Criminal Justice

Florida Makes Possessing Child Sex Dolls a Felony

The new law rests on unsupported premises and vague language to penalize a victimless crime.


Late last week, Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis (R) signed into law a bill outlawing child sex dolls in the state. SB 160, sponsored by Sen. Lauren Book (D–Plantation), makes it a crime to own, sell, or distribute a "child-like sex doll."

Simple first-time possession would earn someone a second-degree misdemeanor charge, rising to a third-degree felony for repeat offenders. Possession with the intent to sell or distribute a child sex doll would be a third-degree felony for the first offense, rising to a second-degree felony for a subsequent offense.

Those convicted under the statute of selling or distributing a child sex doll could get anywhere from five to 15 years in prison, equivalent to the state's penalties for child neglect that results in "great bodily harm, permanent disability, or permanent disfigurement."

The harsh penalties are justified by the deterrent effect the ban will have on would-be offenders, Book said in a press release in early May, when her bill unanimously cleared the legislature.

"These are anatomically correct, lifelike silicone dolls that are eerily similar to real human children made for the sole purpose of sexual gratification," said Book. "Just as viewing child pornography lowers the inhibitions of child predators, so do these childlike sex dolls that have no place in the state of Florida."

This same argument has been deployed in favor of the federal Curbing Realistic Exploitative Electronic Pedophilic Robots (CREEPER) Act.

"These dolls create a real risk or reinforcing pedophilic behavior and they desensitize the user causing him to engage in sicker and sicker behavior," said Rep. Bob Goodlatte (R–Va.) last year.

The CREEPER Act passed the House in June 2018 but was never brought up for a vote in the Senate.

The Kentucky Senate passed a bill banning child sex dolls back in March. The bill is currently awaiting a vote in the state's House. The United Kingdom also prohibits them and has seized 230 dolls since 2016, according to The Sun, a British tabloid.

Manufacturers of child sex dolls argue that by allowing pedophiles to satiate their desires without viewing child pornography or engaging in actual physical abuse, these dolls will help to reduce child sexual abuse.

"I am helping people express their desires, legally and ethically. It's not worth living if you have to live with repressed desire," said Shin Takagi, a Japanese maker of child sex dolls, to The Atlantic in 2016.

Academic research has so far found no empirical evidence one way or another on the effect of child sex dolls.

"The available evidence in relation to sex dolls in general and child sex dolls in particular is very weak, with almost no studies empirically examining the implications of doll use," reads an Australian government report on the issue from March 2019.

The desire to ban child sex dolls is understandable. It is nevertheless true that their use produces no victims. Given that there is also no direct evidence that their use leads to actual crimes, the case for imprisoning people over them is incredibly thin.

In addition, Florida's child sex doll ban does not actually define what it means by "child-like sex doll." This provides little guidance for either law enforcement officers or potential purchasers of sex dolls to know what is actually allowed.

Given that child sex doll bans take aim at a victimless activity, rely on an unsupported theory that they'll deter actual episodes of abuse, and will almost certainly be enforced in an arbitrary manner, they should be abandoned.

NEXT: Cops Strip-Searched a 4-Year-Old After Mom's Errand Took Too Long

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

    1. What do I care that they made your hobby illegal?

    2. Also, pediatric proctology instructors hardest hit.

  1. Kids are too damn spoiled these days if they’re already getting sex dolls.

  2. This doll was manufactured in 2000. It just looks young. Here is its certificate of manufacture.

    1. Seriously, where is the line here? How do you tell the age of a doll?

      1. Federal Department of Sex Doll Age Certification

      2. They banned cartoons of child sex, had the same problem, didn’t faze ’em IIRC. Will they ban cartoons of child sex dolls?

        1. That part is almost like the Mohammed cartoon controversy.

          South Park ended up trolling everyone by doing a cartoon of Mohammed wearing a bear suit.

          1. So a good troll for this would be to make a doll (or cartoon for that matter) of an octogenarian – but label it as “9 year old Suzie the pedophile’s dream”.

  3. i wonder if these people who can’t tell the difference between a doll and a real child are the same ones vehemently asserting that men are not women.

  4. Manufacturers of child sex dolls argue that by allowing pedophiles to satiate their desires without viewing child pornography or engaging in actual physical abuse, these dolls will help to reduce child sexual abuse.

    “I am helping people express their desires, legally and ethically. It’s not worth living if you have to live with repressed desire…”

    Oh, Shin, you almost had it there until the end.

    1. Any priest could tell you it’s easy to live a life of repressed desires , with no potential for an undesirable outcome.

