmony AI”, “part android app, part sexualised robotic assistant” and then also “Harmony Sex Robot” powered by the AI application in a humanoid body. These latest creations introduced to the market are posited as products to have an intimate relationship with (Realbotix, 2018). Our perception of intimacy has changed through technological mediation, as we become increasingly involved in online social interactions (Shank, 2014) (Turkle, 2013), but also because of market-driven changes, an aspect also reflected in globalized sexual commerce (Bernstein, 2008). This investigation seeks to explore how intimacy and companionship is sold through technologically mediated sexual commerce. Through a dualistic approach of discourse analysis of the Realbotix website and cyberethnography of potential customer’s forum comments, this project creates an early approach towards the commercialisation of intimacy mediated through a technologically and artificially created female. This will lead to a reflection on technology and sexual commerce’s mutations that accommodate this desire for intimacy, and how this is characterised through sex robots.

View PDFchevron_right
Anticipating Sex Robots: A Critique of the Sociotechnical Vanguard Vision of Sex Robots as ‘Good Companions’
Janna B van Grunsven

Being and Value in Technology

A number of companies have started to developed humanoid robots that (1) bear some physical resemblance to human beings, (2) have some ability to initiate movements (e.g. blinking; head-turning, gyration, etc.) and (3) possess some AI functionalities enabling quasi-intelligent environment-responsiveness and linguistic expression. The robots I am speaking of are sex robots. A promise frequently voiced by sex-robot developers (and some academics) is that sex robots will be “good companions” who can enrich and transform the romantic lives of human persons, particularly those who – for various reasons – have trouble entering into traditional love relationships with other humans. Curbing this technological enthusiasm, many philosophers have offered more critical anticipations of sex robots (sex-robot-anticipation hereafter) and the idea that they can, will, or should become good companions to human users. While these critical sex-robot-anticipations alert us to some of the potential harms that may follow from a proliferation of sex robots into society, the overarching aim of this chapter is to show that, by and large, these anticipations fall short. Specifically, they continue to frame the anticipation of sex robots around the question of their potential as good companions. In doing so, I argue that many sex-robot-anticipations at best marginalise key ethical questions pertaining to our potential future with sex robots. At their worst, these sex-robot-anticipations are inadvertently contributing to the potential realisation of a technology that they are precisely worried about. In the process of critically engaging with much of today’s philosophical sex-robot-anticipation, I will introduce two criteria I take to be of central importance for good sex-robot-anticipation; what I call ‘reflective anticipation’ and ‘technological groundedness.’

View PDFchevron_right
Ethics and Robotics The ethical and social implications of personal and sexual relationships with robots and AI
Eleanor Hancock
View PDFchevron_right
Erobots and the deterritorialization of eroticism
Aura Schussler

Journal of Future Robot Life, 2022

As a result of its accelerated evolution in the early 21 st Century, technology has already extended far beyond mere instrumental status. In the not too distant future we can expect technology to move towards a new dimension in terms of fusing with human nature; most notably in the field of intimacy towards what are known as erobots (i.e., sexbots, augmented erotic characters, erotic chatbots, erotic avatars, etc.). Given that these erobots have every chance to become part of a future eroticism, this places erobots beyond the onto-metaphysical grounding of the Western tradition regarding objects. This is an aspect that attracts the dissolution of the anthropocentric legacy of Western metaphysics, within the parameters of OOO, by showing that, in this paradigm, so-called human uniqueness is suffering an ontological twist. To show this I am investigating, the scenario that involves the relationship between a sexbot and a human, alongside of that between two sexbots, within the limits of OOO. Consequently, I am addressing the issue of how a sexbot relates to both a human agent and to another sexbot. I am also analyzing the perspective in which a future presence of erobots in the intimate life of the individual will twist the traditional image of eroticism in Western culture. This perspective is opening a deconstructing process with regard to human exceptionalism-analyzed within the limits of the 'deterritorialization' of eroticism-from the traditional structures of Western metaphysical heritage. Such deterritorialization emphasizes the paradigm shift in which eroticism is leaving the familiar terrain of the metaphysics of presence and the fixed structures of societies' 'strata'. Thus, following the philosophical thinking of Gilles Deleuze and Félix Guattari, the 'reterritorialization' of eroticism-in the fluid, transversal and rhizomatic network of technology-is an ongoing, ever-changing process, taking place in the immanent sphere of techno-eroticism's 'plane of consistency'.

View PDFchevron_right
Sexuality and Affection in the Time of Technological Innovation: Artificial Partners in the Japanese Context
Beatriz Aoki

Religion, 2021

Recent years have witnessed an increase in the number of academic studies on the impact of technological advancements on human life, including possible transformations and changes in human sexuality following the development of sex-related devices, such as sex robots. In this context, terms such as posthuman sexuality, digisexuality, and techno-sexuality have emerged, signaling possible new understandings of sexual, intimacy, and emotional practices. It is important to note that ancient history shows that humankind has for a long time been fascinated with their relationship to non-living things, mostly human-like figures, such as dolls. The Ningyo (人形, the Japanese term for doll) has a long history of usage, and has deep religious and animistic significance in the Japanese context—there are records of sexual use as early as the 18th century. With this context in mind, this paper focuses on three Japanese examples, aiming to shine a light on beyond-human relationships, which include ...

View PDFchevron_right
Prosthetic Soul Mates: Sex Robots as Media for Companionship
Chris Chesher

M/C Journal, 2019

View PDFchevron_right
Robot Love: Can We Learn from Robots About Love?
Ine Gevers

ROBOT LOVE, 2018

ROBOT LOVE presents a highly topical theme: what does it mean to be human and to love in the context of robotics and Artificial Intelligence (AI), and how to preserve certain distinctive qualities while we are merging with machines? There is already a tendency to see ourselves as quantitative machines. Meanwhile, in order to become human aware, robots need to incorporate typical human qualities. Qualities such as emotion, intuition, and most of all love. Now that human-like machines are entering the domestic sphere, AI may act as a mirror allowing us to delve deeper into ourselves and the current state of society. ROBOT LOVE, combining art, neuroscience, robotics and ethics, is like a force from the future we cannot yet grasp, but urges us to ask: can we learn from robots about love? This lavishly illustrated book accompanies the ROBOT LOVE exhibition presenting the work of 60 international artists working at the cutting edge of art, technology and social change, including Matthew Barney, Bart Hess, Roger Hiorns, Hito Steyerl, Philippe Parreno, LA Raeven. Renowned scientists and authors such as Margaret Atwood, Anton Grunberg, Reza Negarestani, Katarina Kolozova and Tobias Revell contribute with exploratory and persuasive essays. They make us aware of science fiction becoming science fact.

View PDFchevron_right

References (322)

