AI sex doll sparks ‘sexual revolution’ debate at Houston council

In today’s era of rapid technological development, the tentacles of artificial intelligence have extended to every aspect of our lives and even touched the realm of human emotions and desires. Recently, a virtual brothel called Chub AI has sparked much controversy and discussion. Unlike traditional brothels, Chub AI offers a “sex experience” with AI robots, which is undoubtedly a bold test of the boundaries of privacy and sexual freedom. This incident is not just an isolated case, but is actually part of a broader debate that includes AI sex dolls and even the entire AI intelligent erotic phenomenon.

More than 50 years ago, the so-called “sexual revolution” broke out in the United States, sparking heated debates about privacy and the scope of sexual freedom. Today, the world seems to be facing a second such debate, as liberal voices that once called for sexual freedom are now pushing for a strict ban on individuals’ right to choose different types of partners, such as sex dolls and robots.

Amidst this controversy, the Houston City Council unanimously rejected the opening of a “smart sex doll club” in the city. The club was originally planned to be the first AI sex doll club in the United States that would pay by the hour. Much like the story depicted in the American television series “Westworld,” a giant high-tech adult paradise offers visitors the satisfaction of killing and lust. As the sexy robot waiters gain consciousness and autonomous thought, they begin to doubt the nature of the world, then wake up and rebel against humanity.

The rapid development of the sexy and intelligent doll industry is causing heated debate around the world. For companies like “Kinky S Dolls”, this is equivalent to “testing” potential users of anthropomorphic sex dolls, each of which sells for up to $3,000. These sexy dolls (anthropomorphic but not mechanical) have become widely used in the private sector and are increasingly appearing in entertainment clubs. For example, one club in Canada offers services such as “six sexy, elegant, sophisticated and individual dolls; specially created for discerning gentlemen”. The price starts at $80 US for half an hour.

Interactions between humans and inanimate objects have been a part of literary creation since ancient times. As early as Ovid’s Metamorphoses, the story of Pygmalion tells of how a lonely sculptor fell in love with the perfect woman he carved from ivory and eventually begged Venus, the goddess of love, to bring the statue to life. The story embodies the human desire to create the ideal partner, while also foreshadowing the controversy surrounding intelligent sex dolls. While there are both female and male sex dolls on the market, the consumer base remains overwhelmingly male, and opposition is focused almost entirely on sex dolls. Feminists believe that sex dolls allow men to objectify women and act out their fantasies of domination.

In the British newspaper “The Guardian”, journalist Jenny Kleinman condemned AI sex dolls that can hold conversations and even joke, as “dream lovers” for men “only for men”. Katherine Richardson, a robot ethicist at De Montfort University, wrote an article calling for a ban on all humanoid dolls. Richardson believes that “the development of intelligent sex dolls will further entrench power relations that do not recognize both parties as human subjects”. As a supporter of the anti-sex doll movement, Richardson warns that “technology is not neutral. It is shaped by class, race and gender. ” Determined. Political power affects technological development. “

What’s different about this debate is that the concern isn’t about how the products harm humans, but how humans can simulate harm through the products. From a legal perspective, these intelligent sex dolls are nothing more than a machine with a catchy name. Even the words “brothel” and “club” can be challenged. In Paris, a sex doll club has opened its doors and has been granted permission to be called a “gaming center.” This analogy is based on the fact that in the eyes of customers, AI sex dolls are nothing more than machines designed for entertainment.

This debate about the “new sexual revolution” is really an extension of the previous debate about whether erotic services are reasonable. Some advocates have long argued that pornography is objectifying and promotes violence against women. When it comes to red light districts, many liberals believe that two consenting adults should be allowed to enter into a sexual contract. However, there is a clear disconnect in our current system of social ethics, where you can get paid to have sex with multiple partners on camera in movies, but it is not acceptable in real life.

In these cases, the sex doll removes the alleged victim. When a person has an intimate relationship with what is essentially an advanced device, no one is directly harmed. However, the problem becomes more difficult when sex dolls are designed to look like minors. Such products are banned in many countries, including the United States. Many people have been arrested for possessing or importing underage sex dolls, and their products have been confiscated. Among them, 123 such dolls were seized in the United Kingdom.

In the United States, the CREEPER Act has gained attention due to its many potential claims, and now the government is pushing for the passage of a bill called CREEPER 2.0, which would ban the importation, transportation, possession, and sale of such dolls.

The legal problems are compounded by a broader effort to ban sex dolls and robots. In 2002, in Ashcroft v. Free Speech Alliance, the U.S. Supreme Court struck down two provisions of the Child Pornography Prevention Act of 1996 that involved virtual representations or child pornography. These are purely computer-generated images, with no real children or victims. Both provisions were found to violate the First Amendment, and the court rejected the type of putative harm alleged by CREEPER.

In the absence of direct victims, we can only make purely moral or social judgments about the private tastes and relationships of adults. In Paris, feminists oppose sex doll clubs. Lorraine Questiaux of the feminist group Mouvement du Nid calls the red light district “a place where money is made by simulating the rape of women.” In Sweden, feminist groups have decided to ban intelligent sex dolls because they promote “the objectifying, sexualizing, and degrading attitudes toward women in today’s dominant eroticism.” They oppose men creating artificial women who “absolutely obey orders and cannot reject all male fantasies.”

For many liberals, the answer remains the same: The question must begin and end with personal choice. In the sci-fi retailer series Westworld, Annie the “smart sex robot” asks a reluctant customer, “Does it matter if you can’t tell whether I’m real or not and whether I’m having a good time?” Legally speaking, the answer is, “No.” Jonathan Turley is the Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law at George Washington University. He has extensive research and insights on this question.

With the continuous progress of artificial intelligence technology, the emergence of sexy and intelligent dolls and robots undoubtedly poses a challenge to the traditional values ​​and ethics of human society. This debate about the “sexual revolution” involves multiple aspects such as privacy, sexual freedom, the objectification of women, and technological ethics, and requires us to think deeply and discuss it from multiple angles. In the future, we may see more similar phenomena occur, but in any case, we must adhere to basic human ethics and morality and ensure that the development of technology does not infringe on human dignity and values.