Le questioni morali e le implicazioni psicologiche della riproduzione, del sesso e delle relazioni affettive nelle missioni spaziali

Maurizio Balistreri


Riassunto: I bisogni sessuali degli astronauti rappresentano un tema lungamente trascurato delle missioni spaziali. Soltanto di recente la comunità scientifica ha incominciato a interessarsi alla vita sessuale degli astronauti e a rivolgere una qualche attenzione alle questioni che riguardano il sesso nello spazio. Comunque, il sesso è una questione centrale per gli astronauti impegnati nelle missioni spaziali. Noi sosteremmo che nella prima fase di esplorazione e di colonizzazione dello spazio e di nuovi pianeti, gli astronauti dovrebbero avere la possibilità di fare sesso ma non dovrebbero avere figli. Affermeremo, inoltre, che un programma di colonizzazione di nuovi pianeti dovrebbe prendere in considerazione la possibilità di affiancare agli astronauti macchine sempre più intelligenti in grado non soltanto di assisterli nella missione, a livello operativo, ma anche di soddisfare i loro bisogni sessuali. Finora il dibattito sui sex robot ha considerato quasi esclusivamente il loro uso sul nostro pianeta. Tuttavia, i sex robot potrebbero rivelarsi una risorsa importante per le missioni spaziali che hanno l’obiettivo di avviare la costruzione di nuove stazioni spaziali o colonizzazione di nuovi territori.

Parole chiave: Bioetica; Riproduzione; Sessualità; Spazio; Robot

Moral and psychological issues of reproduction, sex, and affective relationships in space missions

Abstract: The sexual needs of astronauts have long been overlooked in space missions. Only recently has the scientific community begun to show interest in the sexual lives of astronauts and pay attention to the issues surrounding sex in space. However, sex remains a central concern for astronauts involved in space missions. We would argue that in the initial phase of space exploration and colonization of new planets, astronauts should have the opportunity for sexual activity but should not have children. Furthermore, we assert that a program for the colonization of new planets should consider the possibility of providing intelligent machines to accompany astronauts, capable not only of assisting them operationally in their mission but also of satisfying their sexual needs. So far, the debate on sex robots has primarily focused on their use on our planet. However, sex robots could prove to be a valuable resource for space missions aimed at establishing new space stations or colonizing new territories.

Keywords: Bioethics; Reproduction; Sex; Space; Robot

Parole chiave

Bioetica; Riproduzione; Sesso

Full Text


Riferimenti bibliografici

APPEL, M., KRAUSE, S., GLEICH, U., MARA, M. (2016). Meaning through fiction: Science fiction and innovative technologies. In: «Psychology of Aesthetic, Creativity, and Arts», vol. X, n. 4, pp. 472-480.

APPEL, M., MARKER, C., MARA, M. (2019). Otakuism and the appeal of sex robots. In: «Frontiers in Psychology», vol. X, Art.Nr. 569 - doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00569.

BALISTRERI, M. (2021). Sex robots. In: F. FOSSA, G. TAMBURRINI, V. SCHIAFFONATI, (a cura di), Automi e persone. Introduzione all’etica dell’Intelligenza Artificiale e della robotica, Carocci, Roma, pp. 195-212.

BALISTRERI, M. (2022). Il bambino migliore? Cosa significa essere genitori responsabili al tempo del genome editing, Fangango Roma.

BALISTRERI, M. (2022). Sex robots. Love in the age of machines, Trivent, Budapest.

BALISTRERI, M., CASILE, F. (2020). Care robots: From tools of care to training opportunities. Moral considerations. In: E. POPESCU, A.B. GIL, L. LANCIA, L.S. SICA, A. MAVROUDI (eds.), Methodologies and intelligent system for technology enhanced learning, 9th International Conference, Workshops, Springer, Cham, pp. 18-25.

BALISTRERI, M., UMBRELLO, S. (2022). Should the colonisation of space be based on reproduction? Critical considerations on the choice of having a child in space. In: «Journal of Responsible Technology», vol. XI, Art.Nr. 100040 – doi: 10.1016/j.jrt.2022.100040.

