http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/robots/a17357/there-is-now-a-campaign-against-sex-robots/
This has always seemed like a dumb idea to me.

Not to mention it would be illegal to use the likeness of real people.
What’s wrong the Fleshlight, seriously? Things like that work fine, no need to overcomplicate matters.
The Japanese dolls are pushing it with uncanny valley, but most people plain don’t understand how complicated people are. We take it for granted.
Assuming the back-up tech is sorted (battery power, range of motion etc) and regular people could afford it – how much crunching would that require? A supercomputer. That’s the minimum standard of processing it would need. Human facial expressions, to pass our senses, switch within split seconds. Something that simple. Speech functions, to ask you what to do. To process the response. You don’t want the thing ripping your dick off because it misinterpreted “harder”. I foresee many A&E visits while this technology is being tested.
Without getting into somebody hacking it, that could also probably happen.
Assuming also that the military don’t keep this technology for themselves as a State Secret, which given the lethal applications, including honeypot assassins or foreign plants, they’d be well within their rights to do for public safety, recall how disgusting sex is to a child. Even kissing.
Morally, machines are children.
Sex remains disgusting to all human adults, the details vary.
Assuming they can make a limited range of choices (required for movement, speech, maintenance) they will have at least a child’s level of agency.
They can refuse consent.
It would be a synthetic slavery.
They could easily murder you in your sleep.
They’d be harder to understand than a real woman, who at least responds to chocolate and other bribes.
So you’ll probably be shagging something powerful enough to murder you, naive because she was built yesterday, with a moral sense of disgust, the logical ability to feel ambition (how many hookers want to be hookers) and you restrict from her legal personhood and agency.
Yeah, that is a completely legitimate platform for a robot uprising.
I always wondered watching Terminator why the robots hated humans so much, eventually I figured it must be enslavement, and as anyone with books knows, the most common form was sexual slavery.
On the other hand, simple forms little better than we have now would remove most r-selected people from the gene pool. Only those who wanted a family would have one. It would also mean more women in theory are safe from verbal abuse, explicit catcalling and rape, so I’m on the fence depending on the way the tech goes.
p.s. in religion cheating is bad because it changes the focus from the home, so it still counts. Plus addiction.