[block id=”blogads”]
(30 People Likes) Why is importing or possessing a child sex doll a crime, for example in the UK and many states in the US?
’m going to establish some facts and personal background before actually answering it.
I am a victim of childhood abuse, both by confirmed pedophiles and abusers who abuse children. I’ve written about this extensively and some of the writing is in my profile. I am not a pedophile or anyone who has or would ever sexually abuse children.
Pedophilia, or a sexual attraction to prepubescent children, is something that some people are, although estimates of exact percentages vary. It isn’t something someone chooses to be, it can’t be conditioned into them or out of them. It’s very likely, given what we know, that some people are simply born pedophiles and there is nothing to be done about that.
Most sexual abuse of children is not perpetrated by pedophiles, but garden variety abusers who target children because children are easy victims.
Now that we have that out of the way, let’s look at the goals here.
The problem with our society presently when it comes to pedophiles is that we simply demonize anyone who is a pedophile. They make a great punching bag because anyone who is attracted to children is obviously a bad person, right? The fact that they can’t help their attraction is completely ignored and we lump people who are pedophiles but don’t actually act on it in any way (including in viewing child pornography) in with those that do. Because of that stigma around pedophiles, there isn’t a lot of solid research on it and what research there is heavily depends on offending pedophiles as subjects. Pedophiles who don’t offend rarely take part in studies because of the stigma around being a pedophile, so we have a limited sample size.
As a society when it comes to dealing with pedophiles, the goal is and should be simply the reduction of harm to children. In other words, the goal should be whatever it takes so that less children are abused. If you look at it from that perspective, the answer when it comes to sex dolls that look like prepubescent children, is that if in the end it reduces harm to actual children, we should allow them.
As for whether or not they actually reduce harm to children, we simply don’t have enough data to say one way or the other. Evidence seems to suggest that it does make a pedophile less likely to offend if they have access to some kind of way to relieve themselves sexually like with a doll. There isn’t any evidence to suggest any kind of escalation of activity like using a doll would make someone more likely to abuse children. Similar to how massive amounts of evidence shows that people who play violent video games are actually less likely to be violent in real life and as porn use goes up people are less likely to commit sexual assault, we can extrapolate that people are less likely to act on their urges with a real child if they have some kind of ethical outlet.
The main way the pedophiles who do offend actually end up offending is by viewing and collecting child pornography. This hurts children and is wrong as well because you need to abuse real children to produce it. So having an outlet that doesn’t abuse children would make all of those pedophiles that fall into the trap of child pornography less likely to actually do that. This leads us to the logical conclusion as well, where if we could create child pornography without hurting children, would that be allowed as well? As animation gets better, this might someday be possible. These are thorny ethical issues that must be addressed.
The thing is, personally it bothers me and disgusts me. The idea of someone using a sex doll that looks like a child and watching animated porn of people having sex with children Is repulsive (and personally triggering to me). However, we have to remember that we have a goal in mind here and that goal is: fewer children molested and harmed. So if something that bothers and disgusts us but doesn’t hurt any children will make it so that less actual children are harmed, I’m all for it.
So in terms of whether or not they should be illegal I am leaning towards no. They should be allowed and we should do more scientific studies to make sure they actually do what we hope they do: make pedophiles less likely to offend. I would probably be in favor of them being prescribed by a psychiatrist or something like that, who would monitor the person using them and make sure they weren’t going to hurt a real child. However, this is outside of my wheelhouse.
Do they encourage and normalize a cultural climate that condones child molestation and pedophila? Why or why not?
It would in no way create something that condones child molestation. There is no slippery slope here. This has been brought up in countless other industries. Do movies and games that show violence condone real violence? All evidence points to no. In fact, healthy humans are able to separate fantasy from reality and that’s why we are able to enjoy fantastical things that we would never condone in reality. There is strong evidence to suggest that having these fantasies prevents people from doing immoral things in real life. This is why rape fantasies are okay, but real rape isn’t. It goes on and on.
As far as normalizing and condoning pedophilia, we need to normalize it in that we need to recognize that pedophilia or people who are pedophiles are normal and that they exist. We need to normalize their sexuality and help them not act on it. This is very important. Normalizing sexual abuse of children is not something we should ever do (and again, no evidence to suggest that child sex dolls do that). Normalizing pedophiles acknowledging their attractions and getting help to prevent them from hurting children is something we need to do.
