# Sex and intimate relationships with robots to be the norm in 50 years?



## DualGnosis (Apr 6, 2013)

According to sex psychologist Helen Driscoll, with sex dolls already available on the market and artificial intelligence steadily progressing in terms of mimicking human emotions, the idea of having romantic and/or sexual relationship with a robot doesn't seem too far off. In fact it could be a norm within our own lifetimes if society catches up with technology.

Would YOU have sex with a robot? Expert claims it will be the norm in 50 years | Daily Mail Online

Sex with robots to be 'the norm' in 50 years, expert claims - Mirror Online

Sex With Robots Will Be Normal In 50 Years, Experts Say

With movies like _Siri_ and anime like _Chobits_ the idea that having intimate relationships shows that the idea is looming but just how soon will it become reality is the question.



What are you thoughts? Do you approve? Disprove? Would you yourself engage in a relationship with a human-like robot?


----------



## nonnaci (Sep 25, 2011)

It's one step above the existing sex-toys on the market. The porn industry is already investing in virtual reality so a tight-integration between the two sectors is happening, no pun intended. e.g. virtual sex between anonymous parties.

Also, it's not so much sex with bots that's an issue, but getting over the uncanny valley of human-bot relationships. It's like an empathy barrier that has to be crossed for there to be stakes/feelings involved; all parties must place an existential risk and must understand said risk of the other.


----------



## Loaf (Mar 27, 2014)

I can't believe you linked the Daily Fail, that paper is known for being full of bullshit and fear mongering and hatred of foreingners.


----------



## BlackDog (Jan 6, 2012)

If it does, I'm going to Mars. Pack some books, maybe get my dog a space suit. I'm out guys.


----------



## UraniaIsis (Nov 26, 2014)

Yay! My fantasy of being with Data from Star Trek: Next Generation will happen within my lifetime. :kitty: /jk

Nothing beats actual flesh and blood that can grow old with you, but of course I'm a romantic sap. :blushed: /not jk


----------



## stargazing grasshopper (Oct 25, 2013)

The entertainment industry appears to have government backing, which really implies they're planting the seeds for big business.
I can't wait to hear the laid back pope's opinion on this one "bible doesn't prohibit sex with androids, so who am I to judge?" LOLOL

No thanks, big business can shove their androids up their collective government lubed ass


----------



## Grandmaster Yoda (Jan 18, 2014)

Siri says that she was asked to be married by other people.


----------



## finesthour (Jun 12, 2014)

DualGnosis said:


> According to sex psychologist Helen Driscoll, with sex dolls already available on the market and artificial intelligence steadily progressing in terms of mimicking human emotions, the idea of having romantic and/or sexual relationship with a robot doesn't seem too far off. In fact it could be a norm within our own lifetimes if society catches up with technology.
> 
> Would YOU have sex with a robot? Expert claims it will be the norm in 50 years | Daily Mail Online
> 
> ...


No amount of amazing progress in giving machines puzzle pieces of human characteristics will provide us with anything human. I'm against talking to phones for reasons that I won't get into here. So I guess I would want a robot to leave me in peace.


----------



## Metalize (Dec 18, 2014)

stargazing grasshopper said:


> The entertainment industry appears to have government backing, which really implies they're planting the seeds for big business.
> I can't wait to hear the laid back pope's opinion on this one "bible doesn't prohibit sex with androids, so who am I to judge?" LOLOL
> 
> No thanks, big business can shove their androids up their collective government lubed ass


That video made by a paranoid loser who lost a court case doesn't have anything to do with this... lol. He even insults men by implying that they wouldn't be able to care for themselves without learning these skills from women.


----------



## EndsOfTheEarth (Mar 14, 2015)

DualGnosis said:


> According to sex psychologist Helen Driscoll, with sex dolls already available on the market and artificial intelligence steadily progressing in terms of mimicking human emotions, the idea of having romantic and/or sexual relationship with a robot doesn't seem too far off. In fact it could be a norm within our own lifetimes if society catches up with technology.


