After I wrote a column suggesting that humanoid robots might eventually be granted personhood, a reader asked: What about sex robots? Apparently, we are well on the way to producing both male and female avatars that will take an active, and even convincing, part in the proceedings.
I think this is a development that should be nipped in the bud, and not for puritanical reasons.
Let’s suppose for a moment that it will be possible to build sex robots that are, in important respects, indistinguishable from humans.
For example, they can hold a semi-intelligent discussion (not on the merits of Wittgenstein, perhaps, but better than: “Hi, my name is Tonya”). They can build memories, replicate facial mannerisms and generally behave as animate beings.
This is not as improbable as it might seem. There are already brothels in Europe that offer robots as an alternative to the usual fare. True, these machines are definitely in the Tonya class.
Yet Moore’s law states that computing power will double every two years. I have no idea if that applies to androids, but it seems probable we will see a rapid expansion in their skill sets over the next decade or so.
And then what? Relations between the genders are already fraught. The #MeToo movement, seizing on the shameful behaviour of powerful men in the entertainment and broadcast industries, has turned “toxic masculinity” into an indictment of men everywhere.
Indeed, we had Prime Minister Justin Trudeau admonishing us the other day that in allegations of sexual harassment: “The woman must be believed.” Doesn’t that imply that men must not? What happened to the presumption of innocence?
I recognize the man’s limitations. He was merely singing along with the choir.
But this kind of sentiment is a genuine threat to male/female relations. If men are presumptively guilty in any allegation of misconduct, their instinct might be to avoid real women for their own protection.
Then there is the reality that no developed country has sustainable birth rates. Indeed, the very idea of reproduction has acquired a faintly passé aura.
Significant numbers of young Japanese men and women say they’ve never gone out on a date, and have no desire to do so. The sexual revolution of the 1960s and ’70s has been replaced by the safer embrace of social media.
Or sex robots. Physiotherapist Masayuki Ozak from Tokyo takes his silicon avatar out on dates (he carts “her” around in a wheelchair.) He and his wife share a bed with young Mayu.
I know, you can’t make this stuff up. But some leading feminists argue that the very idea demeans women and breeds a culture of exploitation and submission.
They fear that if robots are programmed to meet our every desire, that might alter the expectations humans have of each other.
The question, of course, is: What can be done? Do we amend various human rights codes to halt the development of androids before they can pose such a threat?
We outlaw human cloning, not because it can’t be done, but because it offends our belief that each individual is unique and irreplaceable. Why, then, would we permit the construction of robots that are, in effect, replicants of humans?
There are, indeed, situations in which androids could perform valuable tasks — cleaning up radiation spills, for example. And it might be that if we do ever colonize other worlds, the safest option will be to send machines, not people.
But that’s not what sex robots are about. Their manufacturers have no interest in the protection or betterment of humanity. They’re in it for purely commercial reasons.
We need a thoughtful discussion about this, and preferably before we’ve built clever replicants who will make demands of their own.