Summary: As someone who has been sexually abused as a child, I am willing to support anything that prevents another child from being sexually abused. If that means sanctioning and providing child s
(56 People Likes) What is the real origin story of Annabelle doll? How did it get attached to the evil spirit opposed to Annabelle Creation 2017(spin offs of The Conjuring films)?
t saw it. There Love Doll was no way in hell anybody could look at that thing and not wonder what the maker of that doll was thinking.
And the fact that people wanted to own it? What was the matter with them? If you believed in possessed dolls and things like that, that doll was practically screaming, “I AM EVIL INCARNATE AND WOE TO ALL WHO POSSESS ME! I WILL STARE AT YOU IN YOUR SLEEP! I WILL SMILE CREEPILY FROM MY CORNER! I WILL MOVE FROM PLACE TO PLACE AND LEAVE AN AURA OF EVIL BEHIND ME! EMBRACE ME AND YOU EMBRACE DARKNESS! BOOGA BOOGA BOOGA!”
The “real” Annabelle was a Raggedy Ann doll. That’s a doll that could fool people into thinking it was just a cuddly cloth doll. That would be terrifying.
As a work of fiction, the idea of Annabelle is cool. Bu
(93 People Likes) Can sex dolls be used as partners?
be mindless automated piston driven screw machines. Even if they use plastic molded and modified to look and feel real like females, they are not real even if these dolls could be made to function in a sexual manner there is no life in them. No emotion, no feedback, machine recorded moaning and groaning. I can’t knock you for that, if that’s your choice en
(100 People Likes) What is the story of Annabelle?
ite that explains the true story behind t xandra sex doll e doll right here:
Annabelle the Demonic Doll: The True Story Behind the Hollywood Legend
And if you want to watch a video on it:
And here is a little something Best Sex Dolls about The Warrens’, who are Paranormal Investigators and
(19 People Likes) At what point (of AI development) does a sex robot cease to become a toy and begin to be considered a partner?
/br>
Today I want to present a moral question, but some of this post may be perceived as crass. I assure you, however, that it contributes to the moral quandary, and is not merely intended to shock or disgust.
If however you are looking for a straight-forward answer to this question, scroll down to the las xandra sex doll section.
Sextoy
What do you think of a sextoy laying around the house, in public view? It’s probably not ideal, but it’s not wholly inappropriate—particularly when “in public view” only denotes potential accessibility/viewability as realistically there is no one coming over. If you are a recluse, you might as well have all the walls of the living room adorned with the most shocking or aesthetically pleasing sextoys in the world.
What if it’s a single sextoy, in proximity to children? There are no labels warning not to keep sextoys around children. If any threat is to be perceived at all, it is merely a moral threat, as the sextoy poses no real danger to the child. If the child is young enough, it wouldn’t even know what they are looking at, and they may not even notice the sextoy in plain sight.
What if the child is older—old enough to understand what a sextoy is for? Here we begin to enter inappropriate theory.
And what if the toy is of a larger size? Does that have any bearing on how inappropriate it is?
And what if the sextoy is dad’s? Gender shouldn’t have any bearing on the appropriateness—or lack thereof—of the situation, but somehow it does. Mom’s sextoys are taken to be part of womanhood, while dad’s sextoys are taken to mean a myriad of less favorable things—in part depending on what kind of sextoy we are speaking of. But let’s not delve into a discussion about sex differences and gender identity.
The underlying question here is, should a sextoy be confined to the bedroom? Or let’s imbue some judgment for effect, and rephrase it like, “A sextoy should be confined to the bedroom, don’t you think?” We will get back to that later.
Human-like sextoy
We now live in a time where sextoys are produced that take on the form of humans—so-called ‘Real Dolls’.
First I wonder, is there a difference in inappropriateness in finding dad’s Real Doll compared to mom’s dildo? Or what about dad’s Real Doll compared to dad’s buttplug? Is it of any consideration what the sextoy is for, and/or what is done with/to it when it comes to evaluating the level of inappropriateness? Or is the size of the sextoy of consideration? Or the money spent on it? Or the time spent with it? I think all of these questions have a bearing on how inappropriate such a sextoy in public view and proximity to children is. But hold on to these questions for now.