Humans haven't learnt a thing in all these millenia, still try to solve emotional problems with technology. If someone is dysfunctional in dealing with another human's emotions, then what makes them think they'll be successful in dealing with simulated emotions in a machine? The underlying problem is still there.

On theoretical terms I don't have much problem with artifical intelligence, simulated people and us relating to them. But I do see the rise in machines with limited emotional programming to enable a dysfunctional human to continue on in their dysfunction rather than to learn and grow beyond it. Broken relationships, failures and all the rest are the only experiences that really propel people into looking within for their own dysfunctions and being motivated to solve them. If you bought yourself a stepford wife/husband who simply gave you unconditional love and affection for as long as it worked then you could be as abusive as you liked and you'd actually be rewarded for that behaviour. Does no-one else see a problem with this?

Other people with their right to choose and right to justice if they are wronged are an important check and balance on society and people's behaviour. Remove that and....well I dont think humanity is actually emotionally mature enough to go where our technology is taking us.


----------



## stargazing grasshopper (Oct 25, 2013)

Metasentient said:


> That video made by a paranoid loser who lost a court case doesn't have anything to do with this... lol. He even insults men by implying that they wouldn't be able to care for themselves without learning these skills from women.


Nobody is twisting your arm to watch the video, skip the video if you don't like the guy that created it or his message.
I watched approximately a minute of the video, it just isn't my thing but I thought it might give a few of you chowderheads something to whine about.


----------



## Metalize (Dec 18, 2014)

Lol, I saw that. Don't worry, I don't care.

I'd entertain any message no matter how repulsive to me, but it has to be presented in at least a rational format.


----------



## The Hungry One (Jan 26, 2011)

InSolitude said:


> On theoretical terms I don't have much problem with artifical intelligence, simulated people and us relating to them. But I do see the rise in machines with limited emotional programming to enable a dysfunctional human to continue on in their dysfunction rather than to learn and grow beyond it. Broken relationships, failures and all the rest are the only experiences that really propel people into looking within for their own dysfunctions and being motivated to solve them. If you bought yourself a stepford wife/husband who simply gave you unconditional love and affection for as long as it worked then you could be as abusive as you liked and you'd actually be rewarded for that behaviour. Does no-one else see a problem with this?


If you have abusive tendencies, I think it's preferable to take them out on a robot. 

If you want to be loved unconditionally, the fact is the vast majority of humans are unable to give this to you, so why not program a robot to do that? Understandably, you would have to buy into the delusion that the robot actually cares in order to get any satisfaction from it, but once you have bought into the delusion, the happiness that you feel is genuine, so is the delusion so harmful?

So long as we get what we want, I don't see why it has to be naturally occurring, as opposed to manufactured.


----------



## EndsOfTheEarth (Mar 14, 2015)

The Hungry One said:


> If you have abusive tendencies, I think it's preferable to take them out on a robot.


I think it's preferrable to face your own shadows and overcome them. That's a possibility too, but not a likely one while you are being enabled. Not just thinking about the others involved with that person, but also the person with those tendencies (not just talking about violence, also emotional detachment and other forms of passive abusive behaviour). Most people do have a tendency to some kind of destructive cycle in their life. Mostly they hurt themselves with it until they meet with enough failure in some aspect of life that's really important to them. Then they look to change. 

What I'm talking about is people robbing themselves of the opportunity to grow merely because they made a decision in a crippled state to stay where they are. While it's easy to think about the upside of robots, the upsides of interacting with real people should be considered too. One of those upsides is the growth experience we have when we lose things important to us. make mistakes and even when others choose to walk away from us because we are practising habits which don't nurture a relationship with them. 



> If you want to be loved unconditionally, the fact is the vast majority of humans are unable to give this to you, so why not program a robot to do that? Understandably, you would have to buy into the delusion that the robot actually cares in order to get any satisfaction from it, but once you have bought into the delusion, the happiness that you feel is genuine, so is the delusion so harmful?


