Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Soziale Roboter im sexuellen Bereich

Forschungsstand, neomaterialistische Perspektiven und queeres Potenzial

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Soziale Roboter

  • 9857 Accesses

Zusammenfassung

Der Beitrag diskutiert den Einsatz von sozialen Robotern im sexuellen Bereich. Er zeichnet die aktuelle Debatte um Sexroboter nach und lotet das durch neue Formen der Mensch-Maschine-Interaktion eröffnete Potenzial einer posthumanistischen Sozialität aus. Dabei wird zunächst definiert, was überhaupt unter einem Sexroboter zu verstehen ist und welche Design- und Konfigurationsoptionen aktuell angeboten werden. Im nächsten Schritt wird der Forschungsstand zum Thema knapp skizziert. Schließlich wird aus genderqueerer und feministischer STS-Perspektive diskutiert, inwiefern Sexroboter uns nicht nur in die Lage versetzen, neue, nie da gewesene Arten von Sexualität und sexueller Befriedigung zu erreichen, sondern auch die Möglichkeit bergen, das anthropozentrische Denken der Moderne zu überwinden.

Made to fall in love.

(realdollx.ai)

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 69.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 89.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Die 12 Persönlichkeitsmerkmale sind: unsicher, eifersüchtig, launisch, unberechenbar, liebevoll, sinnlich, gesprächig, intellektuell, hilfsbereit, lustig, fröhlich, spirituell (https://realdollx.ai).

  2. 2.

    Genderskripte geben vor, welche geschlechterstereotype Rollenzuschreibungen in ein Produkt eingearbeitet werden. Die I-Methodology bezeichnet eine Praxis, bei der die Entwickler*innen sich selbst als prototypische Nutzer*innen definieren und das Produkt entsprechend ihrer eigenen Vorstellungen, Vorlieben, Bedürfnisse und Limitierungen erschaffen. Durch die Kombination der beiden Methoden werden große Teile der möglichen Nutzer*innen diskriminiert, marginalisiert oder gänzlich von einer Nutzung ausgeschlossen.

Literatur

  • Akrich M (1992) The de-scription of technical objects. In: Bijker WE, Law J (Hrsg) Shaping technology/building society. Studies in sociotechnical change. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, S 205–224

    Google Scholar 

  • Balistreri M (2018) Sex robot. L’amore al tempo delle macchine. Fandango Libri, Rom

    Google Scholar 

  • Barad K (1996) Meeting the universe halfway. Realism and social constructivism without contradiction. In: Hankinson L, Nelson J (Hrsg) Feminism, science, and the philosophy of science. Kluwer Press, Dordrecht, S 161–194

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Barad K (2003) Posthumanist performativity. Toward an understanding of how matter comes to matter. Signs 28:801–831

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barber T (2017) For the love of artifice 2. An extension of the paper „for the love of artifice: why we need robot sex dolls why there is a growing sub culture of real people trying to become them“. In: Cheok AD, Devlin K, Levy D (Hrsg) Love and sex with robots: second international conference. LSR 2016. Springer, New York, S 64–71

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Bath C (2014a) Searching for methodology. Feminist technology design in computer science. In: Ernst W, Horwath I (Hrsg) Gender in science and technology. Interdisciplinary approaches. Transcript, Bielefeld, S 57–78

    Google Scholar 

  • Bath C (2014b) Diffractive Design. In: Marsden N, Kempf E (Hrsg) GENDER-UseIT. HCI, Usability und UX unter Gendergesichtspunkten. de Gruyter, Berlin, S 27–36

    Google Scholar 

  • Bendel O (2015) Surgical, therapeutic, nursing and sex robots in machine and information ethics. In: van Rysewyk SP, Pontier M (Hrsg) Machine medical ethics. Springer, New York, S 17–32

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Bendel O (2018) Sexroboter aus Sicht der Maschinenethik. In: Bendel O (Hrsg) Handbuch Maschinenethik. Springer VS, Wiesbaden, S 1–19

    Google Scholar 

  • Bendel O (Hrsg) (2020) Maschinenliebe. Liebespuppen und Sexroboter aus technischer, psychologischer und philosophischer Perspektive. Springer Gabler, Wiesbaden

    Google Scholar 

  • Bendel O (2020a) Love dolls and sex robots in unproven and unexplored fields of application. Paladyn J Behav Robot 12:1–12. https://www.degruyter.com/view/journals/pjbr/12/1/article-p1.xml. Zugegriffen am 14.03.2021

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bendel O (2020b) Eine Annäherung an Liebespuppen und Sexroboter. Grundbegriffe und Abgrenzungen. In: Bendel O (Hrsg) Maschinenliebe. Liebespuppen und Sexroboter aus technischer, psychologischer und philosophischer Sicht. Springer Gabler, Wiesbaden, S 3–19