  5. I dunno, man.
    This doesn’t seem like the hill to die on…

    1. Which is why this sort of stupid proliferates.

      There is no way to oppose it. Are you really going to stand there in the well of the legislature and loudly proclaim “It is every citizen’s god given right to have sex with a preschooler sex doll!!”?

      No. No, you are not. Nobody is.

      That is why it took so long to get rid of sodomy laws. Someone had to jump up in front of everyone and say they were in favor of BJ’s and butt sex. Sure, everyone actually is in favor of BJ’s and butt sex, but nobody is going to put that on their resume.

      So now we add this pile of dung to the dung heap.

    2. Somehow, I don’t think that you would die on any hill. You couldn’t be bothered to care about actual infringements upon liberty not your own.

  6. I still don’t understand how it is possible to make shapes illegal.

    That’s what we are talking about here – a lump of silicone rubber shaped like a person. If the next sentence wasn’t “I made it so you can stick your penis in it” there would be no discussion.

    We had this fight about sex toys in the 90s. Local prosecutors looking to make a name kept applying “community standards” to charge dildo and vibrator retailers with crimes. At the time I wrote an essay about the ludicrous nature of such laws – an oblong piece of plastic is obscene. If I call it a dildo. But if I call the same shape “art”, it goes in a museum and people pay to see it. Or it could just be a muddle for food preparation.

    1. Same for porno. Is it art or obscene?
      When are ideas dangerous?

      1. When it takes your thoughts away from God. / Puritan assholes. They don’t come out and say it but that’s what vice laws are all about including the WOD.

  7. Sick. But should not be illegal. A felony is ridiculas. Howdoes this even come close to comparing to murder, rape, assault, and grand larceny. How many actual child rapist are they going to have to let out early to make room for the pervs.

  8. How young do they have to look for them to be illegal? Would they be legal if they are advertised as adults (adults who have conditions which make them look prepubescent exist)? I’m 23 and could pass as 13, would it be illegal for me to make a sex doll based on myself?

    1. Tell me more. Tell me more.


    2. I am guessing this is similar to the alcohol ID laws that says that anyone who “looks to be younger than 30” has to legally have an ID on them to buy alcohol, which then comes down to the “reasonable person” standard.

      Off course if you accidentally sell alcohol to a 30-year-old who looks like they’re 28 to the average person without checking their ID first, because to you they look like they’re 34 because you suck at guessing people’s ages, well; you kinda of broke the law there.

      1. I don’t think those are laws so much as store policies to ensure a 19 year old who looks 25 doesn’t get away with it. I don’t know of any laws enforcing that.

  9. Guess who doesn’t want aberrant sexual behaviour to be recognized as a mental disorder.

  10. Umm, what happened to the ideas of laws reflecting actual problems? There are laws against theft, for example, because it’s something that happens fairly frequently.

    If you’re going to legislate against sex dolls and sex robots, why not also pass laws for speed limits for personal submarines? How about limits to one’s blood alcohol level when piloting a flying saucer?

    It seems Florida legislators have way too much time on their hands.

  11. […] has banned the possession or sale of sex dolls that look too much like […]

  12. The one obvious “loophole” to this law is to just sell regular sex dolls, but with detachable parts, including the head; and then sell regular child dolls with all their regular clothing on separately.

    It only becomes illegal once you actually detach the child’s head and put in on the naked adult one, and then you’d have to switch it back once you “finish”. It would be very difficult for the government to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that you have offended, short of getting a warrant to install hidden cameras in your house (which, to be fair, this being FL, might actually happen (ie: the Kraft prostitution ring)).

    If that doesn’t work, people can always just put a bag over the doll’s head with a printout of a child’s face. Even the most conservative-minded / pro-large state jurors have their limits before they start nullifying these thought-crimes.

  13. I am concerned more with the slippery slope here.

    Child porn is bad because it victimizes children. Of this there is no valid disagreement outside of consensual self-filming by older teens

    Child robot dolls are bad because it … reminds people of children?

    If that’s the case, then what about drawn or animated pornography? Don’t forget, much of that is from Japan, which has a lower age of consent and heavily features high-schoolers. Also, you have characters with adult bodies but explicit, underage ages. Notably, the Disney princesses (who are mostly under 18), Zelda, and probably others that I do not know. This would protect whom, precisely?

  14. n’est pas en faveur des mineurs qui achètent des poupées sexuelles, les articles de ce site Internet sont uniquement vendus à des hommes ou des femmes adultes.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.