  1. 3D Holo Girlfriend. About. https://www.3dhologirlfriend.com/# About. Accessed 19 December 2019
  2. A24 (2014) Ex Machina Official Teaser Trailer #1 (2015) Oscar Isaac, Domhnall Gleeson Movie HD. https://www.youtube.com/ watch?v=EoQuVnKhxaM&fbclid=IwAR1t0eIHKSDDHdZjF2 cfsuwIymBqRorNb7V7O7M7jk2RRht5utjvz1cbLZg. Accessed 18 May 2020
  3. Abdolmanafi A, Nobre P, Winter S, Tilley PJM, Jahromi RG (2018) Culture and sexuality: cognitive-emotional determinants of sexual dissatisfaction among Iranian and New Zealand women. J Sex Med 15(5):687-697. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsxm.2018.0
  4. Adshade M (2017) Sexbot-induced social change: an economic perspective. In: Danaher J, McArthur N (eds) Robot sex: social and ethical implications. MIT Press, Cambridge, pp 289-300
  5. AIMM (2020) The talking artificial intelligent matchmaker. https://aimm.online. Accessed 7 August 2020
  6. Albrecht SV, Stone P (2018) Autonomous agents modelling other agents: a comprehensive survey and open problems. Artif Intell 258:66-95. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.artint.2018.01.002
  7. Allen RE (1991) The dialogues of Plato, volume 2: the sympo- sium. Yale University Press, New Haven
  8. Anctil D, Dubé S (2019) 612 -Penser l'érobotique: regard transdisciplinaire sur la robotique sexuelle. Acfas Con- grès. https://www.acfas.ca/evenements/congres/programme/87/6 00/612/c. Accessed 9 May 2020
  9. van Anders SM (2015) Beyond sexual orientation: integrating gender/sex and diverse sexualities via sexual configurations the- ory. Arch Sex Behav 44(5):1177-1213. https://doi.org/10.1007/ s10508-015-0490-8
  10. Annapurna Pictures (2013) Her Official Trailer #1 (2013) Joaquin Phoenix, Scarlett Johansson Movie HD. https://www.youtube. com/watch?v=dJTU48_yghs&fbclid=IwAR0og-FE6swEAlT_- 0qLhNtjsi9uLr11dX0JDV08dqs9vV5jqwtjDg-lQhY. Accessed 18 May 2020
  11. Appel M, Marker C, Mara M (2019) Otakuism and the appeal of sex robots. Front Psychol 10:1-11. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg. 2019.00569
  12. ARConk. How to watch. https://arconk.com/how-to-watch/. Accessed 19 December 2019
  13. Armstrong S, Sandberg A, Bostrom N (2012) Thinking inside the box: controlling and using an oracle AI. Minds Mach 22:299-324. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11023-012-9282-2
  14. Aron A, Aron EN, Norman C (2003) Self-expansion model of motivation and cognition in close relationships and beyond. In: Fletcher GJO, Clark MS (eds) Blackwell handbook of social psychology: interpersonal processes. Blackwell Publishers Ltd, Oxford, pp 478-501
  15. AR PornTube (2018) GreenScreenAR-new android app that converts regular porn videos into AR. https://www.arporntube. com/greenscreenar-android-app-converts-regular-porn-videos- ar/. Accessed 19 December 2019
  16. Asada M (2015) Development of artificial empathy. Neurosci Res 90:41-50. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neures.2014.12.002
  17. Baccon LA, Chiarovano E, MacDougall HG (2019) Virtual reality for teletherapy: avatars may combine the benefits of face-to-face communication with the anonymity of online text-based commu- nication. Cyberpsychol Behav Soc Netw 22(2):158-165. https:// doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2018.0247
  18. Baldwin JM (1896) A new factor in evolution. Am Nat 30(354):441-451. https://www.jstor.org/stable/2453130
  19. Banca P, Morris LS, Mitchell S, Harrison NA, Potenza MN, Voon V (2016) Novelty, conditioning and attentional bias to sex- ual rewards. J Psychiatr Res 72:91-101. https://doi.org/10.1016/ j.jpsychires.2015.10.017
  20. Bancroft J (2002) Biological factors in human sexuality. J Sex Res 39(1):15-21. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224490209552114
  21. Bardzell S, Bardzell J (2016) Technosexuality. In: Wong A, Wickramasinghe M, Hoogland R, Naples NA (eds) The Wiley Blackwell encyclopedia of gender and sexuality studies. John Wiley & Sons Ltd, New Jersey, pp 1-3. https://doi.org/10.1002/9 781118663219.wbegss469
  22. Barrica A (2019) Sextech revolution: the future of sexual wellness. Lioncrest Publishing, Austin
  23. Bataille G (1986) Erotism: death and sensuality. City Lights Books, San Francisco
  24. de Beauvoir S (1949) The second sex. Vintage, New York 25. Beer RD (2014) Dynamical systems and embedded cognition. In: Frankish K, Ramsey WM (eds) The Cambridge handbook of artificial intelligence. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 128-148
  25. Bendel O (2015) Surgical, therapeutic, nursing and sex robots in machine and information ethics. In: van Rysewyk SP, Pontier M (eds) Machine medical ethics. Springer, Cham, pp 17-32
  26. Bendel O (2020) Care robots with sexual assistance functions. In: Proceedings of the AAAI 2020 spring symposium "applied AI in healthcare: safety, community, and the environment." pp 1-7
  27. von Bertalanffy L (1968) General system theory: foundations, development, applications. George Braziller Inc., New York
  28. de Block A, Adriaens PR (2013) Pathologizing sexual deviance: a history. J Sex Res 50(3-4):276-298. https://doi.org/10.1080/00 224499.2012.738259
  29. Blum C, Winfield AFT, Hafner VV (2018) Simulation-based inter- nal models for safer robots. Front Robot AI 4:1-17. https://doi. org/10.3389/frobt.2017.00074
  30. Borenstein J, Arkin RC (2017) Nudging for good: robots and the ethical appropriateness of nurturing empathy and charitable behaviour. AI Soc 32:499-507. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00146-0 16-0684-1
  31. Bornemark J, Schuback MSC (2012) Phenomenology of eros. Södertörn University, Södertörn
  32. Bostrom N (2014) Superintelligence: paths, dangers, strategies. Oxford University Press, Oxford
  33. Bostrom N, Yudkowsky E (2014) The ethics of artificial intel- ligence. In: Frankish K, Ramsey WM (eds) The Cambridge handbook of artificial intelligence. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 316-334
  34. Both S, Brauer M, Laan E (2011) Classical conditioning of sexual response in women: a replication study. J Sex Med 8(11):3116-3131. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1743-6109.2011.024 53.x
  35. Both S, Brom M, Laan E, Everaerd W, Spinhoven P (2020) Evi- dence for persistence of sexual evaluative learning effects. J Sex Med 17(3):505-517. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsxm.2019.12.005
  36. Both S, Laan E, Spiering M, Nilsson T, Oomens S, Everaerd W (2008) Appetitive and aversive classical conditioning of female sexual response. J Sex Med 5(6):1386-1401. https://doi.org/10.1 111/j.1743-6109.2008.00815.x
  37. Botvinick M, Ritter S, Wang JX, Kurth-Nelson Z, Blundell C, Hassabis D (2019) Reinforcement learning, fast and slow. Trends Cogn Sci 23(5):408-422. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2019.02.0 06
  38. Boulianne S (2015) Social media use and participation: a meta- analysis of current research. Inf Commun Soc 18(5):524-538. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2015.1008542
  39. Brayboy LM, McCoy K, Thamotharan S, Zhu E, Gil G, Houck C (2018) The use of technology in the sexual health education especially among minority adolescent girls in the United States. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol 30(5):305-309. https://doi.org/10.109 7/GCO.0000000000000485
  40. Brom M, Both S, Laan E, Everaerd W, Spinhoven P (2014) The role of conditioning, learning and dopamine in sexual behaviour: a narrative review of animal and human studies. Neurosci Biobehav Rev 38:38-59. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neubiorev.2013.10.014
  41. Bronfenbrenner U, Morris PA (2006) The bioecological model of human development. In: Damon W, Lerner RM (eds) Handbook of child psychology, vol 1, 6th edn. theoretical models of human development. John Wiley & Sons, Hoboken, pp 793-828
  42. Burda Y, Edwards H, Pathak D, Storkey A, Darrell T, Efros AA (2018) Large-scale study of curiosity-driven learning. In: Proceedings of the seventh international conference on learning representations, pp 1-15
  43. Butler J (2007) Gender trouble: feminism and the subversion of identity. Routledge, Abingdon-on-Thames
  44. Call V, Sprecher S, Schwartz P (1995) The incidence and fre- quency of marital sex in a national sample. J Marriage Fam 57(3):639-652. https://doi.org/10.2307/353919
  45. Cameron D, Wodinsky S (2020) 70 000 Tinder photos of women just got dumped on a cyber-crime forum. Gizmodo. https://gizmodo.com/70-000-tinder-photos-of-women-just-got- dumped-on-a-cybe-1841043456. Accessed 8 May 2020
  46. Campaign Against Sex Robots. Campaign against sex robots. https://campaignagainstsexrobots.org/. Accessed 13 May 2020
  47. Carpenter J (2017) Deus sex machina: loving robot sex workers and the allure of an insincere kiss. In: Danaher J, McArthur N (eds) Robot sex: social and ethical implications. MIT Press, Cambridge, pp 261-288
  48. Chathouse 3D Roulette. Experience interactive 3D cybersex with REAL people! -Adult 3D chat and interactive 3D sex in a multiplayer based 3D environment http://www.chathouse3d.net/. Accessed 19 December 2019
  49. Cheok AD, Levy D, Karunanayaka K (2016) Lovotics: Love and sex with robots. In: Game Cinematography: from Camera Control to Player Emotions. Springer International Publishing, pp 303-328
  50. Cheok AD, Zhang EY (2019) An overview of love between humans and artificial partners. In: Cheok AD, Zhang EY (eds) Human-robot intimate relationships. Springer, Cham, pp 1-21
  51. Ciambrone D, Phua VC, Avery EN (2017) Gendered syn- thetic love: real dolls and the construction of intimacy. Int Rev Mod Sociol 43(1):59-78. https://cupola.gettysburg.edu/ cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1034&context=socfac. Accessed 8 August 2020
