CEIAI Governance Database
Back to the database
Record STMT-W53BF6DAdvisory

Current Issues with Sex Robots and Three Approaches to its Regulation

섹스 로봇의 현황과 그 규제에 대한 세 가지 입장

Position paper State lawEastern Asia · KRunknown

This academic article examines the definition and current state of sex robots, reviewing three distinct regulatory approaches proposed by David Levy, Kathleen Richardson, and John Danaher. It analyzes the ethical, social, and legal implications of human-robot sexual relationships, including concerns regarding the objectification of women and the potential promotion of harmful behaviors. The author concludes by supporting a balanced regulatory approach that permits personal use while actively prohibiting sex robots designed to mimic or embody rape or child sexual exploitation. This paper explores the intersection of artificial intelligence, human sexuality, and social ethics within a pluralistic democratic society.

Summary and content fields are drawn from the document text and are pending editorial review.

Who issued it

The Korean Society for Medical EthicsAcademic
Publisher
Legal forceAdvisory
Under whose authorityState law
Judged fromfull text

Who it governs

Researchers and academicsGeneral publicRegulators

Researchers, ethicists, and policymakers interested in the social, legal, and ethical implications of artificial intelligence and sex robotics.

Sectors
Research and science · medical ethics and humanities

What the document contains

What's covered

The document addresses the historical background of sex robots, consumer expectations and use cases, and the arguments of three major scholars regarding the ethical and legal regulation of sex robots.

What's missing

Specific statutory enforcement mechanisms, technical enforcement standards, and legal definitions for commercial deployment outside of academic critique are not detailed.

Key takeaways
  • David Levy welcomes sex robots and argues they can fulfill human emotional and physical needs.
  • Kathleen Richardson campaigns against sex robots, warning they worsen the commodification and objectification of women.
  • John Danaher considers a total ban unrealistic but advocates for criminalizing and regulating robots embodying rape or child sexual exploitation fantasies.
  • The paper concludes that while personal use of sex robots should be permitted, strong regulatory measures are necessary to prohibit harmful behaviors that mimic abuse or rape.
Principles it states
Individual freedom and autonomy should be respected in a pluralistic society as long as they do not cause direct harm to others.Human dignity, autonomy, and mutual respect must be protected against technologies that undermine social norms.Actions that promote or mimic severe harms such as rape and child sexual exploitation must be restricted for public safety and order.
Outline
· I. 서론
· II. 본론
  - 1. 섹스 로봇의 역사적 배경
  - 2. 섹스 로봇의 실태
  - 3. 제기되는 문제와 이슈
· III. 결론
IssuedSeptember 2020
Length5,548 words · 14 pages
FormatNot recorded
Scopenational

How it scores

Pending review

Each score is backed by a quote verified against the document text. Editorial review has not yet confirmed them.

Transparency

0/5

Openness about how AI systems work and are used

screening score · 2026-10-23

Enforcement

4/5

Consequences and compliance mechanisms with real force

강간이나 소아착취성애와 같은 범죄행위는 타인의 안전과 건강을 해치는 분명하고 명백한 행위이므로 이를 모방하거나 함축할 수 있는 것에는 적극적 제재를 취해야 한다.

III. 결론

screening score · 2026-10-23

Impact Assessment

0/5

Required assessment of an AI system's risks/impacts before or during use

screening score · 2026-10-23

Topics

Physical AI Governancesupporting
sex_robots artificial_intelligence ethics regulation sexuality