Sexbots as Synthetic Companions: Comparing Attitudes of Official Sex Offenders and Non-Offenders

Abstract

This is the first Italian study to examine views on sexbots of adult male sex offenders and non-offenders, and their perceptions of sexbots as sexual partners, and sexbots as a means to prevent sexual violence. In order to explore these aspects 344 adult males were involved in the study. The study carried out two types of comparisons. 100 male sex offenders were compared with 244 male non-offenders. Also, sex offenders were divided into child molesters and rapists. Preliminary findings suggest that sex offenders were less open than non-offenders to sexbots, showed a lower acceptance of them, and were more likely to dismiss the possibility of having an intimate and sexual relationship with a sexbot. Sex offenders were also less likely than non-offenders to believe that the risk of sexual violence against people could be reduced if a sexbot was used in the treatment of sex offenders. No differences were found between child molesters and rapists. Though no definitive conclusion can be drawn about what role sexbots might play in the prevention and treatment of sex offending, this study emphasizes the importance of both exploring how sexbots are both perceived and understood. Sex offenders in this study showed a high dynamic sexual risk and, paradoxically, despite, or because of, their sexual deviance (e.g. deficits in sexual self-regulation), they were more inclined to see sexbots as just machines and were reluctant to imagine them as social agents, i.e. as intimate or sexual arousal partners. How sex offenders differ in their dynamic risk and criminal careers can inform experts about the mechanisms that take place and can challenge their engagement in treatment and intervention.

Sexual Interaction in Digital Contexts and Its Implications for Sexual Health: A Conceptual Analysis

“…Child-like sex dolls and sex robots are considered particularly dangerous, and their production and possession is already criminalized in some countries ( Maras and Shapiro, 2017 ; Brown and Shelling, 2019 ). The idea that female or child-like sex dolls and sex robots could successfully be used in the therapy of sex offenders is met with skepticism by ethicists, therapists, and sex offenders ( Zara et al, 2021 ).…”

Pygmalion Displacement: When Humanising AI Dehumanises Women

“…Sex robots as a solution to this makes no sense (viz. Sparrow, 2017;Zara et al, 2021), both given the complex socioeconomic reasons for human trafficking and the fact that non-coercive and ethical sex work exists, and has existed from antiquity long before the modern illegal industry of human trafficking, meaning that it is not caused (in a simple or straightforward way) by lack of access to buying sex.…”

Dignity

“…It's only a thing, and it might even do some good. For instance, it has been suggested that sex robots, used within controlled environments, could help redirect "the sexual behavior of high-risk child molesters … without endangering real children" (Zara et al 2022). The two routes to discussing the ethical issues of sex robots sketched above could also be illustrated as a continuum with two opposing poles which meet where sexual autonomy that does not create harm might be the Aristotelian golden mean (Aristotle 2000(Aristotle : 102 [1138b).…”