  52. Ciocca G, Robilotta A, Fontanesi L et al (2020) Sexological aspects related to Tinder use: a comprehensive review of the lit- erature. Sex Med Rev:1-12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sxmr.2019. 12.004
  53. City of Sin 3D. Features. https://cityofsin3d.com/features/. Accessed 19 December 2019
  54. Clark A, Chalmers D (1998) The extended mind. Anal 58(1):7-19. https://www.jstor.org/stable/3328150
  55. Coopersmith J (1998) Pornography, technology and progress. Icon 4:94-125. https://www.jstor.org/stable/23785961
  56. Cox-George C, Bewley S (2018) I, sex robot: the health impli- cations of the sex robot industry. BMJ Sex Reprod Health 44(3):161-164. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjsrh-2017-200012
  57. Crawford K (2006) Privilege, possibility, and perversion: rethinking the study of early modern sexuality. J Mod Hist 78(2):412-433. https://doi.org/10.1086/505802
  58. Csaba G (2016) The present and future of human sexuality: impact of faulty perinatal hormonal imprinting. Sex Med Rev 5(2):163-169. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sxmr.2016.10.002
  59. Damiano L, Dumouchel P (2018) Anthropomorphism in human- robot co-evolution. Front Psychol 9:1-9. https://doi.org/10.3389/ fpsyg.2018.00468
  60. Damiano L, Dumouchel P, Lehmann H (2015) Towards human- robot affective co-evolution overcoming oppositions in construct- ing emotions and empathy. Int J Soc Robot 7(1):7-18. https://doi. org/10.1007/s12369-014-0258-7
  61. Danaher J (2014) Sex work, technological unemployment and the basic income guarantee. J Evol Technol 24(1):113-130. https:// philpapers.org/rec/DANSWT
  62. Danaher J (2017) Should we be thinking about robot sex? In: Danaher J, McArthur N (eds) Robot sex: social and ethical impli- cations. MIT Press, Cambridge, pp 3-14
  63. Danaher J (2017) The symbolic-consequences argument in the sex robot debate. In: Danaher J, McArthur N (eds) Robot sex: social and ethical implications. MIT Press, Cambridge, pp 103-132
  64. Danaher J (2019) Regulating child sex robots: restriction or exper- imentation? Med Law Rev 27(4):553-575. https://doi.org/10.109 3/medlaw/fwz002
  65. Danaher J, McArthur N (2017) Robot sex: social and ethical impli- cations. MIT Press, Cambridge
  66. Daneback K, Cooper A, Månsson SA (2005) An internet study of cybersex participants. Arch Sex Behav 34(3):321-328. https:// doi.org/10.1007/s10508-005-3120-z
  67. Dang SS, Gorzalka BB, Brotto LA (2019) Dual control model in a cross-cultural context: role of sexual excitation in sexual response and behavior differences between Chinese and Euro-Caucasian women in Canada. Arch Sex Behav 48:2519-2535. https://doi. org/10.1007/s10508-019-01535-7
  68. Dang SS, Hewitt PL, Brotto LA (2019) Heritage and mainstream acculturation's association with sexual response in young Chi- nese men and women in Canada. Can J Hum Sex 28(2):159-176. https://doi.org/10.3138/cjhs.2019-0017
  69. Darwin CR (1859) On the origin of species by means of natural selection, or the preservation of favoured races in the struggle for life. A.L. Burt Co., London
  70. Darwin CR (1871) The descent of man, and selection in relation to sex. The Modern Library, New York
  71. Dautenhahn K (1995) Getting to know each other-artificial social intelligence for autonomous robots. Robot Auton Syst 16(2-4):333-356. https://doi.org/10.1016/0921-8890(95)00054- 2
  72. Dautenhahn K (1998) The art of designing socially intelligent agents: science, fiction, and the human in the loop. Appl Artif Intell 12(7-8):573-617. https://doi.org/10.1080/0883951981175 50
  73. Dautenhahn K, Bond A, Cañamero L, Edmonds B (2002) Socially intelligent agents: creating relationships with computers and robots. In: Dautenhahn K, Bond A, Cañamero L, Edmonds B (eds) Socially intelligent agents. Multiagent systems, artificial societies, and simulated organizations, vol 3. Springer, Boston, pp 1-20
  74. Dawkins R (1976) The selfish gene. Oxford University Press, Oxford
  75. Dawkins R (1983) Universal Darwinism. In: Bendell DS (ed) Evolution from molecules to man. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
  76. Del Vicario M, Vivaldo G, Bessi A, Zollo F, Scala A, Caldarelli G, Quattrociocchi W (2016) Echo chambers: emotional conta- gion and group polarization on Facebook. Sci Rep 6(37825):1-12. https://doi.org/10.1038/srep37825
  77. Dennett DC (1995) Darwin's dangerous idea. Sci 35(3):34-40. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2326-1951.1995.tb03633.x
  78. Dennett DC (2003) Freedom evolves. Viking Books, New York
  79. Deviant Dev, Devilish Domina. Dominatrix simulator: thresh- old. https://deviantdev.itch.io/dominatrix-simulator. Accessed 19 December 2019
  80. Devillers L (2019) Les robots émotionnels: santé, surveillance, sexualité…: et l'éthique dans tout ça?. Humensis, Paris
  81. Devlin K (2018) Turned on: science, sex and robots. Bloomsbury, New York
  82. Di Nucci E (2017) Sex robots and the rights of the disabled. In: Danaher J, McArthur N (eds) Robot sex: social and ethical impli- cations. MIT Press, Cambridge, pp 73-88
  83. Doncieux S, Bredeche N, Mouret J-B, Eiben AE (2015) Evolu- tionary robotics: what, why, and where to. Front Robot AI 2:1-18. https://doi.org/10.3389/frobt.2015.00004
  84. Döring N (2000) Feminist views of cybersex: victimization, lib- eration, and empowerment. Cyberpsychol Behav 3(5):863-884. https://doi.org/10.1089/10949310050191845
  85. Döring N (2017) Vom internetsex zum robotersex: forschungs- stand und herausforderungen für die sexualwissenschaft [From internet sex to robotic sex: state of research and challenges for sexology]. Z Sex Forsch 30(01):35-57. https://doi.org/10.1055/s- 0043-101471
  86. Döring N, Mohseni MR, Walter R (2020) Design, use and effects of sex dolls and sex robots: scoping review. J Med Internet Res 22(7):e18551. https://doi.org/10.2196/18551
  87. Doring N, Poeschl S (2019) Love and sex with robots: a content analysis of media representations. Int J Soc Robot 11:665-677. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-019-00517-y
  88. Döring N, Pöschl S (2018) Sex toys, sex dolls, sex robots: our under-researched bed-fellows. Sexol 27(3):e51-e55. https://doi. org/10.1016/j.sexol.2018.05.009
  89. Döring N, Pöschl S (2019) Experiences with diverse sex toys among German heterosexual adults: findings from a national online survey. J Sex Res. 57:885-896. https://doi.org/10.1080/ 00224499.2019.1578329
  90. DreamWorks SKG (2013) A.I. Artificial Intelligence- Official ® Trailer [HD]. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_19 pRsZRiz4&fbclid=IwAR0YEmeO6Ezt_CN_1wIRlMvsylXaX6
  91. SFBLEIqyyOlh5P2l1zMO-F3TSt5m8. Accessed 18 May 2020
  92. DS doll. Ex doll. http://www.realdollcollection.com/exdoll. Accessed 19 December 2019
  93. Dubé S, Anctil D (2019) Beyond sex robots: erobotics explores erotic human-machine interactions. The Conversation. https:// theconversation.com/beyond-sex-robots-erobotics-explores- erotic-human-machine-interactions. Accessed 14 April 2020
  94. Dubé S, Anctil D (2020) Sex in space: could technology meet astronauts' intimate needs? The Conversation. https:// theconversation.com/sex-in-space-could-technology-meet- astronauts-intimate-needs. Accessed 14 April 2020
  95. Duffy BR (2008) Fundamental issues in affective intelligent social machines. Open Artif Intell J 2(14):21-34. https://doi.org/10.217 4/1874061800802010021
  96. Duggan L (1990) From instincts to politics: writing the history of sexuality in the U.S. J Sex Res 27:95-109. https://doi.org/10.108 0/00224499009551544
  97. Dumouchel P, Damiano L (2017) Living with robots. Harvard University Press, Cambridge
  98. Dvorsky G, Hughes J (2008) Postgenderism: beyond the gender binary. IEET White Paper 03. https://ieet.org/archive/IEET-03- PostGender.pdf
  99. Eichenberg C, Khamis M, Hübner L (2019) The attitudes of ther- apists and physicians on the use of sex robots in sexual therapy: online survey and interview study. J Med Internet Res 21(8):1-15. https://doi.org/10.2196/13853
  100. Eleuteri S, Rossi R, Tripodi F, Fabrizi A, Simonelli C (2018) Sex- ual health in your hands: how the smartphone apps can improve your sexual wellbeing? Sexol 27(3):e57-e60. https://doi.org/10.1 016/j.sexol.2018.04.004
  101. Eskens R (2017) Is sex with robots rape? J Pract Ethic 5(2):62-76
  102. Fedoroff JP (2019) The paraphilias: changing suits in the evolution of sexual interest paradigms. Oxford University Press, New York
  103. Fedoroff JP, di Gioacchino L, Murphy L (2013) Problems with paraphilias in the DSM5. Curr Psychiatry Rep 15(8):363. https:// doi.org/10.1007/s11920-013-0363-6
  104. Ferguson A (2010) The sex doll: a history. McFarland & Company, Jefferson
  105. Fernando C, Sygnowski J, Osindero S, Wang J, Schaul T, Teplyashin D, Sprechmann P, Pritzel A, Rusu A (2018) Meta- learning by the Baldwin effect. In: Proceedings of the genetic and evolutionary computation conference companion (GECCO'18), pp 1313-1320
  106. Fisher HE, Garcia JR (2019) Slow love: courtship in the digital age. In: Sternberg RJ, Sternberg K (eds) The new psychology of love. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 202-208
  107. Flore J, Pienaar K (2020) Data-driven intimacy: emerging tech- nologies in the (re)making of sexual subjects and 'healthy' sexuality. Health sociol rev. https://doi.org/10.1080/14461242.2 020.1803101
  108. Ford M (2018) Architects of intelligence: the truth about AI from the people building it. Packt Publishing, Birmingham
  109. Fosch-Villaronga E, Poulsen A (2020) Sex care robots: exploring the potential use of sexual robot technologies for disabled and elder care. Paladyn J Behav Robot 11:1-18. https://doi.org/10.15 15/pjbr-2020-0001
  110. Foucault M (1979) The history of sexuality volume 1: an intro- duction. Allen Lane, London