And I think there is a very great danger in delusions. While it's often touted that unconditional love is the cure for all ills, the very fact that it rarely if ever exists, should tell us that perhaps it's not. Perhaps the better opportunity for our lives and our emotional well being is actually imperfect love with an ideal to work towards. But the working towards it, may actually be the real gold any relationship. Because it requires us to grow and change in order to meet our ideals. If it is merely handed to us as a product of ownership then I wonder what the real ramifications of that are likely to be. 

It reminds me of the time when I wished to just not have to work at all and just spend all my time in leisure or following my bliss. I actually did this for three years. And it bored the hell out of me and began one the biggest depressive episodes of my life. What we think we want is not always what's good for us. 



> So long as we get what we want, I don't see why it has to be naturally occurring, as opposed to manufactured.


My problem isnt with it being naturally occurring or manufactured. My problem with it is that it's an untested state and one that we may not as individuals actually be ready for and the outcome of that is unknown. One outcome I can rather easily see is humans getting so used to interacting with a programmed response that they lose the ability to deal with the real one coming from another person. I see a lot of disconnect occuring actually.


----------



## The Hungry One (Jan 26, 2011)

@InSolitude

My criteria for "goodness" is maximizing happiness of all parties, as life is short, and happiness is all we have.

Responses, chronologically:

Why is it preferable to suffer to restrain abusive tendencies when we can indulge in them safely? 

What is the utility of the "growth experience" gained from people leaving and hurting us, when we can create robots that never leave or hurt us? When would this growth experience be useful, except for forging new relationships with people, something that will be rendered obsolete by the creation of perfect robot companions? *

I do not agree that the fact that unconditional love does not exist means that it is inferior. It just means it is more difficult to maintain. Character growth is necessary in fiction to make a more entertaining story, but I don't see its value in reality, unless the growth itself serves some utility in the society one exists in. **

So I guess, ultimately, the reason why robot lovers are a bad idea is because robots can never replace humans entirely unless they became identical to humans, in which case they would no longer be robots. So long as robots cannot replace us, we will need our people skills.


----------



## Carpentet810 (Nov 17, 2013)

The Hungry One said:


> @InSolitude
> 
> My criteria for "goodness" is maximizing happiness of all parties, as life is short, and happiness is all we have.
> 
> ...


Because abusive tendencies when unrestrained will take you over, no matter how "safe". When you quit pretending to be someone you are not it is really hard to put the genie back in that lamp..I know...

Unconditional love is an affectation in its own right. It is nothing more than self justification so we can let tendencies or bad habits run wild.


----------



## The Hungry One (Jan 26, 2011)

Carpentet810 said:


> Because abusive tendencies when unrestrained will take you over, no matter how "safe". When you quit pretending to be someone you are not it is really hard to put the genie back in that lamp..I know...
> 
> Unconditional love is an affectation in its own right. It is nothing more than self justification so we can let tendencies or bad habits run wild.


There's no reason why abusive tendencies will "take you over." I like the aesthetic of cutting people non-fatally, but I don't do it because I am not a surgeon. I will never snap and start stabbing people. Some people are pedophiles, some people are zoophiles, but they restrain their tendencies. I don't see why these people have to be cured of their fantasies, which, should they remain fantasies, are entirely harmless. I don't see why they can't be allowed to indulge in them safely. 

Unconditional love is necessary early in development for a child to feel secure in his or her environment.


----------



## Psychophant (Nov 29, 2013)

Cutting things.. fun. I'm guessing many people have some messed up and often violent urges they don't want to acknowledge, but why not indulge them in fantasy? Why do people watch Saw or play violent video games if not for this reason?









Anyway, this is what I thought of when I saw the title. Thanks, Hollywood Britain.


----------



## Metalize (Dec 18, 2014)

Ex Machina is not Hollywood!!
It's British.


