I have to start my post with a disclaimer: while I find the topic of ethics surrounding sex, prostitution and sex as a commodity (this is the part that would include robots) incredibly interesting I am not really comfortable discussing it and arguing about what is "right". Simply because it is a topic where I have changed my views many times and also very recently. However there are some details here I would like to comment on without getting into the bigger discussion of how sex robots will affect society and if we should let that happen.
That's like saying a veggie burger promotes meat eating.
Sex robots is essentially giving the insane meth addict an option for a lifetime supply instead of giving them the truly obvious help they need.
I find these two analogies equally good and valid for the discussion, both also contribute to illustrate why this is a topic I'm not comfortable with discussing in detail.
It's amazing how the male sexuality is always conflated with discarding all non-physical values of a women. It's also amazing how sex-bots are seen as an only male venture.
Only men would use sex bots? Sex bots would be exlusively female bots?
How can you be a doctor and be this stupid.
I think that could be connected with the idea of both male and female prostitutes mostly service men. There are probably actual numbers to be found, but I'm not going to spend time on finding it, and rather go with anecdotal evidence that out from what I have knowledge of illegal and regulated prostitution, escorts, sex call centers, human trafficking, health care services for users of prostitution that I have seen in real life (without seeking it out) and been presented with in the media supports this view. I'm not trying to say that there are no women who buy sex, but rather that they really seem to be a minority. I think many users on this forum will have the same impression.
I also have another anecdotal point that might not fit but I have been waiting for a long time for the possibility to bring it up: the vice documentary on virtual sex toys also seemed to be focused on male pleasure. One scene that really stood out to me was when they were trying a fleshlight that acted out movements done to a dildo. They showed the fleshlight in use on the mans penis, while the woman was using her hands on the dildo. Why didn't they let her use it in her vagina? Why should she only be a provider of pleasure instead of a participant? I don't know their rationale but it still sent out a strong message of female sexuality either not being a priority or that female masturbation is too taboo to show or both. Either way I find that to be really screwed up and discriminatory.
I would argue that such views comes from the fact that (as far as I know) there are no female oriented equivalent of that particular product and even if there are I think their demand is overshadowed by the demand for dildos and vibrators. Those who find guys buying fleshligth to be pervs however are beyond a doubt hypocritical if they are supportive of the female oriented equivalent that are found in dildos and vibrators.
Dr. Richardson just need some good robot loving.
That is incredibly disrespectful, misogynistic and offensive thing to say. It is not even funny as a joke.