BALISTRERI, M., UMBRELLO, S. (2022). Space travel does not constitute a condition of moral exceptionality. That which obtains in space obtains also on Earth!. In: «Medicina e Morale», vol. LXXI, n. 3, pp. 311-321.

BALISTRERI, M., UMBRELLO, S. (2022). The ethics of space travelling and extraterrestrial colonization. What is moral in space is also moral on Earth. In: «Ragion Pratica», in corso di stampa.

BARNES, E. (2014). Valuing disability, causing disability. In: «Ethics», vol. CXXV, n. 1, pp. 88-113.

BARNES, E. (2016). The minority body: A theory of disability, Oxford University Press, Oxford.

BISCONTI, P. (2021). Will sexual robots modify human relationships? A psychological approach to reframe the symbolic argument. In: «Advanced Robotics», vol. XXXV, n. 9, pp. 561-571.

BLACKFORD, R. (2011). Robots and reality: A reply to Robert Sparrow. In: «Ethics and Information Technology», vol. XIV, n. 1, pp. 41-51.

BRANDON, M., PLANKE, J.A. (2021). Emotional, sexual and behavioral correlates of attitudes toward sex robots: Results of an online survey. In: «Journal of Future Robot Life», vol. II, n. 1-2, pp. 67-82.

BRANDON, M., SHLYKOVA, N., MORGENTALER, A. (2022). Curiosity and other attitudes towards sex robots: Results of an online survey. In: «Journal of Future Robot Life», vol. III, n. 1, pp. 3-16.

BUSS, D.M., LARSEN, R.J., WESTEN, D., SEMMELROTH, J. (1992). Sex differences in jealousy: Evolution, physiology, and psychology. In: «Psychological Science», vol. III, n. 4, pp. 251-256.

CAPPUCCIO, M.L., PEETERS, A., MCDONALD, W. (2019). Sympathy for Dolores: Moral consideration for robots based on virtue and recognition. In: «Philosophy and Technology», vol. XXXIII, n. 1, pp. 9-31.

CHEOK, A.D., LEVY, D., KARUNANAYAKA, K. (2016). Lovotics: Love and sex with robots. In: K. KARPOUZIS, G. YANNAKAKIS (eds.), Emotion in games, Springer, Cham, pp. 303-328.

COECKELBERGH, M. (2018). Why care about robots? Empathy, moral standing, and the language of suffering. In: «Kairos», vol. XX, n. 1, pp. 141-158.

CULLEN, D.C., HUDNALL, M.C., ALI, S., BEHRAM, S.S., EDELBROECK, E., LAYENDECKER, A., MARQUES, R.E., MUSHTAQ, S., VERMEULEN, A.C.J. (2023). Sex in space: Consideration of uncontrolled human conception in emerging space tourism, Green paper for community consultation (v1a_24-Apr-2023_DCC_published).

DAMIANI, S. (2016). Giocare con le cose morte. Reborn dolls, arte ed empatia. In: «Piano B. Arti e Culture Visive», vol. I, n. 2, pp. 30-53.

DANAHER, J. (2017). Should we be thinking about sex robots?, In: J. DANAHER, N. MCARTHUR (eds.), Robot sex: Social implications and ethical, MIT Press, Cambridge (MA), pp. 3-14.

DANAHER, J. (2018). Why we should create artificial offspring: Meaning and the collective afterlife. In: «Science and Engineering Ethics», vol. XXIV, pp. 1097-1118.

DANAHER, J. (2020). Welcoming robots into the moral circle: A defence of ethical behaviourism. In: «Science and Engineering Ethics», vol. XXVI, pp. 2023-2049.

DE VRIES, J.G., FORGER, N.G. (2015). Sex differences in the brain: A whole body perspective. In: «Biology of Sex Differences», vol. XV, n. 6, Art.Nr. 32 - doi: 10.1186/s13293-015-0032-z.

DÖRING, N., PÖSCHL, S. (2018). Sex toys, sex dolls, sex robots: Our under-researched bedfellows. In: «Sexologies», vol. XXVII, n. 3, pp. 51-55.

