Exploring different national approaches to prohibiting childlike sex dolls
| Published date | 01 February 2023 |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1177/1023263X231176908 |
| Date | 01 February 2023 |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
Exploring different national
approaches to prohibiting
childlike sex dolls
Elvira Loibl *, Suzan van der Aa*,
Monique Hendriks-Lundh*, and Roel Niemark*
Abstract
There is currently no empirical evidence on whether or not the use of childlike sex dolls would
prevent or encourage sexual abuse of children. Yet, more and more countries prohibit or contem-
plate prohibiting these objects, and the EU Commission also announced it would consider this
issue in the context of the fight against child sexual abuse. This article describes and compares
the laws and policies of five countries in which childlike sex dolls are currently banned:
Australia, Germany, Denmark, Norway and the UK. These countries have adopted different
approaches to dealing with the newly emerging phenomenon of childlike sex dolls: While in
Australia, Germany and Denmark dedicated laws prohibiting these dolls are introduced, in
Norway and the UK existing laws are applied to these objects. By juxtaposing and critically asses-
sing the different approaches to prohibiting childlike sex dolls, the article aims to inspire and guide
other countries that also contemplate legislative action in this context.
Keywords
childlike sex dolls, sexual abuse of children, protection of children, morals, obscene and indecent
articles
1. Introduction
While adult sex dolls have been around for a while, childlike sex dolls –that is, dolls with a
childlike appearance that are used to generate or enhance sexual arousal and pleasure –are a
*
Faculty of Law, Department of Criminal Law and Criminology, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands
Corresponding author:
Elvira Loibl, Maastricht University, Faculty of Law, Department of Criminal Law and Criminology, Bouillonstraat 3, 6211 LH
Maastricht, The Netherlands.
Email: elvira.loibl@maastrichtuniversity.nl
Article
Maastricht Journal of European and
Comparative Law
2023, Vol. 30(1) 63–82
© The Author(s) 2023
Article reuse guidelines:
sagepub.com/journals-permissions
DOI: 10.1177/1023263X231176908
maastrichtjournal.sagepub.com
relatively recent phenomenon.
1
The international legal framework on child pornography (the
2000 Optional Protocol to the UNCRC on the Sale of Children, Child Prostitution and Child
Pornography, the 2001 Budapest Convention, the 2007 Lanzarote Convention and Directive
2011/93/EU) currently does not provide a basis for banning these objects. This is because
childlike sex dolls per se cannot easily be considered as child pornography according to
any of these legal instruments. State Parties are thus not obliged by international or EU law
to prohibit these objects.
2
Nonetheless, more and more countries have prohibited or are con-
sidering prohibiting childlike sex dolls. In a similar vein, the EU Commission announced it
would consider the issue of the sale of childlike sex dolls in the context of the EU strategy
for a more effective fight against child sexual abuse adopted for the period 2020–2025.
3
But what should a ban on childlike sex dolls look like? Should it only cover the production
and distribution of these objects or also their possession, even though one could argue that
the latter activity is a strictly private affair? Furthermore, how should a childlike sex doll be
defined? Should a ban only cover realistic dolls or also childlike dolls with unrealistic or
adult features?
Various academic articles discuss the need and possible justification for a ban on childlike sex
dolls.
4
Proponents of a ban claim that even though child sex dolls do not cause direct harm to
children, they pose a danger to children as they may create indirect harm by increasing the
risks of child victimization associated with escalation. Drawing from research suggesting an
escalation in relation to child exploitation material, experts argue that it is possible that the use
of childlike sex dolls may encourage problematic behaviour, resulting in hands-on sexual
abuse of children.
5
Using a childlike doll could positively reinforce sexual activity with children
and lower the barrier to committing contact sexual abuse, by conditioning the user and increasing
the attractiveness of such conduct.
6
Some ethicists and clinicians, on the other hand, argue that the
use of childlike sex dolls could have a cathartic benefit as they would allow users to direct their
desires away from real children and to relieve their socially and morally unacceptable urges on an
object.
7
Currently there is no empirical support for either of the two positions, which is why some
commentators strongly criticize introducing a legal ban on childlike sex dolls, arguing that
it would violate the harm principle.
8
Others, however, claim that even in the absence of clear
1. M. H. Maras and L. R. Shapiro, ‘Child Sex Dolls and Robots: More than Just an Uncanny Valley’,31Journal of Internet
Law (2019), p. 4.
2. E. Loibl, S. van der Aa, M. Hendriks-Lundh and R. Niemark, WODC Rapport No. 3293 (2022), p. 34–38.
3. European Parliament, Parliamentary question P-003718/2020(ASW), Answer given by Ms Johansson on behalf of the
European Commission (2020), https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/P-9-2020-003718-ASW_EN.html.
4. R. Brown and J. Shelling, ‘Exploring the Implications of Child Sex Dolls’, 570 Trends and Issues in Crime and Criminal
Justice (2019), p. 1–13 that provide an overview of the available academic literature discussing childlike sex dolls and
robots and implications of their use.
5. See, e.g., M. H. Maras and L. R. Shapiro, 21 Journal of Internet Law (2019); L. Strikwerda, ‘Legal and Moral
Implications of Child Sex Robots’, in J. Danaher and N. McArthur (eds.), Robot Sex: Social and Ethical
Implications (MIT Press, 2017).
6. Ibid.
7. M. Behrendt, ‘Reflections on Moral Challenges Posed by a Therapeutic Childlike Sexbot’, in A.D. Cheok and D. Levy
(eds), Love and Sex with Robots: Third International Conference (New York, Springer 2018).
8. See, e.g., J. Renzikowski, ‘Der Entwurf eines Gesetzes zur Bekämpfung sexualisierter Gewalt gegen Kinder‘,6KriPoZ
(2020).
64 Maastricht Journal of European and Comparative Law 30(1)
To continue reading
Request your trial