I see a lot of discourse about whether or not “robosexual” or “botsexual” is the correct term, so I thought I’d weigh in with my knowledge of b4b history.
Robosexual has been used for hundreds of years to describe robots attracted to other robots. Botsexual is a term that has popped up in the last few decades as a “more inclusive” alternative to robosexuality.
Robosexual exclusionists claim that “robosexuality” using the term “robot” as a root centres mechanical bots while botsexual is inclusive to androids as well as droids. I personally think this is nonsense, as the term “robot” is, and always has been, an umbrella term for all fully synthetic lifeforms. Plus, “botsexuality” also comes from the term robot, so even if robot WAS an exclusionary term, how would it be any more inclusive to use the shortened version of robot?
A third term, “synthsexual” had recently cropped up in response to that so-called issue.
Personally, I say use whichever term you feel most comfortable with. Language only has the meaning we give it, no word is inherently more valuable than another. However, please do not erase the history of robosexuality and treat it as an exclusionary term. Let people use whatever word they want.
