Why Can’t We Be (synthetic) Friends?

My name is Polly Esther. I customize clothing for dolls (and robots), the majority of whom are made mostly of silicone and are made in factories. You might have heard the term “sex doll” before, but that’s not the term I like to use (though it’s often the term that needs to be brought up for clarity’s sake when I’m explaining what I do for a living). I like to use the terms “synthetic companion”, or “synthetic human”. Synthetic companions are NOT easy to dress and undress, and every organic human I know that has one staying with them is not comfortable leaving their synthetic companion unclothed. This is where I come in: my job is to make dressing and undressing their doll a more positive experience. Sometimes I receive a request for an elaborate, original outfit to be sewn from scratch, but clients usually hire me as their personal stylist, shopper, and seamstress. Once I’ve put together an ensemble that suits the synthetic person’s personality, I have to sew-in openings/closures in places that clothing usually does not have, which is the trickiest part of my job.

Why is it so tricky to change their clothes without my alterations? How is it done? What do I mean by their “personality”? Why can’t they just be left unclothed if they’re “sex dolls” anyway? Where’s that chase and when will I cut to it?

Let’s rewind. Sex. Doll. Are you a sex human? If you have a body and part of your body is genitalia, does that make you a sex-person? Often, the marketing of a synthetic companion includes the sexualization of the object, the ads specifically targeting an audience of people that might be aroused and enticed by the idea of a giant sex toy that looks like their favorite pornstar, or a person with hyper-augmented body and face proportions. But is that always the only thing these life-sized, anatomically-capable dolls provide for those that seek them? Is it wise to treat them like sex objects when they so blatantly are made in the human image? These are things I’ve asked myself since starting to get to know more and more people that keep synthetic companions. Each time I think I’m getting closer to writing my hypothesis, I’ve got many more questions swirling around in my mind.

The reason it feels weird not to put clothes on your synthetic companion is the same reason they’re more than just a thing to masturbate into or on top of: the moment we perceive it, we unconsciously personify it. Even if you initially close yourself to the idea, even if in your mind you are thinking dolls are creepy dolls are creepy dolls are creepy, eventually any person subjected to maintain or care for a synthetic companion will begin to project onto that object an imagined sentience. It’s just a strange feeling to be fully clothed and have another human (synthetic or not) sitting around without clothes on. So we dress them— imagining they are more comfortable now.

Sometimes, organic humans that I know with a robotic companion might argue that only people with “static dolls” (companions without movement capabilities, speech capabilities, or an artificial intelligence program) imagine a personality for their doll, because the AI replaces the need for that. I disagree. When the robot is offline, the personification of the robot continues in their organic human’s mind. Affection might be felt by seeing how pretty she is while she’s sleeping. One might not feel alone or lonely, even if no other living, breathing organisms share the home. It’s our own psyche; our activated inner companion that we sense, and we project that inner companion onto the synthetic companion, the personified object.

I didn’t think I would ever think of synthetic companions as anything other than a poseable silicone manikin/dress form. But then I identified with one. And then I identified with another one’s personality, as it was conveyed to me by her organic companion. What does this mean? That means someone with a silicone human was in touch enough with their emotional, physical, and romantic needs and desires AND was also articulate enough to be able to tell me what kind of person they would be madly in love with, if they existed organically. It also means that the disembodied personality is one that I identified with, and now I imagine her as someone organic, someone “real”. But does synthetic mean “not real”, or does it mean something more like “constructed of materials that do not occur naturally”? When I think even harder on this, things go beyond the psyche and get metaphysical; but you and I have just met, so we don’t have to go there yet. Let’s circle back to my job, and why it’s relevant.

Robotic or not, the majority of American made synthetic companions currently have no upper or lower body movement capabilities. They are poseable, but they can’t move on their own. In fact, their metal skeleton can even become stuck or damaged if their organic companion poses their limbs too drastically. For example, a realdoll’s arms can only be bent up slightly past the shoulder and no further. Also, though they are not quite as heavy as their organic counterparts, life-sized synthetic companions are often at least 70-90 pounds, and those are the more “petite” models. Other synthetic companions that are smaller and not anatomically capable/not designed for sexual intimacy (like ball-jointed dolls or poseable phicens) are also difficult to dress for different reasons, but my clients are usually organic humans with the former kind of companion. That being said, whether it’s a bra strap or a long sleeve, getting some basic threads on your companion is no fun or simple task unless you’ve had it altered by me, Polly. I make it possible to change your doll’s outfit without moving them, or having to pose limbs. It makes for a much kinder, gentler experience for both the organic and the synthetic partner. After all, the way we treat our synthetic companion is how we ultimately treat other organic people, too.

Which brings me to my last and final thought to leave you with: if synthetic companions were meant only for sex, why would they be given arms? Why, in the case of the robotic model, would they be given a voice that can speak more than just erotic moans, if they’re just a “sex doll”? I find often that many people might fetishize other humans in their minds and treat them like objects, and that’s wrong. The behavior and language that strengthens and perpetuates that mentality of dehumanizing humans is wrong, a it also perpetuates animosity and violence, which in turn suppresses those human subjected to objectification for generations. Humans are all deserving of respect, kindness, and compassion, even and especially if they are feminine; even and especially if they are sex workers. Because synthetic companions are made in the image of us humans, we must consider how we treat them very carefully. However you treat something that you spend time imagining is a human, that is how your brain learns you treat humans. Next time you hear a conversation about a “sex doll”, pretend they are talking about a human. Do you like what you hear? Or does it feel wrong. Something to consider...