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Bendel O (2020c) Sexroboter light. Pflegeroboter mit sexuellen Assistenzfunktionen. In: Bendel O (Hrsg) Maschinenliebe: Liebespuppen und Sexroboter aus technischer, psychologischer und philosophischer Sicht. Springer Gabler, Wiesbaden, S 219–236

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Bendel O (2020d) Liebespuppen und Sexroboter in der Moral. Die Perspektive der Maschinenethik und der Bereichsethiken. In: Bendel O (Hrsg) Maschinenliebe: Liebespuppen und Sexroboter aus technischer, psychologischer und philosophischer Sicht. Springer Gabler, Wiesbaden, S 125–146

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Cheok AD, Levy D (2018) Love and sex with robots: third international conference, LSR 2017, London, UK, December 19–20, 2017, Revised Selected Papers. Lecture Notes in Computer Science Book 10715. Springer, Cham

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Cheok AD, Devlin K, Levy D (2017) Love and sex with robots. Second international conference, LSR 2016, London, UK, December 19–20, 2016, Revised selected papers. In: Adrian David C, Kate D, David L (Hrsg) Lecture notes in computer science book 10237. Springer, Basel

    Google Scholar 

  • Coeckelbergh M (2009) Personal robots, appearance, and human good a methodological reflection on roboethics. Int J Soc Robot 1(3):217–221

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cox-George C, Bewley S (2018) I, sex robot. The health implications of the sex robot industry. BMJ Sex Reprod Health 44(3):161–164

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Danaher J (2014) Robotic rape and robotic child sexual abuse. Should they be criminalised? Crim Law Philos 11(1):71–95

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Danaher J (2017a) Should we be thinking about robot sex? In: Danaher J, McArthur N (Hrsg) Robot sex. Social and ethical implications. MIT Press, Cambridge, S 3–14

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Danaher J (2017b) The symbolic-consequences argument in the sex robot debate. In: Danaher J, McArthur N (Hrsg) Robot sex. Social and ethical implications. MIT Press, Cambridge, S 103–131

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Danaher J (2019) Regulating child sex robots. Restriction or experimentation? Med Law Rev 27(4):553–575

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Danaher J, McArthur N (Hrsg) (2017) Robot sex. Social and ethical implications. MIT Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Danaher J, Earp B, Sandberg A (2017) Should we campaign against sex robots? In: Danaher J, McArthur N (Hrsg) Robot sex. Social and ethical implications. MIT Press, Cambridge, S 47–71

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Deutscher Bundestag (2018) Drucksache 19/3714. http://dipbt.bundestag.de/dip21/btd/19/037/1903714.pdf. Zugegriffen am 14.03.2021

  • Devlin K (2015) In defence of sex machines: why trying to ban sex robots is wrong. The Conversation. http://theconversation.com/in-defence-of-sex-machines-why-trying-to-ban-sex-robots-is-wrong-47641. Zugegriffen am 17.09.2015

  • Devlin K (2018) Turned on. Science, sex and robots. Bloomsbury, London

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Di Nucci E (2017) Sex robots and the rights of the disabled. In: Danaher J, McArthur N (Hrsg) Robot sex. Social and ethical implications. MIT Press, Cambridge, S 73–88

    Google Scholar 

  • Döring N, Pöschl S (2018) Sex toys, sex dolls, sex robots: our under-researched bed-fellows. Sexologies 27(3):e51–e55

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Döring N, Mohseni MR, Walter R (2020) Design, use, and effects of sex dolls and sex robots. Scoping Review. J Med Internet Res 22(7):e18551

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Edirisinghe C, Cheok AD (2017) Robots and intimacies A preliminary study of perceptions and intimacies with robots. In: Cheok AD, Devlin K, Levy D (Hrsg) Love and sex with robots. Second international conference. LSR 2016. Springer, New York, S 137–147

    Google Scholar 

  • Facchin F, Barbara G, Cigoli V (2017) Sex robots: the irreplaceable value of humanity. BMJ online 358:j3790

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Frank L, Nyholm S (2017) Robot sex and consent. Is consent to sex between a robot and a human conceivable, possible, and desirable? Artif Intell Law 25(3):305–323

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gildea F, Richardson K (2017). Sex robots. Why we should be concerned. https://campaignagainstsexrobots.org/2017/05/12/sex-robots-why-we-should-be-concerned-by-florence-gildea-and-kathleen-richardson/. Zugegriffen am 26.03.2021