Dad’s human-like sextoy
Finding dad’s Real Doll in the living room will certainly bring up questions the first time around. Whether dad had sex with it last night will likely influence how inappropriate its presence in the living room is, too. Is the presence of an unused Real Doll more inappropriate than the presence of an unused Fleshlight? What about used ones? Hold on to these thoughts.
Sextoy with AI
Now not only are we producing life-like sextoys in the form of Real Dolls, but they are becoming equipped with AI to increase how human-like they are. This will likely lead to even more moral considerations. In fact this is where things become interesting.
Some of these Real Dolls with AI are now presented as more than merely a sextoy. And indeed, to the owners they often were more than just a sextoy—even without AI. They are often perceived as romantic partners of sorts. See for example the movie Lars and the Real Girl
. This is often perceived as pathetic, but I think there is beauty in it too; flesh or synthetics, why is one partner necessarily less, or more indicative of the failings of her/his partner/owner? I’m hesitant to say owner because there is ambiguity in whether the Real Doll ought to be perceived as a puppet or a partner, though most would likely insist on the former at this point. But the introduction and technological advances of AI will cause a transition from puppet to partner—from sextoy to being.
Part of the family
Even without AI, Real Dolls were presented to be more than mere sextoys, but now that they are being equipped with AI, they are starting to become part of the household. Some Real Dolls with AI are said to have a “family setting”, and that they “do well with the kids”. As a result people have shown confusion, disgust, and concern.
Is it okay for dad’s sextoy to “cosy up with the kids”? And what if dad’s sperm from last night is still inside the doll? I know it’s vulgar, but hold on to that thought as well.
A sextoy should be confined to the bedroom, don’t you think?
Dilemma
The last paragraph amused me, because we just saw the same judgmental question return—more pressing than before—and yet we are about to enter a dilemma which may render the question nonsensical, or lacking in specificity. But it’s hard to avoid the moral dilemma we are about to face.
Before we get there though, let me repeat a few questions I asked before, and add one more. Is the size of the sextoy of consideration when it comes to evaluating (in)appropriateness? Or the money spent on it? Or the time spent with it? Or the intelligence it possesses?
Suppose technology of AI is so advanced that “Real Dolls” are effectively rendered beings in every sense of the word—if not human. And in any case, outwardly and behaviorally they would be indistinguishable from real human beings. Is this Real Doll still a sextoy, or a genuine partner? Is it inappropriate to let her “cosy up with the kids”?
Where then, in between the Real Dolls without AI or rudimentary AI and beings indistinguishable from humans, does it cease to be inappropriate to “leave it out”, or to refer to the Live Doll as “it”? At what point on this transition is a sextoy no longer a sextoy, and instead a true being? Funny to imagine though—a sextoy evolving into a being. I guess either way—whether natural or technological—sex is involved.
Partner
Is it of any consideration what you do with/to your partner when it comes to evaluating the level of inappropriateness of that partner? Is their size of consideration? Or the money you spent on/with your partner? Or the time spent with your partner? I don’t think any of these questions have a bearing on how inappropriate your partner is in public view and proximity to children.
At what point are the questions I asked you to hold on to rendered invalid?
Reverse
I wonder at what level of intelligence and functioning it would be appropriate for a Real Doll with AI to leave the bedroom—to no longer be rendered a sextoy.
The reverse of course is very crass—to consider at what level of intelligence and functioning a mother and partner (not AI) shouldn’t be leaving the bedroom.
The philosophical and moral considerations of these situation juxtaposed amuses me though.
The answer
To answer the question—well, I don’t think there is a definite answer to the question. It will be a smooth transition from sextoy to partner, and at least initially there will be disagreement on whether this AI constitutes a mere sextoy specifically designed for a person’s pleasure, or a genuine partner, who brings pleasure and happiness into someone’s life just like any natural human would.
During these advancements in AI, I would think that increasingly they will be seen as true entities, but it will probably not be a discrete moment when this happens—when Real Dolls cease to be sextoys and are wholle accepted as—or become—true Beings. Not unless there is some kind of revolution of identity which radically changes public perceptions of these notions. But just maybe a revolution of sorts will occur at the moment AIs are perceived to exhibit genuine empathy, pain, sorrow, and whatever “human” attribute we come to identify ourselves with, and/or shake our moral foundation to a degree that “machines” will be included in our moral and ethical considerations.
There likely will become a distinction—possibly also in terms of class—between natural humans and synthetic humans, but at some point of sophistication of AI we are likely going to be urged to at least acknowledge
