About a month ago, I was sitting in the waiting area of the Ramsey County District Court, when a program on the waiting area TV caught my eye. On screen was a young woman declaring she was in love with her robot and intended to marry it. What had grabbed my attention was not an episode of “Futurama,” but a CNN segment on Laurie Segall’s docu-series, “Mostly Human.”

When I went home that same day, I looked the woman up. Lilly lives in France, is a declared robosexual and 3D printed InMoovator before falling in love with it. “Love is still love. It’s not that different,” she said in an interview.

As it turns out, Lilly is not the only one advocating for human-robot relationships. Though it may seem like a creepy episode of “Black Mirror” or a rip-off of “Her,” some experts have predicted the legalization of human-robot marriage by 2050. This may seem far-fetched, but it would be silly to deny that our relationship with technology and, subsequently, with other humans has changed.

MIT professor Sherry Turkle suggested that “the idea of some kind of artificial companionship has already become the new normal. Kids play with robotic pets, become allies with computer game agents. But … this new normal comes with a price. For the idea of artificial companionship to become our new normal, we have to change ourselves, and in the process we are remaking human values and human connection.”

In fact, as we move further away from human connection and seek solace in artificial intelligence, what we are really looking for is something that will answer to our necessities without rebuttal: loss of the “other’s” freedom.

The way Lilly’s relationship with InMoovator has been described by some proves my point. “Jezebel” introduced Lilly as an “extremely relatable woman” who “should be proud because she has the skills to build her perfect mate,” and computing professor Adrian David Cheok was quoted saying, “It’s going to be much more easier, much more convenient to have sex with a robot, and maybe much better because that’s how you want it.”

The issue runs much deeper than the way technology is evolving. At the heart of it all, inhabitants of First World countries have become more interested in having all whims and pleasure satisfied, than engaging in true human connections. We seek the “perfect partner” as opposed to a free-willed human being that will choose to love us in spite of their shortcomings. This interest in the world catering to our comfort makes it so that when we engage in relationships we do not embark on a journey hoping to learn about the other person, hoping to learn how to love them, and wishing them complete freedom to be themselves. We expect a sort of human robot.

That is why, though the idea scares me, I don’t think it’s wild and crazy to think that humanity is gravitating toward relationships with artificial intelligence, which can be crafted to respond as we wish, without causing much fuss while still simulating the comfort of human interaction.

To combat a sad existence such as this, we must keep in mind that people are going to disappoint. Life may end up disappointing as well if we approach it wishing to bend it to our will. However, I find it much more appealing and, honestly, much more freeing to engage in relationship with people, things and reality in general, knowing I am not the maker of everything, and all I can do is discover.

Letizia Mariani can be reached at mari8259@stthomas.edu