----------



## Playful Proxy (Feb 6, 2012)

Isn't this basically what's already going on in Japan? Neither gender is interested in having sex.


----------



## Tezcatlipoca (Jun 6, 2014)

Honestly, why does this creep people out? I would love to be an AI and shoot through the datasphere like a bullet made of light. The freedom and exhiliration of that alone would be like sex to me. Now add in an "artificial" partner that is custom designed to be a "dual gnosis" for me? Fuck yeah!


----------



## DualGnosis (Apr 6, 2013)

InSolitude said:


> Humans haven't learnt a thing in all these millenia, still try to solve emotional problems with technology. If someone is dysfunctional in dealing with another human's emotions, then what makes them think they'll be successful in dealing with simulated emotions in a machine? The underlying problem is still there.


Can't it be said that in this situation, that simulated emotions in a machine be a tool to rehabilitate or train a person with dysfunctional human social skills? 



> On theoretical terms I don't have much problem with artifical intelligence, simulated people and us relating to them. But I do see the rise in machines with limited emotional programming to enable a dysfunctional human to continue on in their dysfunction rather than to learn and grow beyond it. Broken relationships, failures and all the rest are the only experiences that really propel people into looking within for their own dysfunctions and being motivated to solve them. If you bought yourself a stepford wife/husband who simply gave you unconditional love and affection for as long as it worked then you could be as abusive as you liked and you'd actually be rewarded for that behaviour. Does no-one else see a problem with this?


There's a way to solve this in that a robot could theoretically mimic a human being "completely" in the sense that they feel repulsion and pain when they are abused, which could send a report to companies/government agencies in charge of said robot. Of course I'm diving into the realm of science fiction here but in a way does that not solve your concern? (Assuming robots are given any kind of rights) 

And even if "limited emotional capacity AI" is the issue here... I think it ultimately depends on the individual. Even today, people have the choice to grow or to stagnate whether it be in terms of relationships, mentality or knowledge. If individuals do not want to grow, we can't necessarily force them to do so; perhaps family intervention would be a solution but I don't think that is up to everyone else to decide. Sometimes we throw them in prison or insane asylums but in the end people do have the right to live how they want to live. 



> Other people with their right to choose and right to justice if they are wronged are an important check and balance on society and people's behaviour. Remove that and....well I dont think humanity is actually *emotionally mature enough* to go where our technology is taking us.


The question is will humanity ever collectively do so? I personally don't believe you can herd humanity to be of one state of mind or another, everyone is different and everyone has flaws. We will continue to stumble, it's just a matter of how each person deals with each obstacle. 




Loaf said:


> I can't believe you linked the Daily Fail, that paper is known for being full of bullshit and fear mongering and hatred of foreingners.


I didn't know, but if the article gets the point across I don't really care too much about the association.


----------



## Killionaire (Oct 13, 2009)

I prefer real people but I would be willing to try the sex robots.


----------



## Loaf (Mar 27, 2014)

Everyone is dysfunctional in some aspect, and in some respects its what makes us who we are. 

Personally the idea of having sex with a robot is freaky, and not in a good way.


----------



## Killionaire (Oct 13, 2009)

Tezcatlipoca said:


> Honestly, why does this creep people out? I would love to be an AI and shoot through the datasphere like a bullet made of light. The freedom and exhiliration of that alone would be like sex to me. Now add in an "artificial" partner that is custom designed to be a "dual gnosis" for me? Fuck yeah!


We INTJ's are really open minded and non-traditional. Whatever works is good. Humans are just organic machines. The only question is how good can they make the robots? Also if the robots are good enough, I would opt to transfer my mind into one instead of dying. I could get spare parts & upgrades and live forever.


----------



## MissMo (Jun 3, 2015)

Yes. One day, we'll all fall in love with a robot. Like Hari Seldon.


----------



## ninjahitsawall (Feb 1, 2013)

Don't know about "intimate." It's the equivalent of calling porn or a dildo an intimate relationship.


