I wrote an article for Slate this week about Roxxxy, the high-tech sex doll that was announced at this year’s Adult Entertainment Expo. For the piece, I interviewed author (and pal) Violet Blue, who had some really interesting opinions about Roxxxy. I wasn’t able to include all of her quotes in the post, so I wanted to print the full text of our email interview here for your reading enjoyment:

Is Roxxxy the kind of thing that will stay very niche, or are we looking at the future of sex toys?

Roxxxy is expensive and the bar to entry (ahem) is too high for most consumers insofar as access, acceptance and maintenance, not to mention it’s made as a boutique item from a single inventor. For any sex toy to go from niche, obscurity and cult status, it must be affordable, widely distributed, mass produced, have name brand recognition, be easy to use, and achieve mainstream acceptance; the Rabbit Habit vibrator (popularized on Sex and the City) is a perfect example of this. Roxxxy in its current form will most certainly remain niche, especially as other ‘sex robot’ manufacturers worldwide have already surpassed Roxxxy on many levels. And we shouldn’t forget that RealDoll has already cornered the lifelike sex doll market while Roxxxy is little more than a cross between RealDoll and a Tickle Me Elmo.

Why are people so obsessed with the idea of sex robots?

People have fantasized about sex with robots since at least 1886, thanks to science fiction, when the first female android mate was made popular in French author Auguste Villers novel “The Future Eve” (“L’Eve Future”). In it, a fictional Thomas Edison creates a human female android for a despondent male friend who hates his real-life fiancée so much he wants to kill himself. Edison kindly offers to make him a robot replica of the fiancée, but without all that bothersome personality. Sex with robots is the ultimate manifestation for our fantasy of having sex with things that have no feeling, free of consequences.There are many advantages to sex with a human, and many things you will not get — yet — from a machine, like skin touch, smell, eye contact, tenderness, etc. Those things that humans alone can provide (so far) are only part of the sexual experience, but they are so fraught with intensity that they can often dominate the experience. Since we are socialized to not be blatant about physical pleasure, even if we’re blatant about sexuality, engaging in that kind of physical expression, and focusing on the purely penetrative and rhythmic, is liberating for many, including women.

I think it’s important that we reconsider calling an item with no robotics and no movement (or actuators) a robot. There are no robotics in Roxxxy, save for sensors that only transmit feedback for audio responses.

Would a male version of a doll like this ever work for women?

Yes, absolutely. Probably even more successfully than for men, provided she’s handy with tools and has rudimentary programming skills when her Robert PattinsonXXX Love Doll has a system crash. What’s fascinating is how openly and unquestionably women have embraced sex with machines: whether vibrators, or large-scale sex machines such as those seen as infamous machine sex websites where it’s only women, machines and authentic orgasms. According to “The Technology Of Orgasm” by Rachel Maines, women have been having orgasms with machines since at least 1860, and the first at-home self-stimulation device was widely marketed to women in 1918 so it’s proof positive that on our own, women have no inhibitions about having sex with machines. We’ve been doing it much longer than men. It’s true that a machine enables huge variations in how one conjures an orgasm, as in speed, stroke, size, vibration, steadiness, how long it all lasts — things that wouldn’t be possible with a human.

Should real women be worried about being replaced in the bedroom?

Not at all. In the same way that men joke — sort of — while buying vibrators for their girlfriends and wives that they’re worried it might replace them, it’s an ungrounded anxiety that simply isn’t true. By 2010 we’ll see toys that realistically mimic certain human elements of the sexual experience. But people will always have to suspend an element of disbelief to complete the fantasy; you can’t fool all of the senses, and sex with another person is a sense-reliant experience. For some people, and only some (not most), they are more than happy with having a fantasy lover than a real life companion or mate, but because their orientation does not suit them for intimate human relationships. These people will be happy to have a sex robot to manifest their fantasy instead of a human being, but again, these aren’t the people you’ll see at singles’ bars or dating meetups in the first place.

Despite the creator’s claims, there have been lots of sex robots out there. What makes this one different? Better? Creepier?

Yes, worldwide there have been many sex robots, and his efforts have been exceeded by many companies and manufacturers (First Android, Zoltan and Alice + Kiri, Le Trung’s Project Aiko, Kokoro/Actroid). What makes this one different is that a) unlike First Androids the body does not move, and b) also unlike First Androids, it has programmable personality programs. Roxxxy is not a robot. I’m not sure how advanced the AI is, if indeed it is a genuine ELIZA-style (AIML) AI (artificial intelligence computer entity, a program that is a natural language chatterbot). Or if it’s just a canned response ‘bot, that reacts to certain stimulus with preset phrases. We don’t know what he’s running, so we don’t know if the programming is as advanced as a ‘virtual girlfriend’ like KariGirl or A.L.I.C.E. So in many ways, it’s one step forward and many steps right in place. It’s definitely creepier, as it’s so clearly based on the face and body of one particular girl. It’s no better than a RealDoll (a high quality item), not by far, but it is a different experience. Roxxxy certainly has more hype than any other sex “robot” innovation standing — or not.

Further reading on Asylum

No related posts.