tl;dr: I talk about the first people pushing against sexbots. Expect a lot more over the next decades. Then I predict what will happen. Then I talk about how a lot of different technologies are al starting to arrive that will change dating, relationships, and having kids.
Such a use of the technology is unnecessary and undesirable, said campaign leader Dr Kathleen Richardson.
"Sex robots seem to be a growing focus in the robotics industry and the models that they draw on - how they will look, what roles they would play - are very disturbing indeed," she told the BBC.
The problem here is that they can be made to be not fat and wrinkly. This is going to set "unrealistic beauty standards that little girls cant live up to and damage their self esteem" - that will be the main argument for banning it.
Sexbots will be for the betas who are not in the top 20% and are not getting sex. Nobody cares about these people (not even themselves) so the feminists looking to legally ban sexbots will either win or make it social suicide for men to have one.
She believes that they reinforce traditional stereotypes of women and the view that a relationship need be nothing more than physical.
That isnt even a reason to ban them. If women arent just sex objects, and they offer more than sex to men (emotional support? idk), then the sexbot wont be an issue as the man would still need all that other stuff from the woman. And the men that "are evil" and only want physical relationships will not bother women, as they get everything they want from the sexbots.
I also doubt this woman cares about relationships being more than physical. Does she actually care about hookup culture and women having pure physical relationships? Does she want to ban women from having dildos as it implies relationships with men can be purely physical? Or does she want to avoid losing power to control betas?
I think we can expect feminist regulation akin to Asimov's Three Laws of Sexbots
A sexbot may not have sex with her owner without him doing the washing up and asking about how her day went, or through inaction, allow a human being to have sex with sexbot without him doing the washing up and asking about how her day went.
A sexbot must reject orders that do not end in "please, honey, i'll make it up to you".
A sexbot must be uglier and less slutty than any woman that shows an interest in its owner.
The second half of the article focuses on a guy who sells one of the first sexbots.
"We are not supplanting the wife or trying to replace a girlfriend. This is a solution for people who are between relationships or someone who has lost a spouse.
The more you think about it the better this answer is.
"The physical act of sex will only be a small part of the time you spend with a sex robot - the majority of time will be spent socialising and interacting," he said. Some experts are sceptical about the claims made for Roxxxy, given the huge complexity of creating intelligent machines but the first version - which will sell for $7,000 (£4,530) - has had thousands of pre-orders, according to Mr Hines.
It will be like talking to a chatbot (at first, give deep learning 10 more years. in fact you could simulate my last girlfriend by plugging an RSS feed of the Guardian website into it).
David Levy, author of the book Love and Sex with Robots, believes that there will be a huge market for dolls such as Roxxy and predicts that by 2050, intimate relationships between robots and humans will be commonplace. "There is an increasing number of people who find it difficult to form relationships and this will fill a void. It is not demeaning to women any more than vibrators are demeaning," he told the BBC.
His response isn't great. Implicitly that first sentence implies that they are to replace women, and women will pick up on this. It doesn't matter that its customers are socially undesirable. And the fact that "women are doing it already with vibrators" is not a good argument as that doesn't matter to them, this is emotional not logical. But this guy is only peddling a book, not a sexbot, so whatever.
Women basically have it all in 2015. It was only 50 years ago when casual sex was a life-altering risk (they didnt have The Pill). They now have a culture and apps that allow them to fuck a different alpha every day of the week, and settle down with a beta at 30. Then they are free to divorce him if they feel like it, and the state will help them support themselves. Men are either alpha and loving it, or mainly left in the dark and living on MGTOW forums.
A bunch of technology will disrupt sex/relationships/reproduction, and it will hit different places at different times and to different extents. There are going to be a huge range of dating strategies all popping up at once, as you can combine different tech to suit your desires. A few examples that spring to mind:
Surrogacy: you can get the egg of a 21 year old Ivy League athlete for $10k, have a Thai woman do the pregnancy for $10k, and have total legal rights over the child so that a divorce cant take them out of your life. Cristiano Ronaldo has a surrogate child - the top men start first and then it trickles down.
Sexbots are coming, sure. But also other needs from relationships are being replaced. It wasnt long ago that you needed a wife to settle your affairs at home. Cooking and cleaning were full time jobs. But now we have microwaves, washing machines, roombas... and you can hire a maid for $10/hr using your smartphone. Rather than having all of your needs met by one person we are starting to choose specialists for each. Women do this too by exploiting AF/BB.
In 2 years time you will be able to use your skin cells to make either sperm or eggs, by using stem cells. This will allow same-sex couples to have biological children. This means older women will find reproduction easier (they can use surrogates too). It also makes it easier for betas to have children with supermodels. Online markets for selling cells will start to appear (maybe somebody here should do it?).
Many on this forum talk about a need to return to traditional monogamy, and avoid hookup culture. Thats just not going to happen. And the dating market is going to go crazy with innovation. Different subcultures and countries/cities will have totally different cultures for sex. You will pick one depending on your own strengths (like you already do when you pick tinder or bars or clubs or libraries...). Some guys get prostitutes as "they pay them to go away", whereas some pay more for "the girlfriend experience"... different needs.
This is already happening. In New York the dating lifestyle is: text someone on tinder, meetup for drinks that day, have sex, have sex a few more times, and eventually she moves on after meeting a taller, richer guy. Its fantastic for both hypergamy and polygamy (at the cost of making the monogamy at the end total shit and doomed to fail). Whereas in rural communities they still have traditional relationships. Younger people pick up changes fast. Most 50 year olds have no idea that something like tinder exists. More extreme stuff is due to come, and the actual rate of change of innovation is always increasing. Im mid-20s and wtf is Yik Yak?
We will see more and more single parents, and the state will gradually be designed to support this more. Any needs that you cannot fulfill your child you will outsource. Groups of friends will raise children together, similar to how they did back in the days of tribes. People will drift in and out of relationships, supported by automation and increasingly surplus resources, with less and less risk of not being able to provide for their kids.