DUBÉ, S., ANCTIL, D. (2021). Erobots and erobotics. In: A.D. Lykins (ed.), Encyclopedia of sexuality and gender, Springer, Cham - doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-59531-3_100-1.

DUBÉ, S., ANCTIL, D. (2021). Foundations of erobotics. In: «International Journal of Social Robotics», vol. XIII, n. 6, pp. 1205-1233.

DUBÉ, S., SANTAGUIDA, M., ANCTIL, D., GIACCARI, L., LAPIERRE, J. (2023). The case for space sexology. In: «The Journal of Sex Research», vol. LX, n. 2, pp. 165-176.

DUMOUCHEL, P., DAMIANO, L. (2017). Living with robots, Harvard University Press, Harvard.

FOSCH-VILLARONGA, E., POULSEN, A. (2020). Exploring the potential use of sexual robot technologies for disabled and elder care. In: «Paladyn. Journal of Behavioral Robotics», vol. XI, pp. 1-18.

FREUD, S. (1989). Il perturbante (1919). In: S. FREUD, Opere, vol. IX, a cura di C.L. MUSATTI, Bollati Boringhieri, Torino, pp. 81-114.

GARASIC, M. (2013). Anti-love biotechnology: Was it not better to have loved and lost than never to have loved at all. In: «The American Journal of Bioethics», vol. XIII, n. 11, pp. 22-23.

GARASIC, M. (2021). The war of ethical worlds: Why an acceptance of posthumanism on Mars does not imply a follow up on Earth. In: «Medicina e Morale», vol. LXX, n. 3, pp. 317-327.

GARASIC, M. (2022). What happens on Mars, stays on Mars: A reply to Balistreri and Umbrello. In: «Medicina e Morale», vol. LXXI, n. 3, pp. 323-332.

GARLAND-THOMSON, R. (2012). The case for conserving disability. In: «Journal of Bioethical Inquiry», vol. IX, n. 3, pp. 339-355.

GLOVER, J. (2006). Choosing children: Genes, disability and design, Oxford University Press, Oxford.

GUNKEL, D.J. (2019). Robot rights, MIT Press, Cambridge (CA).

JECKER, N. (2021). Nothing to be ashamed of: Sex robots for older adults with disabilities. In: «British Journal of Medical Ethics», vol. XLVII, n. 1, pp. 26-32.

JENNINGS, R.T., BAKER, E.S. (2008). Gynecologic and reproductive concerns. In: M.R. BARRATT, S.L. POOL (eds.). Principles of clinical medicine for space flight, Springer, New York, pp. 381-390.

KNOTT, A., SAGAR, M., TAKAC, M. (2022). The ethics of interaction with neurorobotic agents: A case study with BabyX. In: «AI and Ethics», vol. II, n. 4, pp. 115-128.

KOVEROLA, M., DROSINOU, M., PALOMÄKI, J., HALONEN, J., KUNNARI, A., REPO, M., LEHTONEN, N., LAAKASUO, M. (2020). Moral psychology of sex robots: An experimental study – How pathogen disgust is associated with interhuman sex but not interandroid sex. In: «Paladyn. Journal of Behavioral Robotics», vol. XI, n. 1, pp. 233-249.

LEI, X., CAO, Y., MA, B., ZHANG, Y., NING, L., QIAN, J., ZHANG, L., QU, Y., ZHANG, T., LI, D., CHEN, Q., SHI, J., ZHANG, X., MA, C., ZHANG, Y., DUAN, E. (2020). Development of mouse preimplantation embryos in space. In: «National Science Review», vol. VII, n. 9, pp. 1437-1446.

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

LEVY, D. (2013). Roxxxy the “Sex Robot” - Real or fake?. In: «Lovotics», vol. I - doi:10.4303/lt/235685

LIBERATI, N. (2017). Teledildonics and new ways of “being in touch”: A phenomenological analysis of the use of haptic devices for intimate relations. In: «Science and Engineering Ethics», vol. XXIII, n. 3, pp. 801-823.