  111. Franklin A, Graesser A (1996/2005) It is an agent, or just a program?: a taxonomy for autonomous agents. In: Muller JP, Woolridge MJ, Jennings NR (eds) Intelligent agents III agent the- ories, architectures, and languages. ATAL 1996. Lecture notes in computer sciences, vol 1193. Springer, Berlin
  112. de Fren A (2009) Technofetishism and the uncanny desires of A.S.F.R. (alt.sex.fetish.robots). Sci-Fict Stud 36(3):404-440. https://www.jstor.org/stable/40649546
  113. Freud S (1973-1986) Penguin Freud Library (15 volumes). Eds. Angela Richards and Albert Dickson, Penguin Books, Ham- mondsworth
  114. Galaitsi SE, Hendren CO, Trump B, Linkov I (2019) Sex robot- s-a harbinger for emerging AI risk. Front AI 2:1-4. https://doi. org/10.3389/frai.2019.00027
  115. Gallagher S (2013) The socially extended mind. Cognit Syst Res 25-26:4-12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cogsys.2013.03.008
  116. Georgiadis JR, Kringlebach ML, Pfaus JG (2012) Sex for fun: a synthesis of human and animal neurobiology. Nat Rev Urol 9:486-498. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrurol.2012.151
  117. Gersen JS (2019) Sex lex machina: intimacy and artificial intel- ligence. Columbia Law Review 119(7):1793-1810. https://www. jstor.org/stable/26810849
  118. Geschke D, Lorenz J, Holtz P (2019) The triple-filter bubble: using agent-based modelling to test a meta-theoretical framework for the emergence of filter bubbles and echo chambers. Br J Soc Psychol 58(1):129-149. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjso.12286
  119. Ghahramani Z (2015) Probabilistic machine learning and arti- ficial intelligence. Nature 521:452-459. https://doi.org/10.1038/ nature14541
  120. Giami A (2015) Between DSM and ICD: paraphilias and the trans- formation of sexual norms. Arch Sex Behav 44(5):1127-1138. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-015-0549-6
  121. Gibson, JJ (1979/1986) The ecological approach to visual percep- tion. Houghton Mifflin, Boston
  122. Giddens A (1992) The transformation of intimacy: sexuality, love and eroticism in modern societies. Stanford University Press, Stanford
  123. Gobble MM (2019) The road to artificial general intelligence. Res-Technol Manag 62(3):55-59. https://doi.org/10.1080/08956 308.2019.1587336
  124. Gopnik A, Wellman HM (1992) Why the child's theory of mind really is a theory. Mind Lang 7:145-171. https://doi.org/10.1111/ j.1468-0017.1992.tb00202.x
  125. Gore AC, Holley AM, Crews D (2018) Mate choice, sexual selec- tion, and endocrine-disrupting chemicals. Horm Behav 101:3-12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.yhbeh.2017.09.001
  126. Griffiths TL, Callaway F, Chang MB, Grant E, Krueger PM, Lieder F (2019) Doing more with less: meta-reasoning and meta- learning in humans and machines. Curr Opin Behav Sci 29:24-30. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cobeha.2019.01.005
  127. Guihot M, Matthew AF, Suzor N (2017) Nudging robots: inno- vative solutions to regulate artificial intelligence. Vanderbilt J Entertain Technol Law Forthcom, SSRN: 1-60. https://ssrn.com/ abstract=3017004
  128. Gutiu SM (2012) Sex robots and the roboticization of consent. In: Proceedings of the WeRobot 2012 conference
  129. Gutiu SM (2016) The roboticization of consent. In: Calo R, Froomkin AM, Kerr I (eds) Robot law. Edward Elgar Publish- ing, Cheltenham, pp 186-212
  130. Ha D, Schmidhuber J (2018) World models. https://arxiv.org/pdf/ 1803.10122.pdf
  131. Haraway DJ (1985) A manifesto for cyborgs: science, technology, and socialist feminism in the 1980s. Aust Fem Stud 2(4):1-42. https://doi.org/10.1080/08164649.1987.9961538
  132. Haraway DJ (1991) Simians, cyborgs and women: the reinvention of nature. Free Association Books, London
  133. Harvey C (2015) Sex robots and solipsism: towards a culture of empty contact. Philos Contemp World 22(2):80-93. https://doi. org/10.5840/pcw201522216
  134. Hausman DM, Welch B (2010) Debate: to nudge or not to nudge. J Polit Philos 18(1):123-136. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-976 0.2009.00351.x
  135. Heinemann J, Atallah S, Rosenbaum T (2016) The impact of culture and ethnicity on sexuality and sexual function. Curr Sex Health Rep 8:144-150. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11930-016-008 8-8
  136. Helm B (2017) Love. The stanford encyclopedia of philoso- phy. https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2017/entries/love/. Accessed 11 May 2020
  137. Herbenick D, Reece M, Sanders S, Dodge B, Ghassemi A, Forten- berry JD (2009) Prevalence and characteristics of vibrator use by women in the United States: results from a nationally representa- tive study. J Sex Med 6(7):1857-1866. https://doi.org/10.1111/j. 1743-6109.2009.01318.x
  138. Herbenick D, Reece M, Sanders SA, Dodge B, Ghassemi A, Fortenberry JD (2010) Women's vibrator use in sexual partner- ships: results from a nationally representative survey in the United States. J Sex Marital Ther 36(1):49-65. https://doi.org/10.1080/0 0926230903375677
  139. Hertwig R, Grüne-Yanoff T (2017) Nudging and boosting: steering or empowering good decisions. Perspect Psychol Sci 12(6):973-986. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691617702496
  140. Hinton GE, Nowlan SJ (1987) How learning can guide evolution. Complex Syst 1(3):495-502
  141. Hoffman H (2012) Considering the role of conditioning in sexual orientation. Arch Sex Behav 41:63-71. https://doi.org/10.1007/ s10508-012-9915-9
  142. Hoffman H (2017) Situating human sexual conditioning. Arch Sex Behav 46:2213-2229. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-017-1 030-5
  143. Hoffman H, Peterson K, Garner H (2012) Field condition- ing of sexual arousal in humans. Socioaffect Neurosci Psychol 2(17336):1-6. https://doi.org/10.3402/snp.v2i0.17336
  144. Holodexxx VR (2019) Holodexx. https://www.holodexxx.com/# demos-section. Accessed 9 May 2020
  145. Hoorn JF, Konijn EA, Pontier MA (2019) Dating a synthetic char- acter is like dating a man. Int J Soc Robot 11:235-253. https:// doi.org/10.1007/s12369-018-0496-1
  146. Hudlicka E (2004) Beyond cognition: modeling emotion in cog- nitive architectures. In: Proceedings of the sixth international conference on modeling, pp 118-123
  147. Hull DL (1988) Science as a process: an evolutionary account of the social and conceptual development of science. University of Chicago Press, Chicago
  148. Hutchins E (1995) Cognition in the wild. MIT Press, Cambridge
  149. Hybri (2020) Mixed reality: the digital human AI Partner. Hybri. https://whatisthehybri.com/. Accessed 9 May 2020
  150. Ismail LI, Hanapiah FA, Belpaeme T, Dambre J, Wyffels F (2020) Analysis of attention in child-robot interaction among children diagnosed with cognitive impairment. Int J Soc Robot. https:// doi.org/10.1007/s12369-020-00628-x
  151. Ivanski C, Kohut T (2017) Exploring definitions of sex positivity through thematic analysis. Can J Hum Sex 26(3):216-225. https:// doi.org/10.3138/cjhs.2017-0017
  152. Jelisavcic M, Glette K, Haasdijik E, Eiben AE (2019) Lamarckian evolution of simulated modular robots. Front Robot AI 6:1-15. https://doi.org/10.3389/frobt.2019.00009
  153. Johnson GM, Puplampu KP (2008) Internet use during child- hood and the ecological techno-subsystem. Can J Learn Technol 34(1):1-11. https://doi.org/10.21432/T2CP4T
  154. Johnson DG, Verdicchio M (2019) AI, agency and responsibility: the VW fraud case and beyond. AI Soc 34:639-657. https://doi. org/10.1007/s00146-017-0781-9
  155. Johnson DG, Verdicchio M (2019) Constructing the meaning of humanoid sex robots. Int J Soc Robot. https://doi.org/10.1007/s1 2369-019-00586-z
  156. Joyal CC, Cossette A, Lapierre VJ (2015) What exactly is an unusual sexual fantasy? J Sex Med 12:328-340. https://doi.org/1 0.1111/jsm.12734
  157. Juicebox. Slutbot. https://www.juiceboxit.com/slutbot. Accessed 19 December 2019
  158. Kabiry DM (2020) Objectum sexuality or objectophilia. Int J Adv Stud Sexol 2(1):20-24. https://doi.org/10.46388/ijass.2020.13.14
  159. Kaufman EM (2018) Sex, lies, and imitation games: the ethical implications of an artificially intelligent girlfriend. Master's the- sis, Georgetown University
  160. Kaufman EM (2020) Reprogramming consent: implications of sexual relationships with artificially intelligent partners. Psychol Sex 11:372-383. https://doi.org/10.1080/19419899.2020.176916 0
  161. Khan MM, Kasmarik K, Barlow M (2018) Toward computational motivation for multi-agent systems and swarms. Front Robot AI 5:1-13. https://doi.org/10.3389/frobt.2018.00134
  162. Khashman A (2008) A modified backpropagation learning algo- rithm with added emotional coefficients. IEEE Trans Neural Netw 19(11):1896-1909. https://doi.org/10.1109/TNN.2008.2002913
  163. Kim E, Zeppenfeld V, Cohen D (2013) Sublimation, culture, and creativity. J Personal Soc Psychol 105(4):639-666. https://doi. org/10.1037/a0033487
  164. Kirana P-S, Gudeloglu A, Sansone A, Fode M, Reisman Y, Corona G, Burri A (2020) E-sexual health: a position statement of the European society for sexual medicine. J Sex Med in press. https:// doi.org/10.1111/bjso.12286
  165. Kleinplatz PJ, Moser C (2005) Politics versus science: an adden- dum and response to Drs. Spitzer and Fink. J Psychol Hum Sex 17(3-4):135-139. https://doi.org/10.1300/j056v17n03_09
  166. Kleist E, Moi H (1993) Transmission of gonorrhoea through an inflatable doll. Genitourin Med 69(4):322. https://doi.org/10.113 6/sti.69.4.322
  167. Knafo D, Lo Bosco R (2017) The age of perversion: desire and technology in psychoanalysis and culture. Routledge, London
  168. Kokko H, Jennions MD, Brooks R (2006) Unifying and testing models of sexual selection. Annu Rev Ecol Evol Syst 37:43-66. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.37.091305.110259
  169. Krach S, Paulus FM, Bodden M, Kircher T (2010) The rewarding nature of social interactions. Front Behav Neurosci 4:1-3. https:// doi.org/10.3389/fnbeh.2010.00022
