and, no, not all of them fit to your narrow idea of what is "acceptable" sex
Mine more mainstream, excuse me.
I don't care. Just because something is not "mainstream", it does not make it wrong, and nor does it give you the right to dictate that it shouldn't happen.
That means people make a sentient being and attempt to mould it to cater to people's need without really giving a choice. That's a slavery.
Well, it's difficult to really say that. I do find the idea of creating a being so that it will cater to your needs somewhat distasteful but, at the same time, once such a being exists, it is just as entitled to follow its wishes than anyone else. And, it's difficult to really define "giving it a choice" in this context, because there is simply no way to allow a robot to choose its core programming. That's like saying that we should be allowed to choose our own genes....
Further, I think that programming all robots to have vanilla tastes would be extremely dull and restrictive (and would probably have bad results for human society if robots became prevalent). So, this is an issue that I don't think has a particularly good answer. Creating a robot for the purpose of serving humans in a particular manner does seem rather disturbing, yes, but I don't think it is really possible to just start a robot out as a blank slate and expect it to just develop a personality with no influence from the creator, particularly since robots start out as "adults" (i.e. they aren't raised like a human child), and a lack of a personality would almost certainly result in exploitation. Plus, honestly, we already do it with humans
to a large extent. How a child grows up is a product of society and of their parents. I don't see why a robot would be any different.
If we make sentient robots, they should be made with no specific purpose in mind than being able to choose for themselves.
Creation of new intelligent species is something profound.
The problem is that we have
to give them some kind of personality. However you choose that personality, it is automatically determining their purpose. Further, we are almost certainly going to want to produce sentient robots to perform certain tasks for us, and I'm not sure that is necessarily a bad thing, provided they are treated decently.
I also suspect that, in practice, the whole thing will be done in a much more haphazard way than this. We won't give robots rights until they can demonstrate that such rights are needed, and I think the only way they will ever start showing that is when they start acting in ways that go against
their initial programming.
Also, there is another factor here, which is that it is entirely possible to produce a non-sentient sex doll which is programmed to act human-like but isn't intelligent enough to be considered alive. I see nothing wrong with that, since they're not sentient or self-aware. And, further, I wouldn't be surprised if the first sentient sex doll developed because some clever programmer in the sex doll industry accidentally
designed a neural net that resulted in a sentient being. Even determining if that has happened
is a difficult process, because, actually, we don't have a very good definition of what is and is not sentient.