----------



## Thalassa (Jun 10, 2010)

Wow that's pretty much the pinnacle of complete narcissism. I'm glad I'll be old by then. 

But I don't think it will ever be the norm. That's like some LOL MGTOW fantasy. "Take that, women, we have blow up dolls."


----------



## Thalassa (Jun 10, 2010)

Tezcatlipoca said:


> Honestly, why does this creep people out? I would love to be an AI and shoot through the datasphere like a bullet made of light. The freedom and exhiliration of that alone would be like sex to me. Now add in an "artificial" partner that is custom designed to be a "dual gnosis" for me? Fuck yeah!


Because fortunately most people aren't completely self absorbed narcissists. The appeal is largely obviously to the sort of person who wants to control everything, and thinks it's perfectly fine if they "make" (program) someone to love them.


----------



## Thalassa (Jun 10, 2010)

Killionaire said:


> We INTJ's are really open minded and non-traditional. Whatever works is good. Humans are just organic machines. The only question is how good can they make the robots? Also if the robots are good enough, I would opt to transfer my mind into one instead of dying. I could get spare parts & upgrades and live forever.



Except that you would probably go insane between 150-200.


----------



## Thalassa (Jun 10, 2010)

The Hungry One said:


> If you have abusive tendencies, I think it's preferable to take them out on a robot.
> 
> If you want to be loved unconditionally, the fact is the vast majority of humans are unable to give this to you, so why not program a robot to do that? Understandably, you would have to buy into the delusion that the robot actually cares in order to get any satisfaction from it, but once you have bought into the delusion, the happiness that you feel is genuine, so is the delusion so harmful?
> 
> So long as we get what we want, I don't see why it has to be naturally occurring, as opposed to manufactured.


Because the free will of other living things matters.


----------



## Thalassa (Jun 10, 2010)

stargazing grasshopper said:


> The entertainment industry appears to have government backing, which really implies they're planting the seeds for big business.
> I can't wait to hear the laid back pope's opinion on this one "bible doesn't prohibit sex with androids, so who am I to judge?" LOLOL
> 
> No thanks, big business can shove their androids up their collective government lubed ass


The way he speaks reveals his lack of mental health. It's weird and sing songy, yet monotonous, all at the same time. Also those photographs of women are pretty reminiscent of the Black Hole Sun video by Soundgarden in the 90s.


----------



## Thalassa (Jun 10, 2010)

stargazing grasshopper said:


> Nobody is twisting your arm to watch the video, skip the video if you don't like the guy that created it or his message.
> I watched approximately a minute of the video, it just isn't my thing but I thought it might give a few of you chowderheads something to whine about.


I listened to it for a while. I wasn't offended by it, I think he sounds crazy, not just in what he says but the way he talks, his actual voice tone lacks normal emotional inflection, monotonous like he's reading a book too fast, yet he constantly lilts at the end of a statement in a manner that suggests a mania or fervor. His defining emotions sound like a weird mix of self conscious anxiety and self congratulatory pride in himself ...which are the basic underlying emotional states of the narcissistic persona. At any rate, he isn't well. And the video is relevant to the thread, as he begins to talk about progress towards robot stepford AI "women".


----------



## Kyusaku (Mar 18, 2014)

Technology has always been about making life more comfortable and easier. I imagine you will be able to decide all the facial features of the robot, and tailor their personality. No matter what people say on this thread, so many people are desperate when it comes to dating that this kind of product would sell like hot cupcakes. And before pointing out how unhealthy this kind of technology is, you should take a better look at sitcoms, TV shows and films, because they pretty much already try to cover that market. Creating fake people and fake relationships in order to give the viewer a false sense of social satisfaction. I know people that have zero social life outside of work, yet they don't feel like anything is wrong or missing. They just have to switch on their TV and feel like they have an exhilarating life.