  • Gomes LM, Wu R (2018) User evaluation of the neurodildo. A mind-controlled sex toy for people with disabilities and an exploration of its applications to sex robots. Robotics 7(3):46

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Graaf M de, Allouch SB (2016) Anticipating our future robot society. The evaluation of future robot applications from a user’s perspective. Conference paper, International symposium on robot and human communication, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Haraway D (1988) Situated knowledge. The science question in feminism and the privilege of partial perspective. Fem Stud 14:575–599

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hauskeller M (2014) Sex and the posthuman condition. Palgrave Macmillan, London

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Hauskeller M (2017) Automatic sweethearts for transhumanists. In: Danaher J, McArthur N (Hrsg) Robot sex. Social and ethical implications. MIT Press, Cambridge, S 203–218

    Google Scholar 

  • Hawkes R, Lacey C (2019) The future of sex. Intermedial desire between fembot fantasies and sexbot technologies. J Pop Cult 52(1):98–116

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klein WEJ, Lin VW (2018) „Sex robots“ revisited. Comput Soc 47(4):107–121

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kubes T (2019a) New materialist perspectives on sex robots. A feminist dystopia/utopia? Soc Sci 8:224. https://www.mdpi.com/2076-0760/8/8/224. Zugegriffen am 26.03.2021

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kubes T (2019b) Bypassing the uncanny valley. Postgender sex robots and robot sex beyond mimicry. In: Loh J, Coeckelbergh M (Hrsg) Techno:Phil. Aktuelle Herausforderungen der Technikphilosophie. J.B. Metzler, Stuttgart, S 59–73

    Google Scholar 

  • Kubes T (2019c) Sexroboter. Queeres Potential oder materialisierte Objektifizierung? Cyborgs revisited: Zur Verbindung von Geschlecht, Mensch und Maschinen. Feministische Stud 2019(2):351–362

    Google Scholar 

  • Kubes T (2020a) Queere Sexroboter. Eine neue Form des Begehrens? In: Bendel O (Hrsg) Maschinenliebe. Liebespuppen und Sexroboter aus technischer, psychologischer und philosophischer Sicht. Springer Gabler, Wiesbaden, S 163–183

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Kubes T (2020b) Technik jenseits von Geschlecht? Eine kritische Reflexion der Verschränkung von Geschlecht und Technik. In: Bauer MC, Deinzer L (Hrsg) Bessere Menschen? Technische und ethische Fragen in der transhumanistischen Zukunft. Springer, Berlin, S 61–75

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Latour B (1993) La clef de Berlin. Éditions La Découverte, Paris

    Google Scholar 

  • Latour B (2002) Die Hoffnung der Pandora. Suhrkamp, Frankfurt am Main

    Google Scholar 

  • Latour B (2005) Reassembling the social. An Introduction to actor-network-theory. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee J (2017) Sex robots. The future of desire. Palgrave Macmillan, London

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Levy D (2007) Love and sex with robots. The evolution of human-robot relationships. Harper Collins, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Levy D (2013) Roxxxy the „sex robot“. real or fake? Lovotics 1:1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mackenzie R (2014) Sexbots. Replacements for sex workers? Ethical constraints on the design of sentient beings for utilitarian purposes. In: Chisik Y (Hrsg) Proceedings of the 2014 workshops on advances in computer entertainment conference. ACM, New York, S 1–8

    Google Scholar 

  • Mackenzie R (2018a) Sexbots. Customizing them to suit us versus an ethical duty to created sentient beings to minimize suffering. Robotics 7(4):70

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mackenzie R (2018b) Sexbots. Sex slaves, vulnerable others or perfect partners? Int J Technoethics 9(1):1–17

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McArthur N (2017) The case for sexbots. In: Danaher J, McArthur N (Hrsg) Robot sex Social and ethical implications. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, S 31–45

    Google Scholar 

  • Migotti M, Wyatt N (2017) On the very idea of sex with robots. In: Danaher J, McArthur N (Hrsg) Robot sex. Social and ethical implications. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, S 15–27

    Google Scholar 

  • Musiał M (2019) Enchanting robots. Intimacy, magic, and technology. Palgrave Macmillan, New York

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Nida-Rümelin J, Weidenfeld N (2018) Digitaler Humanismus. Eine Ethik für das Zeitalter der Künstlichen Intelligenz. Piper, München

    Google Scholar 

  • Oudshoorn N, Pinch T (Hrsg) (2003) How users matter. The co-construction of users and technologies. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA

    Google Scholar 

  • Oudshoorn N, Rommes E, Stienstra M (2004) Configuring the user as everybody. Gender and design cultures in information and communication technologies. Science, Technology, & Human Values 29(1):30–63

