The moral case for sexbots

Abstract In this paper, I will try to examine the main objections and moral qualms by some opponents to sexbots. While minor points of their argumentation are not entirely groundless, my aim is to show that overall, most of the claims directed against sexbots are: (1) rarely based on facts or data; (2) driven by unfounded fears; and originate from; (3) implicit to very strong political and ideological beliefs. The driving moral forces behind the opponents’ position are not traditional moral categories such as good or bad per se, but they are rather subsumed or dissolved under very vague and fashionable concepts such as gender and objectification. Hence, morality in this case can be seen as highly subservient to a political cause: it views some aspects of technological progress as an offshoot of all-mighty capitalism; and sexbots in particular, as a threat to social order, that will redefine or even wipe out traditional interactions between human beings and ultimately, destroy humanity. I will argue on the contrary that there is a strong moral case for sexbots, that stems from notions such as sexual liberty, personal freedom and humanism, and extends to novel concepts, like sexual equality or sexual opportunity, sexual justice and compassion. Moreover, I am fairly convinced that sexbots, widely available and used in a responsible manner, might have a positive impact on society as a whole. The sexual well-being and fulfilment of individuals in want of intimacy and emotional connection, could be seen as a tool for social progress and sexual justice. As Socrates brilliantly pointed out through Plato, most of human misery, suffering and wars, arise from our unfulfilled bodily desires and frustrations (“Phaedo”, 66c). He of course advocated in favour of chastity and resisting sexual temptation, but his basic premise and insight are still valid today. Finally, the underlying questions I will explore in the following pages are: how come such vast swaths of the progressive camp, adopt a conservative discourse, when it comes to sexual progress? Why is there such a staunch opposition to sexbots and the ensuing right to pleasure, while at the same time, we are precisely witnessing in the most recent decades, an inflation in all kinds of subjective rights, that we tend to value so much?