It is a growing concern that the use of sex dolls and robots could affect human sexuality. This concern has led to a ban of child-like sex dolls in several countries and a call to ban adult-like sex dolls and robots by some scholars. However, empirical data is largely missing supporting this claim. Here, we present retrospective self-reported quantitative and qualitative data of a large sample (N = 224, 90.5% men, Mean age = 31 years, SD = 14.2) of teleiophilic (i.e., sexual orientation toward adults) and pedo-hebephilic participants. Using an online survey, we found that users reported an overall reduction in sexuality-related behaviors (e.g., porn consumption or visiting of sex workers) in response to doll ownership. Users in a relationship with a human were less affected by doll use, while those in a relationship with a doll reported greater effects. Interestingly, pedo-hebephilic users reported a greater reduction of sexual compulsivity compared to teleiophilic participants following doll use. Additionally, pedo-hebephilic participants more often reported acting out of illegal sexual fantasies with their dolls and a loss of interest in (sexual) intimacy with real children through doll use in the qualitative data. These self-reported data challenge the view that doll use is dangerously affecting human sexuality and instead suggest that dolls may be used as a sexual outlet for potentially dangerous and illegal (sexual) fantasies.
It’s becoming more and more clear within the scientific community that child-like sex dolls and Fantasy Fexual Material do not encourage or incite acts of child sexual abuse.
The review deals with the controversy surrounding the use of highly realistic dolls with a child-like appearance. It summarizes recent empirical findings and provides an overview of the different legal and ethical perspectives on this issue. Countries use different legal approaches to regulate the use or sale of child-like sex dolls. Although a causal link is assumed by some legislators between the prohibition of such dolls and the protection of children from sexual abuse, empirical studies do not support this causality. The imposition of bans will hinder empirical research on the potential use of alternative sexual outputs for people with paraphilic disorders.
I don’t mean to be condescending, but it really should be common sense to arrive at that conclusion.
Purposefully, such alternatives are meant to divert focus away from real people.
Unsurprisingly, there are also people who exist who are capable of self-governing.
However, human nature is susceptible to forming cyclical thought processes that can actually exacerbate the very things they swear against, and raise harm towards the very things they aim to protect.
The dog that bites its own ass on frequent occasion, just to rid itself of a few fleas.
A flea dip would be a much more soothing and effective alternative.
I feel like that this is one of their goals. Allowing for studies and evidence to flourish would be in conflict with their own personal morals as it makes introducing legislation much harder.
My personal opinion also believes that the tech industry, especially the surveillance industry, desires the criminalization of such media/objects. The bigger the pool of criminals, the more data. This is confirmed by the Thorn leak revealing direct payments to EU politicians to vote for chat control, so they can sell their services.
There is also no reason not to support research, but yet Germany criminalized dolls back in 2021 despite experts being against it and demanding a government funded study. They know the outcome would not be in their favor, or are uncertain enough to not risk it.
Netherlands also criminalized Dolls in 2024 with a similar development story.
Exactly. And that’s the issue - they’re more concerned about what they find offensive and disgusted than progress that could actually help people. It’s the same kind of ideological paternalism that drove Nixon and other conservatives to push for bans on pornography, in spite of their failure to find a causal link between such matters, even the most ‘depraved’ or ‘deviant’ examples, and the perpetration of sexual assaults against women and children by men.
The worst thing you can do to these people is not only provide a compelling argument as to why their viewpoint-backed agenda is wrong, but also harmful, which demonstrates how it’s actually against the better interests of the populace which drives them insane.
I’ve seen many people try to argue how virtual/simulated child pornography is harmful, only to be unable to substantiate their arguments with anything tangible or real that would justify imprisoning people over it.
The fact that reality does not conform to their moralism calls many aspects of, if not their entire worldview into question.