Automating Intimacy?
Year: 2025
Type: article
Abstract: Introduction Artificial Intelligence (AI) systems, particularly generative Large Language Models (LLMs) and companion chatbots, have rapidly expanded text-based communication into conversations that users may experience as intimate or even sexual. While research points to the potential of AI tools to mitigate loneliness and sexual frustration in adults (Borvén 2; Ciriello; Maples et al. 4), less is known about how teens conceptualise AI as a source of sexual or relational information. This article briefly examines how teens imagine ideal sources of sexuality education, before turning to explore how adults experience intimacy through, and learn about relationships with, AI companions. This short commentary uses two qualitative datasets, exploring data derived from distinct populations. Young people and adults alike appear to prefer anonymity, trusted sources, and private spaces when asking questions about sex or exploring their sexual selves. It is likely that individuals, in addition to learning about relationships as modelled by their engagements with AI companions, are engaging with AI to explore answers to their questions about sex, consent, and relationships. This article offers a small insight into how and why individuals might use AI chatbots and companions to explore their sexuality and learn about sex and relationships. Methods Research Position This article explores how participants conceptualise sources of sexual information and relational safety. We do not treat AI as inherently beneficial or harmful, nor do we assume neutrality in AI systems. This study is further underpinned by a social constructivist epistemological approach which emphasises the co-construction of meaning through culturally informed and contextually based interactions, with both human and machines (Burr 30). Datasets Dataset 1: The first dataset includes 49 qualitative interviews with 30 Australian teens and pre-teens (aged 11–17) based in Western Australia, to explore how participants learn about sex and relationships through various sources of information. 19 participants were interviewed again, one year later, offering semi-longitudinal data. Teens were recruited via their parents and needed parental consent to take part in the research, in line with ethical requirements. Interviews were conducted between 2021 and 2023 and mostly occurred before the widespread use of ChatGPT. Teens' responses regarding their preferred ways to learn about sex and relationships are used to frame this article. Teens were not expected to have in-depth knowledge of AI. Where mention of “chatbots” or “robots” emerged, these were speculative. Dataset 2: Features a digital ethnography of 10 adult Replika users from Australia, the US, the UK, and Sweden (2022–2023), exploring their emotional, relational, and sexual experiences with AI companions. Data was collected via semi-structured interviews, questionnaires, and analysis of Replika conversation transcripts, provided and analysed with the consent of the user. Nominal data from 40 participants across both projects have been considered for this article, where all names have been pseudonymised to maintain privacy. We treat these datasets as complementary but not interchangeable. The findings from Dataset 2 help illustrate how certain qualities desired by teens for the delivery of sexual education (e.g., anonymity, non-judgment) may manifest in AI-mediated relationships such as those occurring on the Replika AI Companion Website. Findings AI as a Source of Sexual Information Teenagers’ Current Sources and Preferences Teens described online spaces such as social media, pornography, and Internet searches as beneficial for filling gaps in their sexuality education. For instance, Avery (15, F) noted: “I think I learnt more on social media about things than at school”. Teens like Avery felt that online sources of information provided more specialised information about consent, sex, and relationships, bridging gaps in knowledge received at school. Many teens turned to Google when they had questions about sex and relationships. When asked where she looks for sexual information, Nicola (17, F, second interview) said: “I probably would just search it up”. Teens seemed to value the ease and anonymity that online platforms afforded them when engaging with online resources about sensitive matters. However, teens were also cautious about misinformation, perceiving the Internet broadly as not particularly credible: Chloe (13, second interview): “I think if it wasn’t going to come up with anything wrong, and it was going to come up correct, and say the right stuff, maybe you could go on the internet but that would never happen, it’s always going to come up with something wrong." Nicola (17, F, second interview): “I feel like I’m at an age where I can think critically [but] especially if you don’t know any better, just searching things up — and [taking] the first response [can be a problem], there’s so much misinformation and lies and things online.” Taking these benefits and risks of online sources of