----------



## Ziwosa (Sep 25, 2010)

Thalassa said:


> Because fortunately most people aren't completely self absorbed narcissists. The appeal is largely obviously to the sort of person who wants to control everything, and thinks it's perfectly fine if they "make" (program) someone to love them.


What are you talking about, surely you can stretch your mind a little further to see more reasons other than those you mentioned to make sex robots?


----------



## Ziwosa (Sep 25, 2010)

InSolitude said:


> It reminds me of the time when I wished to just not have to work at all and just spend all my time in leisure or following my bliss. I actually did this for three years. And it bored the hell out of me and began one the biggest depressive episodes of my life. What we think we want is not always what's good for us.


I don't think anyone wants to have to work. People want to have the choice to work. Instead of a forced struggled to support the self. When a human no longer needs to do anything to support themselves, that's when they really start thinking and get creative, perhaps even grow. So many people lose themselves into the struggle that trying to stay alive in society is. They end up chasing the wrong things. Not enough thinking and considering is happening.




InSolitude said:


> My problem with it is that it's an untested state and one that we may not as individuals actually be ready for and the outcome of that is unknown. One outcome I can rather easily see is humans getting so used to interacting with a programmed response that they lose the ability to deal with the real one coming from another person. I see a lot of disconnect occuring actually.


This is always going to be the case with new technology. It's untested. That's what you have the early adopters for. Those who devour all new experiences, often created by technology. You can count me into that group.

People seeing a lot disconnect occurring is nothing new either. They said the same thing of news papers ...










So people please, can we all grow up and start embracing technology instead of fearing and shunning it?


----------



## EndsOfTheEarth (Mar 14, 2015)

DualGnosis said:


> Can't it be said that in this situation, that simulated emotions in a machine be a tool to rehabilitate or train a person with dysfunctional human social skills?
> 
> There's a way to solve this in that a robot could theoretically mimic a human being "completely" in the sense that they feel repulsion and pain when they are abused, which could send a report to companies/government agencies in charge of said robot. Of course I'm diving into the realm of science fiction here but in a way does that not solve your concern?


Ah! But would anyone pay money for a robot that could ultimately reject them, the same as a human would? I doubt it, then there would be no difference and no point. The exchange of money for ownership would carry with it the expectation that rejection was not going to happen. A bit like how people pay prostitutes not the reject them...yes? 



> But in the end people do have the right to live how they want to live.


No-ones forcing them to grow. But it's one thing to make your choices and live the consequences of them. It's another to make your choices then purchase an enabler so you never need be bothered by the consequences. That's the distinction I'm making here. Should we start cloning internal organs in glass jars so when we abuse our own we can easily replace them? Would that make alcoholism and smoking suddenly okay because we can get a new liver or new set of lungs?

It's human nature to see only the good side of new invention. The downside usually comes as a painful aftershock that no-one bothered to pay attention to. The upside of the industrial revolution was higher productivity, more uniformity in production and cheaper goods than ever before. The downside of that is being realised globally now. Unemployment.


----------



## EndsOfTheEarth (Mar 14, 2015)

Ziwosa said:


> So people please, can we all grow up and start embracing technology instead of fearing and shunning it?


To have a realistic and balanced view of what a technology might mean isn't immaturity and fearing and shunning. It's considering all sides, rather than looking at it only with rose coloured glasses.


----------



## Ziwosa (Sep 25, 2010)

InSolitude said:


> To have a realistic and balanced view of what a technology might mean isn't immaturity and fearing and shunning. It's considering all sides, rather than looking at it only with rose coloured glasses.


But saying it's a problem because it's untested isn't realistic and balanced at all.


----------



## EndsOfTheEarth (Mar 14, 2015)

Ziwosa said:


> But saying it's a problem because it's untested isn't realistic and balanced at all.


Well it's a good thing I didn't say then isn't it?

I said here's a problem I see with it and here are the reasons why I think it will be a problem. There are plenty of people advocating it, I saw no point in jumping on that bandwagon. It doesn't need my help.


----------