  170. Kubes T (2019) Bypassing the uncanny valley: sex robots and robot sex beyond mimicry. In: Loh J, Coeckelbergh M (eds) Fem- inist philosophy of technology, vol 2. Spinger, Berlin, pp 59-71
  171. Kurzweil R (1999) The age of spiritual machines: when computers exceed human intelligence. Viking Press, New York
  172. Lafortune D, Dion L, Renaud P (2019) Virtual reality and sex therapy: future directions for clinical research. J Sex Marital Ther 46(1):1-17. https://doi.org/10.1080/0092623X.2019.1623357
  173. Lake BM, Ullman TD, Tenenbaum JB, Gershman SJ (2017) Building machines that learn and think like people. Behav Brain Sci 40:1-72. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X16001837
  174. Langcaster-James M, Bentley G (2018) Beyond the sex doll: post-human companionship and the rise of the 'allodoll'. Robot 7(4):62. https://doi.org/10.3390/robotics7040062
  175. Långström N, Rahman Q, Carlström E, Lichtenstein P (2010) Genetic and environmental effects on same-sex sexual behaviour: a population study of twins in Sweden. Arch Sex Behav 39(1):75-80. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-008-9386-1
  176. Legaspi R, He Z, Toyoizumi T (2019) Synthetic agency: sense of agency in artificial intelligence. Curr Opin Behav Sci 29:84-90. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cobeha.2019.04.004
  177. Lehmiller JJ (2017) The psychology of human sexuality. Wiley, Hoboken
  178. Levillain F, Zibetti E (2017) Behavioral objects: the rise of the evocative machines. J Hum Robot Interact 6:4-24. https://doi. org/10.5898/JHRI.6.1.Levillain
  179. Levy D (2007) Love and sex with robots: the evolution of human- robot relationships. Harper Collins, New York
  180. Levy D (2014) The ethics of robot prostitutes. In: Lin P, Abney K, Bekey GA (eds) Robot ethics: the ethical and social implications of robotics. MIT Press, Cambridge
  181. Liberati N (2020) Making out with the world and valuing rela- tionships with humans. Paladyn J Behav Robot 11(1):140-146. https://doi.org/10.1515/pjbr-2020-0010
  182. Lin P, Abney K, Bekey G (2011) Robot ethics: mapping the issues for a mechanized world. Artif Intell 175(5-6):942-949. https:// doi.org/10.1016/j.artint.2010.11.026
  183. Lionsgate AI (2019) Rising-trailer. https://www. youtube.com/watch?v=VLpLkJ5Mh3M&fbclid=IwAR02 iaXWYeZgGjCPRQcy2S3Fn3NvwsXTVsdBMaA2Z6VkuD8 sMK-C8ecFIGI. Accessed 18 May 2020
  184. Little AC, DeBruine LM, Jones BC (2013) Sex differences in attraction to familiar and unfamiliar opposite-sex faces: men prefer novelty and women prefer familiarity. Arch Sex Behav 43:973-981. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-013-0120-2
  185. Loh J, Coeckelbergh M (2019) Feminist philosophy of technol- ogy, vol 2. Springer, Berlin
  186. Long J (2012) Darwin's devices: what evolving robots can teach us about the history of life and the future of technology. Basic Books, New York
  187. Loranger C, Bouchard S (2017) Validating a virtual environment for sexual assault victims. J Trauma Stress 30(2):157-165. https:// doi.org/10.1002/jts.22170
  188. Loucks L, Yasinski C, Norrholm SD et al (2019) You can do that?!: feasibility of virtual reality exposure therapy in the treatment of PTSD due to military sexual trauma. J Anxiety Disord 61:55-63. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.janxdis.2018.06.004
  189. MacDorman KF, Ishiguro H (2006) The uncanny advantage of using androids in cognitive and social science research. Interact Stud 7(3):297-337. https://doi.org/10.1075/is.7.3.03mac
  190. Mackenzie R (2018) Sexbots: customizing them to suit us versus an ethical duty to created sentient beings to minimize suffering. Robot 7(4):1-17. https://doi.org/10.3390/robotics7040070
  191. MacKillop J, Amlung MT, Few LR, Ray LA, Sweet LH, Munafò MR (2011) Delayed reward discounting and addictive behaviour: a meta-analysis. Psychopharmacology 216:305-321. https://doi. org/10.1007/s00213-011-2229-0
  192. Maes H (2018) Erotic art. The stanford encyclopedia of philos- ophy. https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/erotic-art/. Accessed 12 May 2020
  193. Mahon A (2005) Eroticism and art. Oxford University Press, Oxford
  194. Makridakis S (2017) The forthcoming artificial intelligence (AI) revolution: its impact on society and firms. Futures 90:46-60. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.futures.2017.03.006
  195. Maras M-H, Shapiro LR (2017) Child sex dolls and robots: more than just an uncanny valley. J Internet Law 21(6):3-21
  196. Marcus G, Davis E (2019) Rebooting AI: building artificial intel- ligence we can trust. Pantheon, New York
  197. Marr B (2019) How AI is transforming porn and adult entertain- ment. Forbes. https://www.forbes.com/sites/bernardmarr/2019/0
  198. Maturana HR, Varela FJ (1973/1980) Autopoiesis and cognition: the realization of the living. In: Boston studies in the philosophy of science, vol. 42. D. Reidel Publishing Company, Holland
  199. McArthur N (2017) The case for sexbots. In: Danaher J, McArthur N (eds) Robot sex: social and ethical implications. MIT Press, Cambridge, pp 31-46
  200. McArthur N, Twist MLC (2017) The rise of digisexual- ity: therapeutic challenges and possibilities. Sex Relatsh Ther 32(3-4):334-344. https://doi.org/10.1080/14681994.2017.13979 50
  201. Mei. The future of messaging & the successor to SMS. RCS. https://textmei.com/rcs/. Accessed 19 December 2019
  202. Meston CM, Buss DM (2007) Why humans have sex. Arch Sex Behav 36:477-507. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-007-9175-2
  203. Migotti M, Wyatt N (2017) On the very idea of sex with robots. In: Danaher J, McArthur N (eds) Robot sex: social and ethical implications. MIT Press, Cambridge, pp 15-27
  204. Miller GF (1998) How mate choice shaped human nature: a review of sexual selection and human evolution. In: Crawford C, Krebs DL (eds) Handbook of evolutionary psychology: ideas, issues, and applications. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc., Mahwah, pp 87-129
  205. Miller GF (2000) The mating mind: how sexual choice shaped the evolution of human nature. Doubleday, New York
  206. Miller JH, Page SE (2007) Complex adaptive systems: an intro- duction to computational models of social life. Princeton Univer- sity Press, Princeton
  207. Minsky M (1968) Semantic information processing. MIT Press, Cambridge
  208. Miss Doll (2020) How artificial intelligence is redefining modern love. Future of Sex. https://futureofsex.net/dating-relationships/ how-artificial-intelligence-is-redefining-modern-love/?fbclid= IwAR2YWuW8sSVVJRP_VTea7MSTKmNkdb27TRNvY_ EpvxGEPsKKuDn5NW8EAnU. Accessed 11 May 2020
  209. Moerland TM, Broekens J, Jonker CM (2018) Emotion in rein- forcement learning agents and robots: a survey. Mach Learn 107:443-480. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10994-017-5666-0
  210. Moran JC (2019) Programming power and the power of pro- gramming: an analysis of racialized and gendered sex robots. In: Loh J, Coeckelbergh M (eds) Feminist philosophy of technology. Springer, Heidelberg, pp 39-57
  211. Morton H, Gorzalka BB (2015) Role of partner novelty in sexual functioning: a review. J Sex Marital Ther 41(6):593-609. https:// doi.org/10.1080/0092623X.2014.958788
  212. Motherlode An interactive virtual reality experience in partner- ship with Babeland. Lube river. https://www.motherlodelab.com/ luberiver/. Accessed 19 December 2019
  213. Muhamad R, Horey D, Liamputtong P, Low WY, Sidi H (2019) Meanings of sexuality: views from Malay women with sexual dysfunction. Arch Sex Behav 48:935-947. https://doi.org/10.100 7/s10508-018-1228-1
  214. Müller VC (2020) Risks of artificial intelligence. Chapman and Hall/CRC, London
  215. Nappi RE, Ferdeghini F, Abbiati I, Vercesi C, Farina C, Polatti F (2003) Electrical stimulation (ES) in the management of sexual pain disorders. J Sex Marital Ther 29(1):103-110. https://doi.org/ 10.1080/713847129
  216. Nelson RR, Dosi G, Helfat CE, Pyka A, Winter SG, Saviotti PP, Lee K, Dopfer K, Malerba F, Winter SG (2018) Modern evo- lutionary economics: an overview. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
  217. Newen A, De Bruin L, Gallagher S (2018) The oxford handbook of 4E cognition. Oxford University Press, Oxford
  218. Nguyen TT, Hui P-K, Harper FM, Terveen L, Konstan JA (2014) Exploring the filter bubble: the effect of using recommender sys- tems on content diversity. In: Proceedings of the 23rd international world wide web conference committee, pp 677-686
  219. Nordmo M, Naess JØ, Husøy MF, Arnestad MN (2020) Friends, lovers or nothing: men and women differ in their perceptions of sex robots and platonic love robots. Front Psychol 11:1-10. https:// doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.00355
  220. Nowak KL, Biocca F (2003) The effect of the agency and anthro- pomorphism on users' sense of telepresence, copresence, and social presence in virtual environments. Presence Teleoperators Virtual Env 12(5):481-494. https://doi.org/10.1162/1054746033 22761289
  221. Nwana HS (1996) Software agents: an overview. Knowl Eng Rev 11(3):205-244. https://doi.org/10.1017/S026988890000789X
  222. Nyholm S, Frank LE (2019) It loves me, it loves me not: is it morally problematic to design sex robots that appear to love their owners? Res Philos Technol 23(3):402-424. https://doi.org/10.5 840/techne2019122110
  223. O'Bryhim S (2015) The economics of agalmatophilia. Class J 110(4):419-429. https://doi.org/10.5184/classicalj.110.4.0419
  224. O'Donohue W, Plaud JJ (1994) The conditioning of human sexual arousal. Arch Sex Behav 23(3):321-344. https://doi.org/10.1007/ BF01541567
  225. Odum EP (2001) The techno-ecosystem. Bull Ecol Soc Am 82(2):137-138