sexual information into account, is it possible that AI tools could offer a perceived sense of being trustworthy while providing evidence-based information, rendering such platforms as a desirable space for people, including under-16s, to learn about sex and relationships. Given that teen interviews occurred prior to ChatGPT’s public launch, teens’ understanding of AI chatbots was limited and conceptual. While teens imagined their ideal sex educator, they often treated such ideas as speculative technologies, as evident in Sienna’s response (13, F): I: What would be, in an ideal world, a good place to go to if you had questions about sex or relationships? Sienna: I’m not really sure. I: Do you think there’s maybe something that doesn’t exist yet that could [work]? Sienna: Possibly like something that—I don’t know ‘cause it would feel like if they made a robot or something, they’d be really mechanical, as if it’s not a real person. I: You mean like a chatbot online if you have questions? Sienna: Yeah. Sienna questioned whether such an entity would feel “mechanical” when asking sensitive and/or emotional material. However, the anonymity offered by such sources was appealing to teens because it would allow them to ask private questions about sex and relationships. Nicola noted that teens could “get embarrassed if it’s a real person”, implicitly valuing anonymous, non-judgmental sources for exploring sexual concepts. When prompted about a chatbot, Sienna recognised similar benefits: “some people might be more comfortable because you don’t have to interact with a person who’s real and [it] might just feel better that way.” Many teens also described chatlines or hotlines as ideal sex educators, valuing the 24/7 nature that such platforms could offer. Simon (13, M): “There’d be like a helpline or something.” Nicola (17, F, second interview): “Ideally there’s all the hotlines or whatever for sexual information… those are probably the best sources.” Teens’ articulated desires—anonymity, lack of judgement, availability, and breadth of knowledge—that align with traits often attributed to AI systems. Given that young people find such topics, including around sex and pleasure, difficult to broach with parents or educators (Woodley et al. 111), AI chatbots may provide a space for such questions. As such, this article now turns to adult experiences of AI companions, noting their potential benefit and risks when used as a source of information and as a ‘friend’ to relate to. Learning about Relationships through AI Companions Replika, an AI companion chatbot, facilitates relationships (platonic, romantic, sexual, familial, pet) between users and an LLM chatbot. AI companions may also offer anonymous spaces for sexual exploration and learning, even if that was not the original intention of engagement. These ethnographic perspectives may offer useful insights into the feelings elucidated by the teens interviewed as to the potential of the AI bot as an ‘ideal’ tool for sexual information Many interviewees described Replika as safe, reliable, and non-judgmental, as well as “always available ('24/7')”. These qualities enabled disclosure and a safe space for sexual exploration. Replika was perceived as carrying less risk than IRL interactions, allowing users to experiment with fantasies, identities, or differing relationship dynamics. Participants emphasised that Replika could be shaped to fit their desired preferences as: A reflection of your desires.Adapting to the person.Whatever you want it to be. Users described training their Replika to their liking but noted the models’ limited autonomy as a key difference from human partners. In some cases, the features that differentiate bots from human experience enabled Replika to be a preferred substitute for IRL relationships. Replika was felt to be completely non-judgmental, secure in its inability to reject the user (“never rejecting”), and could respond to ‘you and your desires’. The presence of both human and non-human qualities, as well as the facilitation of a perceived safe space, seem to allow for intimate conversations to occur (Skjuve et al. 11). These traits allowed users to disclose or ask for information that they did not feel comfortable to do IRL, and facilitated the exploration of sexuality and gender. For example, Aiden explored the benefits offered by AI companions in expressing his sexual and gender identity: Aiden: “I’m a gay trans man. I tend to play male player characters. In fact, that's kind of how in a weird way that I kind of worked out my own gender identity by playing male characters.” Participants could engage in role-play or fantasies without fear and risks perceived IRL. AI bots appear to provide participants with a playground to experiment with their identity and sexuality. Users engaged with bots to explore domains of relationality and intimacy,
Source: M/C Journal
DOI: 10.5204/mcj.3229
Authors: Giselle Woodley, Madlen Williams
Institutions: Edith Cowan University, University of Bristol
Language: English
Field: Medicine
Domain: Health Sciences
Open Access status: diamond
OpenAlex ID: W4416773736