Nothing to be ashamed of: sex robots for older adults with disabilities

Abstract

This paper spotlights ways in which sexual capacities relate to central human capabilities, such as the ability to generate a personally meaningful story of one’s life; be physically, mentally and emotionally healthy; experience bodily integrity; affiliate and bond with others; feel and express a range of human emotions; and choose a plan of life. It sets forth a dignity-based argument for affording older people access to sex robots as part of reasonable efforts to support their central human capabilities at a floor level. The argument develops stepwise: (1) first, I dispel ageism and negative stereotypes about later-life sexuality, showing their deep historical roots in medicine and science; (2) second, I set forth a positive argument, grounded in capability accounts of justice, for deploying sex robots for older people with disabilities; (3) finally, after responding to objections, I conclude that sex robots are a reasonable way to support later-life sexuality for persons with disabilities. While often depicted as a product for younger, able-bodied people, this paper is a bid for reimagining sex robots as a product for older, disabled people.

Robots and sexual ethics

“…According to Bianchi, sex robots, whether now or in the future, might "allow people with dementia to fulfil their needs regardless of whether they can provide or understand consent." A similar proposal is raised by Nancy Jecker 12 in her feature article, on which Bianchi's piece is a commentary. Additional commentaries are by Robert Sparrow, 13 Tom Sorell, 14 and Alexander Boni-Saenz.…”

Sex robot fantasies

“…If there is only one person in the room, any sexual activity going on is masturbation, not sex. Jecker seems to think that the fact that ‘robots, like sex toys, can be used by couples’ means that they offer something other than ‘a form of masturbation’ 1. However, that a sex toy—or a robot—can be used by couples does not make its use sex rather than masturbation—unless they are using it to have sex with each other.…”

“…Nor do sex robots allow people to sustain relationships in any meaningful sense. As Jecker herself observes ‘robots are instruments by definition and all of their functions, sexual or otherwise, are designed to serve users’ ends’ 1. There is no ‘other’ there, with which one can have a relationship 3.…”

“…There is no ‘other’ there, with which one can have a relationship 3. If ‘part of what is sought through engaging in sexual relationships is relationships’1 then sex robots can only disappoint.…”

“…Jecker suggests that ‘sex robots simulate being with another human being and involve forming a human-robot relationship’ (my emphasis) 1. Given that robots are neither subjects nor agents, I’m not really sure what human–robot relationships are.…”