  226. Optale G, Pastore M, Marin S, Bordin D, Nasta A, Pianon C (2004) Male sexual dysfunctions: immersive virtual reality and multimedia therapy. Stud Health Technol Inform 99:165-178
  227. Owsianik J, Dawson R (2017) The future of sex report. Future of Sex. https://futureofsex.net/Future_of_Sex_Report.pdf. Accessed 13 May 2020
  228. Panait L, Luke S (2005) Cooperative multi-agent learning: the state of the art. Auton Agents Multi-agent Syst 11:387-434. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10458-005-2631-2
  229. Pariser E (2012) The filter bubble: how the new personalized web is changing what we read and how we think. Penguin, New York
  230. Pathak D, Agrawal P, Efros AA, Darrell T (2017) Curiosity-driven exploration by self-supervised prediction. In: Proceedings of the 34th international conference on machine learning (ICML), pp 2778-2787
  231. Pavlov IP (1927) Conditioned reflexes: an investigation of the physiological activity of the cerebral cortex (Anrep GV, Trans). Dover, New York
  232. Perlich C, Dalessandro B, Raeder T, Stitelman O, Provost F (2014) Machine learning for targeted display advertising: transfer learn- ing in action. Mach Learn 95:103-127. https://doi.org/10.1007/ s10994-013-5375-2
  233. Peters J, Büchel C (2011) The neural mechanisms of inter- temporal decision-making: understanding variability. Trends Cogn Sci 15(5):227-239. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2011.03. 002
  234. Pfaus JG, Kippin TE, Coria-Avila GA, Gelez H, Afonso VM, Ismail N, Parada M (2012) Who, what, where, when (and maybe even why)? How the experience of sexual reward connects sexual desire, preference, and performance. Arch Sex Behav 41(1):31-62. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-012-9935-5
  235. Pfeifer R, Scheier C (1999) Understanding intelligence. MIT Press, Cambridge
  236. Picard RW (1995) Affective computing. MIT Press, Cambridge
  237. Pietronudo E (2018) "Japanese women's language" and artificial intelligence: Azuma Hikari, gender stereotypes and gender norms. Università Ca' Foscari Venezia Online. http://hdl.handle.net/105 79/12791. Accessed 11 August 2020
  238. Planned Parenthood. Ask Roo. https://www.plannedparenthood. org/learn/roo-sexual-health-chatbot. Accessed 19 December 2019
  239. Posner RA (1994) Sex and reason. Harvard University Press, Cambridge
  240. Premack D, Woodruff G (1978) Does the chimpanzee have a the- ory of mind? Behav Brain Sci 1(4):515-526. https://doi.org/10.1 017/S0140525X00076512
  241. Puig K (2017) The synthetic hyper femme: on sex dolls, fembots, and the future of sex. Master's thesis, University of California, Santa Cruz
  242. Rabinowitz NC, Perbet F, Song HF, Zhang C, Eslami SMA, Botvinick M (2018) Machine theory of mind. In: Proceedings of the 35th international conference on machine learning, PMLR 80, pp 4218-4227
  243. Rahwan I, Cebrian M, Obradovich N et al (2019) Machine behaviour. Nature 568:477-486. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586- 019-1138-y
  244. Ranzini G, Lutz C (2017) Love at first swipe? Explaining Tinder self-presentation and motives. Mob Media Commun 5(1):80-101. https://doi.org/10.1177/2050157916664559
  245. RealDollX. The perfect companion in the palm of your hands. Realbotix. https://www.realdollx.ai/. Accessed 19 December 2019
  246. Real E, Liang C, So DR, Le QV (2020) AutoML-zero: evolving machine learning algorithms from scratch. arXiv:2003.03384
  247. Reece M, Herbenick D, Sanders SA, Dodge B, Ghassemi A, Fortenberry JD (2009) Prevalence and characteristics of vibra- tor use by men in the United States. J Sex Med 6(7):1867-1874. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1743-6109.2009.01290.x
  248. Reynolds C, Sutherland MA, Palacios I (2019) Exploring the use of technology for sexual health risk-reduction among Ecuadorean adolescents. Ann Glob Health 85(1):1-10. https://doi.org/10.533 4/aogh.35
  249. Richardson K (2015) The asymmetrical 'relationship': parallels between prostitution and the development of sex robots. SIGCAS Comput Soc 45(3):290-293. https://doi.org/10.1145/2874239.28 74281
  250. Richardson K (2016) Sex robot matters: slavery, the prostituted, and the rights of machines. IEEE Technol Soc Mag 35(2):46-53. https://doi.org/10.1109/MTS.2016.2554421
  251. Richters J, Altman D, Badcock PB, Smith AMA, de Visser RO, Grulich AE, Rissel C, Simpson JM (2014) Sexual identity, sexual attraction and sexual experience: the second Australian study of health and relationships. Sex Health 11(5):451-460. https://doi. org/10.1071/SH14117
  252. Riva G, Baños RM, Botella C, Wiederhold BK, Gaggioli A (2012) Positive technology: using interactive technologies to promote positive functioning. Cyberpsychol Behav Soc Netw 15(2):69-77. https://doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2011.0139
  253. Rosenberger JG, Schick V, Herbenick D, Novak DS, Reece M (2012) Sex toy use by gay and bisexual men in the United States. Arch Sex Behav 41:449-458. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-01 0-9716-y
  254. Rubin P (2018) Future presence: how virtual reality is chang- ing human connection, intimacy, and the limits of ordinary life. HarperOne, San Francisco
  255. Rubinsky V (2018) "Sometimes it's easier to type things than to say them:" technology in BDSM sexual partner communication. Sex Cult 22:1412-1431. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12119-018-953 4-2
  256. Russell ASB (2009) Blurring the love lines: the legal impli- cations of intimacy with machines. Comput Law Secur Rev 25(5):455-463. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clsr.2009.07.003
  257. Russell S (2019) Human compatible: artificial intelligence and the problem of control. Viking, New York
  258. Russell S, Norvig P (2003) Problem-solving. In: Russell SJ, Norvig P (eds) Artificial intelligence: a modern approach, 2nd edn. Prentice Hall, New Jersey, pp 59-193
  259. SAE International (2018) SAE international J3016 level of driv- ing automation. https://www.sae.org/news/press-room/2018/12/ sae-international-releases-updated-visual-chart-for-its-%E2%8 0%9Clevels-of-driving-automation%E2%80%9D-standard-for- self-driving-vehicles. Accessed 14 December 2019
  260. Samani HA (2011) Lovotics: love + robotics, sentimental robot with affective artificial intelligence. Dissertation, National Uni- versity of Singapore
  261. Samani HA, Cheok AD, Fernando ONN (2011) An affective inter- active audio interface for lovotics. Comput Entertain 9(2):1-14. https://doi.org/10.1145/1998376.1998377
  262. Satinsky S, Rosenberger JG, Schick V, Novak DS, Reece M (2011) USA study of sex toy use by HIV-positive men who have sex with other men: implications for sexual health. Int J STD AIDS 22(8):442-448. https://doi.org/10.1258/ijsa.2011.010488
  263. Scherer KR (2001) Appraisal considered as a process of multi- level sequential checking. In: Sherer KR, Schorr A, Johnstone T (eds) Appraisal processes in emotion: theory, methods, research. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 92-120
  264. Scheutz M (2012) The inherent dangers of unidirectional emo- tional bonds between humans and social robots. In: Lin P, Abney K, Bekey GA (eds) Robot ethics: the ethical and social implica- tions of robotics. MIT Press, Cambridge, pp 205-221
  265. Scheutz M, Arnold TH (2016) Are we ready for sex robots? The 2016 11th ACM/IEEE international conference on human-robot interaction (HRI). HRI, Christchurch, pp 351-358
  266. Schlosser M (2015) Agency. In: Zalta EN (ed) The Stanford ency- clopedia of philosophy, fall 2015 edn. https://plato.stanford.edu/ archives/fall2015/entries/agency/. Accessed 27 April 2017
  267. Schuller D, Schuller BW (2018) The age of artificial emotional intelligence. Computer 51(9):38-46. https://doi.org/10.1109/MC. 2018.3620963
  268. Schussler AE (2020) Artificially intelligent sexbots and sexual solipsism-A posthumanist ethical approach. J Posthuman Stud 4:25-40. https://doi.org/10.5325/jpoststud.4.1.0025
  269. Seligman MEP, Csikszentmihalyi M (2000) Positive psychology: an introduction. Am Psychol 55(1):5-14. https://doi.org/10.1037/ 0003-066X.55.1.5
  270. Sharkey NS, van Wynsberghe A, Robbins S, Hancock E (2017) Our sexual future with robots: a foundation for respon- sible robotics consultation report. Responsib Robot. https:// responsible-robotics-myxf6pn3xr.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/ uploads/2017/11/FRR-Consultation-Report-Our-Sexual-Future- with-robots-1-1.pdf. Accessed 27 April 2020
  271. Shen FX (2019) Government officials have no idea how to regulate the growing sex-robot industry. Business Insider. https:// www.businessinsider.com/sex-robot-industry-regulations-2019- 2. Accessed 22 July 2019
  272. Shin Y, Kim J (2018) Data-centered persuasion: nudging user's prosocial behaviour and designing social innovation. Comput Hum Behav 80:168-178. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2017.11. 009
  273. Silva MBC, Silva CM, Lucena RJRS, Alves GJ, Cavalcante EL, Moretti EC, Lemos A, Rodrigues MAB (2019) Rehabilitation physiotherapy of the perineum muscle through virtual reality. In: Costa-Felix R, Machado JC, Alvarenga AV (eds) XXVI Brazilian congress on biomedical engineering, CBEB 2018, pp 875-880
  274. Skinner BF (1938) The behavior of organisms: an experimental analysis. Appleton-Century, New York
  275. Solano I, Eaton NR, O'Leary KD (2020) Pornography consump- tion, modality and function in a large internet sample. J Sex Res 57(1):92-103. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224499.2018.1532488
  276. Sparrow R (2017) Robots, rape, and representation. Int J Soc Robot 9(4):465-477. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-017-0413-z
  277. Stabile E (2013) Getting the government in bed: how to regu- late the sex-toy industry. Berkeley J Gend Law Just 28:161-183. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2222079
  278. Stafford RQ, MacDonald BA, Jayawarde C, Wegner DM, Broad- bent E (2014) Does the robot have a mind? Mind perception and attitudes towards robots predict use of an eldercare robot. Int J Soc Robot 6(1):17-32. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-013-0186-y
  279. Strömfelt H, Zhang Y, Schuller BW (2017) Emotion-augmented machine learning: overview of an emerging domain. In: Seventh international conference on affective computing and intelligent interaction (ACII), pp 305-312
  280. Su NM, Lazar A, Bardzell J, Bardzell S (2019) Of dolls and men: anticipating sexual intimacy with robots. ACM Trans Comput Hum Interact 26(3):1-35. https://doi.org/10.1145/3301422
  281. Sumter SR, Vandenbosch L, Ligtenberg L (2017) Love me Tin- der: untangling emerging adults' motivations for using the dating application Tinder. Telemat Inform 34(1):67-78. https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.tele.2016.04.009
  282. Szczuka JM, Hartmann T, Krämer NC (2019) Negative and posi- tive influences on the sensations evoked by artificial sex partners: a review of relevant theories, recent findings, and introduction of the sexual interaction illusion model. In: Zhou U, Fischer M (eds) AI I love you. Springer, Cham, pp 3-19. https://doi.org/10.3390/ mti1010003
  283. 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 charac- teristics influencing this evaluation. Multimodal Technol Interact 1(1):1-18. https://doi.org/10.3390/mti1010003
  284. Tegmark M (2017) Life 3.0: being human in the age of artificial intelligence. Knopf, New York
  285. Thomas AM, Parkinson J, Moore P, Goodman A, Xhafa F, Barolli L (2013) Nudging through technology: choice architectures and mobile information revolution. In: Proceedings of the 2013 eighth international conference on P2P, parallel, grid, cloud and internet computing, pp 255-261
  286. Thue D, Bulitko V, Spetch M, Romanuik T (2011) A computa- tional model of perceived agency in video games. In: Proceedings of the seventh AAAI Conference on artificial intelligence and interactive digital entertainment, pp 91-96
  287. Timmermans E, De Caluwé E (2017) To Tinder or not to Tinder, that's the question: an individual differences perspective to Tinder use and motives. Personal Individ Differ 110:74-79. https://doi. org/10.1016/j.paid.2017.01.026
  288. Toates F (2009) An integrative theoretical framework for under- standing sexual motivation, arousal, and behaviour. J Sex Res 46(2-3):168-193. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224490902747768
  289. Todaro E, Silvaggi M, Aversa F, Rossi V, Nimbi FM, Rossi R, Simonelli C (2018) Are social media a problem or a tool? New strategies for sexual education. Sexol 27(3):e67-e70. https://doi. org/10.1016/j.sexol.2018.05.006
  290. Turing AM (1950) Computing machinery and intelligence. Mind 49(236):433-460
  291. Turkle S (2007) Authenticity in the age of digital companions. Interact Stud 8(3):501-517. https://doi.org/10.1075/is.8.3.11tur
  292. Turney P, Whitley D, Anderson RW (1996) Evolution, learning, and instinct: years of the Baldwin effect. Evol Comput 4(3):4-8. https://doi.org/10.1162/evco.1996.4.3.iv
  293. Twist MLC, McArthur N (2020) Introduction to special issue on digihealth and sexual health. Sex Relatsh Ther 35(2):131-136. https://doi.org/10.1080/14681994.2020.1735176
  294. Valverde SH (2012) The modern sex doll-owner: a descriptive analysis. Master's Thesis, California Polytechnic State University
  295. Varela FJ, Thompson E, Rosch E (1991) The embodied mind: cognitive science and human experience. MIT Press, Cambridge
  296. Verbeek PP (2005) What things do: philosophical reflections on technology, agency, and design. Pennsylvania State University Press, University Park
  297. Verbeek PP (2008) Cyborg intentionality: rethinking the phe- nomenology of human-technology relations. Phenomenol Cogn Sci 7(3):387-395. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11097-008-9099-x
  298. Vilalta R, Drissi Y (2002) A perspective view and survey of meta- learning. Artif Intell Rev 18(2):77-95. https://doi.org/10.1023/A: 1019956318069
  299. Virtual Mate. Software design and development. https://www. virtualmate.com/pages/software. Accessed 19 December 2019
  300. de Waal F (1982) Chimpanzee politics: power and sex among apes. Jonathan Cape, London
  301. Walker A, Makin DA, Morczek AL (2016) Finding lolita: a com- parative analysis of interest in youth-oriented pornography. Sex Cult 20(3):657-683. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12119-016-9355-0
  302. Wang Y, Wu H, Sun ZS (2019) The biological basis of sexual orientation: how hormonal, genetic, and environmental factors influence to whom we are sexually attracted. Front Neuroen- docrinol 55:100798. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.yfrne.2019.100798
  303. Ward AF, Duke K, Gneezy A, Bos MW (2017) Brain drain: the mere presence of one's own smartphone reduces available cogni- tive capacity. J Assoc Consum Res 2(2):140-154. https://doi.org/ 10.1086/691462
  304. Washida Y (2005) Collaborative structure between Japanese high- tech manufacturers and consumers. J Consum Mark 22(1):25-34. https://doi.org/10.1108/07363760510576527
  305. Wayne G, Hung C, Amos D et al (2018) Unsupervised predictive memory in a goal-directed agent. arXiv:1803.10760
  306. Weber T, Racanière S, Reichert DP et al (2017) Imagination- augmented agents for deep reinforcement learning. In: Proceed- ings of the 31st conference on neural information processing systems (NIPS 2017), pp 5694-5705
  307. White D, Galbraith PW (2019) Japan's emerging emotional tech. Anthropology News. http://www.anthropology-news.org/ index.php/2019/01/25/japans-emerging-emotional-tech/#:~: text=Along%20with%20the%20new%20AIBO,and%20even%2 0guess%20one's%20age. Accessed on 11 August 2020
  308. Williams DJ, Thomas JN, Prior EE, Walter W (2015) Introducing a multidisciplinary framework of positive sexuality. J Posit Sex 1:6-11
  309. Wilner SJS, Huff AD (2017) Objects of desire: the role of product design in revising contested cultural meanings. J Mark Man- age 33(3-4):244-271. https://doi.org/10.1080/0267257X.2016.1 240099
  310. Wilson ML, Miller CM, Crouse KN (2017) Humans as a model species for sexual selection research. Proc Biol Sci 284(20171320):1-10. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2017.1320
  311. Wood IB, Varela PL, Bollen J, Rocha LM, Goncalves-Sá J (2017) Human sexual cycles are driven by culture and match collective moods. Sci Rep 7(17973):1-11. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598- 017-18262-5
  312. World Health Organization (2015) Sexual health, human rights and the law. World Health Organization. https://www.who.int/ reproductivehealth/publications/sexual_health/sexual-health- human-rights-law/en/. Accessed 11 May 2020
  313. Wunsch S (2017) Phylogenesis of mammal sexuality: analysis of the evolution of proximal factors. Sexologies 26(1):e1-e10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sexol.2016.12.001
  314. Young JE, Hawkins R, Sharlin E, Igarashi T (2009) Toward acceptable domestic robots: applying insights from social psy- chology. Int J Soc Robot 1(1):95-108. https://doi.org/10.1007/s1 2369-008-0006-y
  315. Yuval NH (2017) Reboot for the AI revolution. Nature. https:// www.nature.com/news/reboot-for-the-ai-revolution-1.22826. Accessed 11 August 2020
  316. Zetter K (2015) Hackers finally post stolen Ashley Madison data. Wired. https://www.wired.com/2015/08/happened-hackers- posted-stolen-ashley-madison-data/. Accessed 9 May 2020
  317. Zgourides GD (2020) Disposition and treatment of paraphilia in non-western Cultures. In: Rowland DL, Jannini EA (eds) Cultural differences and the practice of sexual medicine: a guide for sexual health practitioners. Springer, Cham, pp 253-273
  318. Zhou Y, Fischer MH (2019) AI love you: developments in human- robot intimate relationships. Springer, New York
  319. Zhou Z, Zhao J, Liang X (2020) Cyberphysical human sexual behaviour acquisition system (SeBA): development and imple- mentation study in China. JMIR mHealth uHealth 8(4):1-10. https://doi.org/10.2196/12677
  320. Złotowski J, Yogeeswaran K, Bartneck C (2017) Can we con- trol it? Autonomous robots threaten human identity, uniqueness, safety, and resources. Int J Hum-Comput Stud 100:48-54. https:// doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhcs.2016.12.008
  321. Zuboff S (2019) The age of surveillance capitalism: the fight for a human future at the new frontier of power. PublicAffairs, New York Publisher's Note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to juris- dictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. Simon Dubé is a PhD Candidate in Psychology at Concordia Univer- sity (Montreal, Qc, Ca) working under the co-supervision of Dr. Aaron Johnson (Concordia Vision Labs) and Dr. David Vachon (Research on Sex, Violence, and Personality Lab, McGill University). He special- izes in sexuality and technology. Specifically, his research program investigates how people's subjective, cognitive, and psychophysiolog- ical responses to sexual stimuli relate to their sexual preferences. He applies multi-method research designs to the study of human-machine erotic interaction-or Erobotics-and explores the influence of new interactive, immersive, and connected (socio)sexual technologies (e.g., artificial erotic agents, or erobots) on human sexuality.
  322. Dave Anctil (PhD), is full-time Philosophy professor at Collège Jean- de-Brébeuf (Montreal, Qc, Ca). He is also affiliated with the Observa- toire international sur les impacts sociétaux de l'IA et du numérique (OBVIA; Laval University, Qc, Ca). His fields of expertise are ethics, political theory, artificial intelligence, and Erobotics.

Related papers

Robots, Love, and Sex: The Ethics of Building a Love Machine
John P Sullins

IEEE Transactions on Affective Computing, 2012

ABSTRACT This paper will explore the ethical impacts of the use of affective computing by engineers and roboticists who program their machines to mimic and manipulate human emotions in order to evoke loving or amorous reactions from their human users. We will see that it does seem plausible that some people might buy a love machine if it were created, but it is argued here that principles from machine ethics have a role to play in the design of these machines. This is best achieved by applying what is known about the philosophy of love, the ethics of loving relationships, and the philosophical value of the erotic in the early design stage of building robust artificial companions. The paper concludes by proposing certain ethical limits on the manipulation of human psychology when it comes to building sex robots and in the simulation of love in such machines. In addition, the paper argues that the attainment of erotic wisdom is an ethically sound goal and that it provides more to loving relationships than only satisfying physical desire. This fact may limit the possibility of creating a machine that can fulfill all that one should want out of erotic love unless a machine can be built that would help its user attain this kind of love.

View PDFchevron_right
From Sex Robots to Love Robots: Is Mutual Love with a Robot Possible? (in J. Danaher & N. McArthur (Eds.) Robot Sex: Social and Ethical Implications, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2017)
Lily Frank

Some critics of sex-robots worry that their use might spread objectifying attitudes about sex, and common sense places a higher value on sex within love-relationships than on casual sex. If there could be mutual love between humans and sex-robots, this could help to ease the worries about objectifying attitudes. And mutual love between humans and sex-robots, if possible, could also help to make this sex more valuable. But is mutual love between humans and robots possible, or even conceivable? We discuss three clusters of ideas and associations commonly discussed within the philosophy of love, and relate these to the topic of whether mutual love could be achieved between humans and sex-robots: (i) the idea of love as a “good match”; (ii) the idea of valuing each other in our distinctive particularity; and (iii) the idea of a steadfast commitment. We consider relations among these ideas and the sort of agency and free will that we attribute to human romantic partners. Our conclusion is that mutual love between humans and advanced sex-robots is not an altogether impossible proposition. However, it is unlikely that we will be able to create robots sophisticated enough to be able to participate in love-relationships anytime soon.

View PDFchevron_right
Love(rs) in the making: Moral subjectivity in the face of sexbots
Jan Peter Bergen

Paladyn, 2020

This article offers a novel reading of the criticisms of sex robots put forward by the Campaign Against Sex Robots (CASR). Focusing on the implication of a loss of empathy, it structures CASR's worries as an argument from moral degradation centered around the potential effects on sexbot users' sexual and moral subjectivity. This argument is subsequently explored through the combined lenses of postphenomenology and the ethical phenomenology of Emmanuel Levinas. In so doing, it describes the type of human-technology relations that sexbots invite, identifying alterity as a central feature. It also highlights how alterity, responsibility , and subjectivity are intimately connected. However, that connection is distinctly different in sexual circumstances, making current versions of Levinasian roboethics largely inapplicable for the ethics of sexbots. To overcome this, the article delves into Levinas' phenomenology of Eros and identifies voluptuousness as a type of enjoyment of the Other that is different from the enjoyment invited by current sexbots and is compatible with responsibility. Based on this, the article provides examples of how this phenomenology of Eros can inspire the design of future sexbots in ways that alleviate some of CASR's concerns.

View PDFchevron_right
SEX ROBOTS: The Ethics of Intimacy
Mushba Said

Thought to be far-fetched works of science fiction and fantasy, one of the most recent and significant developments for the field of science, technology, and society has been that of sex robots (also referred to as sexbots). This paper aims to examine the developing phenomenon of sex robots through a primarily philosophical lens in order to better understand the implications that the existence of these robots can have for society at large in a multitude of ways. Though a topic that can be easily joked about, one of the main aims for the outcome of this paper will be to establish how sex robots, in many ways, embody the Anthropocene era through the complexity of their existence—an existence that is intertwined with ideas of capitalism, feminism, technologism, representation, and moral responsibilities, or lack thereof, by raising questions on the ethics of sex robots such as: What are the moral implications of creating sex robots? What does that say about the state and status of human intimacy? What does the creation of sex robots say about current social thought? Do sex robots hold any potential for solving social and intimacy issues? Is humanising sex robots ethical? And so on. This paper will attempt to answer those questions by considering three main perspectives: A ethical/moral critique; a feminist/social critique; and a technological critique, referring to works by the likes of John Danaher & Neil McArthur, Donna Haraway, Hiroki Azuma, David Levy, Jean Baudrillard, and others. By doing so, it is hoped that this paper will be able to provide a basic, holistic perspective to the reader, rather than produce a work that is completely biased against the topic, and help the reader to gain an understanding on the topic and perhaps form an opinion over it in order to gauge at the possibilities that the future holds for sex robots, and the consequences that accompany them in their development. Keywords: Sex robots; sexbots; philosophy; Anthropocene; Donna Haraway; cyborg manifesto; ethics; morality; science, technology, and society.

View PDFchevron_right
Aristotle and Sartre on Eros and Love-Robots
Daniel D Novotný

Open Philosophy , 2025

For Aristotle, human beings are deeply social creatures, a trait that contributes to the meaningfulness of our lives. In more recent philosophy, Jean-Paul Sartre similarly argued that our existence is informed by our unavoidable social relations, even as he also emphasized the quest for individual freedom. What happens when the “Other” in these relationships are artifacts, such as robots? Can robots liberate us from our existential dependence on other humans? Should they do so, in light of Aristotelian and Sartrean ethics? With recent technological advancements, an increasing amount of scholarly literature has emerged about the use, meaning, and limits of innovations such as sex- or love-robots. In this article, we will first explore the relevance of Aristotle’s virtue ethics in relation to romantic love (eros) and social technologies. We will then examine Sartre’s existentialism as in some respects a continuation of Aristotelian ethics and assess its applicability to eros in our technological age. Finally, we will conduct a case study on love-robots, reviewing recent scientific studies to evaluate their ethical and social implications from the perspectives of Aristotle and Sartre. We argue that neither Aristotle nor Sartre would endorse the view of love-robots as part of our social well-being

View PDFchevron_right

Related topics

  • Social Robotics

    • Cited by

    Erobots and Erobotics
    Simon Dubé

    Encyclopedia of Sexuality and Gender

    Erobots refers to all artificial erotic agents, as well as their enabling technologies, and interconnected, multilayered, and multi-agent systems. Erobotics refer to the transdisciplinary field of research which intersects human-machine interaction and sexology, and focuses on humanmachine erotic interaction and coevolution, as well as their related phenomena.

    View PDFchevron_right
    Erobots as research tools: Overcoming the ethical and methodological challenges of sexology
    Simon Dubé

    Journal of Future Robot Life

    Sexology faces several ethical and methodological challenges. One of them is that sex researchers must rely on proxy methods to safely study fundamental aspects of human sexuality – in laboratories and natural environments. However, laboratory studies often lack ecological validity, whereas studies conducted in natural environments make it difficult for researchers to control experimental conditions or use sophisticated equipment. Together, this puts into question some of the empirical foundations of contemporary sexology. To address this problem, the present article proposes that sex researchers could leverage the potential of emerging technology, like erobots – or artificial erotic agents, such virtual partners, erotic chatbots, and sex robots – to help overcome some of the current ethical and methodological challenges of sexology. To make this case, this article describes these challenges; highlights how erobotic technologies could be employed as research tools to conduct more ec...

    View PDFchevron_right
    Erobots and the deterritorialization of eroticism
    Aura Schussler

    Journal of Future Robot Life, 2021

    As a result of its accelerated evolution in the early 21st Century, technology has already extended far beyond mere instrumental status. In the not too distant future we can expect technology to move towards a new dimension in terms of fusing with human nature; most notably in the field of intimacy towards what are known as erobots (i.e., sexbots, augmented erotic characters, erotic chatbots, erotic avatars, etc.). Given that these erobots have every chance to become part of a future eroticism, this places erobots beyond the onto-metaphysical grounding of the Western tradition regarding objects. This is an aspect that attracts the dissolution of the anthropocentric legacy of Western metaphysics, within the parameters of OOO, by showing that, in this paradigm, so-called human uniqueness is suffering an ontological twist. To show this I am investigating, the scenario that involves the relationship between a sexbot and a human, alongside of that between two sexbots, within the limits o...

    View PDFchevron_right
    580 California St., Suite 400
    San Francisco, CA, 94104
    © 2025 Academia. All rights reserved