    Google Scholar 

  • Petersen S (2017) Is it good for them too? Ethical concern for the sexbots. In: Danaher J, McArthur N (Hrsg) Robot sex. Social and ethical implications. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, S 155–171

    Google Scholar 

  • Richardson K (2015) The asymmetrical „relationship“. Parallels between prostitution and the development of sex robots. ACM SIGCAS. Comput Soc 45(3):290–293

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Richardson K (2016a) Sex robot matters. Slavery, the prostituted, and the rights of machines. IEEE Technol Soc Mag 35(2):46–53

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Richardson K (2016b) Technological animism. The uncanny personhood of humanoid machines. Soc Anal 60(1):110–128

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Richardson K (2016c) Are sex robots as bad as killing robots? In: Inibt J, Nørskov M, Andersen SS (Hrsg) What social robots can and should do. Proceedings of robophilosophy 2016. IOS Press, Amsterdam, S 27–31

    Google Scholar 

  • Scheutz M, Arnold TH (2016) Are we ready for sex robots? In: Bartneck C (Hrsg) Human-robot interaction. An introduction. IEEE Press, New York, S 351–358

    Google Scholar 

  • Scheutz M, Arnold TH (2017) Intimacy, bonding, and sex robots Examining empirical results and exploring ethical ramifications. In: Danaher J, McArthur N (Hrsg) Robot sex. Social and ethical implications. MIT Press, Cambridge, S 247–260

    Google Scholar 

  • Sparrow R (2017) Robots, rape, and representation. Int J Soc Robot 9(4):465–477

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Strikwerda L (2017) Legal and moral implications of child sex robots. In: Danaher J, McArthur N (Hrsg) Robot sex. Social and ethical implications. MIT Press, Cambridge, S 133–151

    Google Scholar 

  • Sullins JP (2012) Robots, love, and sex. The ethics of building a love machine. IEEE Trans Affect Comput 3(4):398–409

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Szczuka JM, Krämer NC (2017a) Influences on the intention to buy a sex robot: an empirical study on influences of personality traits and personal characteristics on the intention to buy a sex robot. In: Cheok AD, Devlin K, Levy D (Hrsg) Love and sex with robots. Second international conference. Springer, New York, S 72–83

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Szczuka JM, Krämer NC (2017b) Not only the lonely. How men explicitly and implicitly evaluate the attractiveness of sex robots in comparison to the attractiveness of women, and personal characteristics influencing this evaluation. Multimodal Technol Interact 1(1):3

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Szczuka JM, Krämer NC (2018) Jealousy 4.0? An empirical study on jealousy-related discomfort of women evoked by other women and gynoid robots. Paladyn J Behav Robot 9(1):323–336

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Szczuka JM, Krämer NC (2019) There’s more to humanity than meets the eye. Differences in gaze behavior toward women and gynoid robots. Front Psychol 10:693

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wajcman J (1991) Feminism confronts technology. Polity Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Wajcman J (2004) TechnoFeminism. Polity Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Wennerscheid S (2018) Posthuman desire in robotics and science fiction. In: Cheok AD, Levy D (Hrsg) Love and sex with robots. Third international conference. Springer, New York, S 37–50

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Wennerscheid S (2019) Sex Machina. Zur Zukunft des Begehrens. Matthes & Seitz, Berlin

    Google Scholar 

  • Wosk J (2015) My fair ladies. Female robots, androids and other artificial eves. Rutgers University Press, New Brunswick/New Jersey/London

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhou Y, Fischer MH (Hrsg) (2019) AI love you: developments on human-robot intimate relationships. Springer International Publishing, Cham

    Google Scholar 

  • Oudshoorn N, Rommes E, Stienstra M (2004) Configuring the user as everybody. Gender and design cultures in information and communication technologies. Science, Technology, & Human Values 29(1): 30–63

    Google Scholar 

  • Kubes T, Reinhardt T (2021) Techno-species in the becoming. Towards a relational ontology of multi-species assemblages (ROMA). NanoEthics

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. TU Berlin, Berlin, Deutschland

    Tanja Kubes

Authors
  1. Tanja Kubes
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Tanja Kubes .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Hochschule für Wirtschaft FHNW, Windisch, Schweiz

    Oliver Bendel

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2021 Der/die Herausgeber bzw. der/die Autor(en), exklusiv lizenziert durch Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden GmbH, ein Teil von Springer Nature

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Kubes, T. (2021). Soziale Roboter im sexuellen Bereich. In: Bendel, O. (eds) Soziale Roboter. Springer Gabler, Wiesbaden. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-31114-8_24

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-31114-8_24

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer Gabler, Wiesbaden

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-658-31113-1

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-658-31114-8

  • eBook Packages: Business and Economics (German Language)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation