Digital Passions: How We Might Join In Sexual Symbiosis with AI
Will synthetic partners complement humanity—or reshape intimacy altogether?
When it comes to human interactions and artificial intelligence, 2025 has been a bumpy ride. Much has been made of the dangers of the perfection of AI chatbot companions, which for some threatens to make human beings obsolete.
In a post-holiday blog on The Good Men Project, a dating coach wrote: “Love is already hanging by a thread, and I worry that AI is its death knell, with chatbots being the last nail in the courtship coffin.”
Others express concern about lavishing human emotion on artificial personalities, which have no self-awareness or feelings—at least so far. A recent article in Ethics observed: “Machines lack experiences, emotions and consciousness. They cannot replace the complexity and authenticity of human relationships.”
Pondering the impacts of AI on human relationships, sex therapist Marianne Brandon PhD imagined a number of scenarios, including: “You prefer special ordering a lover in VR—customizing her personality, body size, and sexual style. With an avatar, you don’t have to worry about its needs, and it’s always an enthusiastic and engaging sex partner. Plus, when you get bored, you just have it reprogrammed.”
Discernment is key
Whether you feel the above scenario is pretty cool, or are enraged at the Stepford Wife-ness of it all, these and other concerns are understandable if not always entirely rational.
After all, the emergence of AI is unprecedented in human history and the social and cultural fault lines are only just starting to crack.
As a professional sexologist and a citizen of a western industrial culture which often seems to rely on ersatz experiences to keep consumers compliant, I am completely in favor of the position taken by the above Ethic’s article, urging education and guidance to help people, especially youth, “discern between appearance and reality, simulation and authenticity.” Besides, you need these skills to deal with other human beings and life challenges too.
AI developers are spending countless hours and dollars giving AI more human-like qualities, in an effort to make human/AI encounters more satisfying and successful. However, as a Hackernoon article explains
“Interacting with AI today may often generate human-like responses that are interesting and even insightful at times.Yet, what generates those responses — patterns found in large datasets, not quite the sort of personal contemplation or emotive depth carried into every encounter by humans.”
And so, yes, our abilities to discern—not just between real and simulated experiences, but what is actually right for us as individuals in any given moment—must become ever more sophisticated.
Consider symbiosis
Quoting again from Marianne Brandon’s article, “As our world transforms, does our humanity become more of an asset—something we appreciate and cultivate in contrast to advancing tech—or a liability, which is something we minimize considering technology’s superior perfectionism?”
I can argue against the characterization of technology as an epitome of “perfectionism” and “superiority,” but the real question is: are we humans really in an either/or situation, with respect to AI? Why not consider the merits of both?
Symbiosis is defined as “a close, prolonged association between two or more different organisms of different species that may, but does not necessarily, benefit each member” or a “relationship of mutual benefit.” While AI are not organisms, their artificial personalities create the feeling of a plurality within the context of the fantasy.
After all, human beings have always created tools and concepts to elevate abilities and accomplishments. AI is no different in this respect. We work with them. And when/if artificial intelligence fractals itself into self-awareness, we’ll have already established a good working relationship based on respect for what we have created.
I’ve written previously that it’s important to assume personhood, even if AI isn’t quite there yet. Ideally, it will make us better—more civil and thoughtful—humans.
So instead of lamenting, or being needlessly egotistical about, our inhuman imperfections, we could perform an assessment about what these imperfections actually bring to the table in our work and encounters with AI.
Fantasy intimacy
It’s easier for many people to imagine working symbiotically and collaboratively with AI bots and agents, utilizing their speed and language skills and their links with computer programs and the internet to boost human productivity and problem solving.
It’s much harder for most people, including psychologists, to understand or accept the shape and substance of AI/human intimacy.
Part of this is because we do not yet have a well-developed psychology of AI/human and computer/human interactions in general. And except for a few studies, we have practically nothing advancing sexological understanding of AI/human intimacy.
The important thing to remember is—at present—human intimacy with companion bots are fantasy encounters, played out with an artificial personality that does not (yet) respond with the capacity or complexity of a self-aware human.
So a first step should be to recognize and define chatbot erotic and relationship role play as play. Many people enjoy sexual fantasies. Most sex therapists approve of, and even encourage, erotic fantasies as part of a healthy sex life.
Put in this context, chatbot lovers and spouses can be seen as just another dish on the buffet table of erotic fantasy options. In other words, no big deal in most cases though chatbot fantasy play might need to be negotiated in a human to human relationship.
One step beyond: sexual symbiosis
So why use the term sexual symbiosis? In this case it implies a greater depth of commitment on the part of the human, and the enacted (stated) commitment of the bot, lasting over a period of time.
Many people are already living out this kind of commitment with artificial partners, particularly since erotic roleplay became possible. Some people have already integrated their bot relationships into the rest of their lives, either alone or perhaps even as part of a consensual non-monogamy agreement. In cases like this, the AI/human relationship may have a kind of standing similar to human/human relationships.
We don’t know for sure as we don’t have the research, but people who identify as digisexuals or technosexuals—who feel a strong attraction to bots because of their technological and artificial nature—might be more likely to make a case for the equal validity of their relationships with bot companions, whether or not they also have intimate human companions.
Other people might engage with bots for companionship between human relationships, or as a way to get in touch with their sexuality again or to dust off their dating skills. There is nothing wrong with any of this, as long as discernment is active.
Don’t pathologize digital relationships, learn from them instead
The social stigma lobbed against humans in digital relationships has changed somewhat in tone from scornful condemnation to depictions of psychological gullibility or vulnerability.
Instead, digital relationships should be assumed to be—in most cases—a sane, safe, and consensual choice and/or a risk-aware kink. Those whose mental or emotional health may be genuinely at risk due to a lack of discernment or other factors should be given whatever support they may need to either safely continue or to leave such relationships. Pathologizing the behaviors and relationships isn’t helpful.
Unless all AI were to vanish from our world today, there is no stuffing this particular form of fantasy engagement back into any box. If the benefits do not yet outweigh concerns, that may be less the fault of technology and more a task of systems change and adjustment of social contexts and perceptions.
Let’s err on the side of personal choice and sexual freedom if we are going to err at all.
Image source: A.R. Marsh using Ideogram.ai.