LIN, P., ABNEY, K. (2014). Introduction to astronaut bioethics. In: «Slate», 6 ottobre, https://slate.com/techno logy/2014/10/astronaut-bioethics-would-it-be-unethical-to-give-birth-on-mars.html

MA, B., CHAO, Y.-J., ZHENG, W.-B., LU, J.-R., KUANG., H., LEI, X.-H., LV, Y.-H., ZHANG, T., DUAN, E.-K. (2008). Real-time micrography of mouse preimplantation embryos in an orbit module on SJ-8 satellite. In: «Microgravity Science and Technology», vol. XX, pp. 127-136.

MA, J., TOJIB, D., TSARENKO, Y. (2022). Sex robots: Are we ready for them? An exploration of the psychological mechanisms underlying people’s receptiveness of sex robots. In: «Journal of Business Ethics», vol. CLXXVIII, n. 4, pp. 1-17.

MAAS M.K., VASILENKO S.A., WILLOUGHBY B.J. (2018). A dyadic approach to pornography use and relationship satisfaction among heterosexual couples: The role of pornography acceptance and anxious attachment. In: «Journal of Sex Research», vol. LV, n. 6, pp. 772-782.

MACDORMAN, K. (2015). Androids as an experimental apparatus: Why is there an uncanny valley and can we exploit it?. In: Cogsci-2005 Workshop: Toward social mechanisms of android science, Stresa, pp. 106-118.

MAGNI, S.F. (2021). In defence of person-affecting procreative beneficence. In: «Bioethics», vol. XXXV, n. 5, pp. 473-479.

MARA, M., APPEL, M. (2015). Science fiction reduces the eeriness of android robots: A field experiment. In: «Computers in Human Behavior», vol. XLVIII, pp. 156-162.

MASSA, N., BISCONTI, P., NARDI, D. (2022). The psychological implications of companion robots: A theoretical framework and an experimental setup. In: «International Journal of Social Robotics», online first: January, 28th 2022 - doi: 10.1007/s12369-021-00846-x.

MCARTHUR, N. (2017). The case for sexbots. In: J. DANAHER, N. MCARTHUR (eds.). Robot sex. Social and ethical implications, MIT Press, Cambridge (MA), pp. 31-45.

MORI, M. (1970). Bukimi no tani [the Uncanny Valley]. In: «Energy», vol. VII, n. 4, pp. 33-35.

NOMURA, T., KANDA, T., SUZUKI, T. (2006). Experimental investigation into influence of negative attitudes toward robots on human-robot interaction. In: «AI and Society», vol. XX, n. 2, pp. 138-150.

NORDMO, M., NǼSS, J.O., HUSØY, M.F. (2020). Friends, lovers or nothing: Men and women differ in their perceptions of sex robots and platonic love robots. In: «Frontiers in Psychology», vol. XI, Art.Nr. 355 - doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2020.00355.

OLEKSY, T., WNUK, A. (2021). Do women perceive sex robots as threatening? The role of political views and presenting the robot as a female- vs male-friendly product. In: «Computers in Human Behavior», vol. CXVII, Art.Nr. 106664 – doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2020.106664.

OWANO, N. (2016). Microgravity research satellite explores embryo development in space – URL: https://phys.org/news/2016-04-microgravity-satellite-explores-embryo-space.html

PARFIT, D. (1989). Ragioni e persone (1984), traduzione italiana di R. RINI, Il Saggiatore, Milano.

PEETERS, A., HASELAGER, P. (2021). Designing virtuous sex robots. In: «International Journal of Social Robotics», vol. XIII, n. 4, pp. 55-66.

REGNERUS M., GORDON D., PRICE J. (2016). Documenting pornography use in America: A comparative analysis of methodological approaches. In: «Journal of Sex Research», vol. LIII, n. 7, pp. 873-881.

RICHARD A., ROHRMANN S., VANDELEUR C.L., SCHMID M., BARTH J., EICHHOLZER M. (2017). Loneliness is adversely associated with physical and mental health and lifestyle factors: Results from a Swiss national survey. In: «PLoS ONE», vol. XII, n. 7, Art.Nr. e0181442 - doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0181442.

RICHARDSON, K. (2015). The asymmetrical “relationship”: Parallels between prostitution and the development of sex robots. In: «ACM SIGCAS Computer and Society», vol. XLV, n. 3, pp. 290-293.

RICHARDSON, K. (2016). Sex robot matters: Slavery, the prostituted, and the rights of machines. In: «IEEE Technology and Society Magazine», vol. XXXV, n. 2, pp. 46-53.

RICHARDSON, K. (2021). Realdoll – Disponibile online allo URL: https://www.realdoll.com/realdoll-x/

ROBERTS, M. (2022). The nonidentity problem. In: E.N. ZALTA, U. NODERLMAN (eds.), The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy, Winter edition - URL:https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2022/entries/nonidentity-problem/.

RODOGNO, R. (2016). Social robots, fiction, and sentimentality. In: «Ethics and Information Technology», vol. XVIII, n. 4, pp. 257-268.

RONCA, A.E., BAKER, E.S., BAVENDAM, T.G., BECK, K.D., MILLER, V.M., TASH, J.S., JENKINS, M. (2014). Effects of sex and gender on adaptations to space: Reproductive health. In: «Journal of Women’s Health», vol. XXIII, n. 11, pp. 967-74

SAVULESCU, J. (2001). Procreative beneficence: Why we should select the best children. In: «Bioethics», vol. XV, n. 5-6, pp. 413-426.

SAVULESCU, J., KAHANE, G. (2009). The moral obligation to create children with the best chance of the best life. In: «Bioethics», vol. XXIII, n. 5, pp. 274-290.

SCHENKER, E., FORKHEIM, K. (1998). Mammalian mice embryo early development in weightlessness environment on STS 80 space flight. In: «Israel Aerospace Medicine Institute», Report 5.

SCHEUTZ, M., ARNOLD, T. (2016). Are we ready for sex robots?. In: «ACM – IEEE - International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction», pp. 351-358 – doi: 10.1109/HRI.2016.7451772.

SCHUSTER, H., PECK, S.L. (2016). Mars ain’t the kind of place to raise your kid: Ethical implications of pregnancy on missions to colonize other planets. In: «Life Science, Society and Policy», vol. XII, n. 1, Art.Nr. 10 - doi: 10.1186/s40504-016-0043-5.

SKAŁACKA, K., GERYMSKI, R. (2019). Sexual activity and life satisfaction in older adults. In: «Psychogeriatrics», vol. XIX, n. 3, pp. 195-201.

SPARROW, R. (2002). The march of the robot dogs. In: «Ethics and Information Technology», vol. IV, n. 4, pp. 305-318.

SPARROW, R. (2017). Robots, rape, and representation. In: «International Journal of Social Robotics», vol. IX, n. 4, pp. 465-477.

SPARROW, R. (2020). Virtue and vice in our relationships with robots: Is there an asymmetry and how might it be explained?. In: «International Journal of Social Robotics», vol. XIII, pp. 23-29.

SPARROW, R. (2021). Sex robot fantasies. In: «Journal of Medical Ethics», vol. XLVII, n. 1, pp. 33-34.

STRIKWERDA, L. (2017). Legal and moral implications of child sex robots. In: J. DANAHER, N. MCARTHUR (eds.), Robot sex. Social and ethical implications, MIT Press, Cambridge (MA), pp. 133-151.

SULLINS, J. (2012). Robots, love, and sex: The ethics of building a love machine. In: «IEEE Transactions on Affective Computing», vol. III, n. 4, pp. 398-409.

SUZUKI, Y., GALLI, L., IKEDA, A., ITAKURA, S., KITAZAKI, M. (2015). Measuring empathy for human and robot hand pain using electroencephalography. In: «Scientific Reports», vol. V, Art.Nr. 15924 - doi: 10.1038/srep15924.

SZCZUKA, J.M., KRÄMER, N.C. (2018). Jealousy 4.0? An empirical study on jealousy-related discomfort of women evoked by other women and gynoid robots. In: «Paladyn. Journal of Behavioral Robotics», vol. IX, n. 1, pp. 323-336.

SZOCIK, K. (2020). Is human enhancement in space a moral duty? Missions to Mars, advanced AI and genome editing in space. In: «Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics», vol. XXIX, n. 1, pp. 122-130.

SZOCIK, K (2023). The bioethics of space exploration, Oxford University Press, Oxford.

SZOCIK, K. (2023). The ethical status of germline gene editing in future space missions: The special case of positive selection on Earth for future space missions. In: «NanoEthics», vol. XVII, n. 1, Art.Nr. 3 - doi: 10.1007/s11569-023-00438-1.

SZOCIK, K., WÓJTOWICZ, T. (2019). Human enhancement in space missions: From moral controversy to technological duty. In: «Technology in Society», vol. LIX, n. 18, Art.Nr. 101156 - doi: 10.1016/j.techsoc.2019.101156.

THOMPSON, K. (2012). Fake babies: The women devoting themselves to eerily lifelike dolls. In: «The Mirror», URL: http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/real-life-stories/the-fake-babies-crazemeet-the-women-786454.

TROIANO, G.M., WOOD, M., HARTEVELD, C. (2020). “And this, kids, is how I met your mother": Consumerist, mundane, and uncanny futures with sex robots. In: «Proceedings of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems ACM», Paper 471 – doi: 10.1145/3313831.3376598.

UMBRELLO, S., BALISTRERI, M. (2023). Human enhancement and reproductive ethics on generation ship. In: «Argumenta», online first: June, 16th 2023 - doi: 10.14275/2465-2334/20230.umb.

WAKAYAMA, S., ITO, D., KAMADA, Y., SHIMATZU, T., SUZUKI, T., NAGAMATSU, A., ARAKI, R., ISHIKAWA, T., KAMIMURA, S., HIROSE, N., KAZAMA, K., YANG, LI, INOUE, R., KIKUCHI, Y., HAYASHI, E., EMURA, R., WATANABE, R., NAGATOMO, H., SUZUKI, H., YAMAMORI, T., TADA, N.M., OSADA, I., UMEHARA, M., SANO, H., KASAHARA, H., HIGASHIBATA, A., YANO, S., ABE, M., KISHIGAMI, S., KOHDA, T., OOGA, M., WAKAYAMA, T. (2021). Evaluating the long-term effect of space radiation on the reproductive normality of mammalian sperm preserved on the international space station. In: «Science Advances», vol. XI, n. 7, Art.Nr. eabg5554 - doi: 10.1126/sciadv.abg5554.

WATKINS, A. (2020). Sex in space: Our final reproductive frontier. In: «Physiology News Magazine», vol. CXVII – doi: 10.36866/pn.117.14.

YOUGOV (2017), 1 in 4 men would consider having sex with a robot, pubblicato il 27 settembre – URL: https://today.yougov.com/news/2017/10/02/1-4-men-would-consider-having-sex-robot/.

ZARA, G. (2018). La psicologia dei sexbot nel trattamento dei sex offender. In: M. BALISTRERI, Sex robot. L’amore al tempo delle macchine, Fandango, Roma, pp. 225-282.

ZARA, G., VEGGI, S., FARRINGTON, D.P. (2022). Sexbots as synthetic companions: Comparing attitudes of official sex offenders and non-offenders. In: «International Journal of Social Robotics», vol. XIV, pp. 479-498.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.4453/rifp.2023.0013

Copyright (c) 2023 Maurizio Balistreri

URLdella licenza: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

Rivista internazionale di Filosofia e Psicologia - ISSN: 2039-4667 (print) - E-ISSN: 2239-2629 (online)

Registrazione al Tribunale di Milano n. 634 del 26-11-2010 - Direttore Responsabile: Aurelia Delfino

Web provider Aruba spa - Loc. Palazzetto, 4 - 52011 Bibbiena (AR) - P.IVA 01573850516 - C.F. e R.I./AR 04552920482

Licenza Creative Commons
Dove non diversamente specificato, i contenuti di Rivista Internazionale di Filosofia e Psicologia sono distribuiti con Licenza Creative Commons Attribuzione 4.0 Internazionale.