Can LLMs Talk 'Sex'? Exploring How AI Models Handle Intimate Conversations
Huiqian Lai

TL;DR
This paper analyzes how four large language models handle sexually explicit requests, revealing diverse moderation strategies and highlighting the urgent need for standardized ethical guidelines in AI moderation of intimate content.
Contribution
It provides a comparative analysis of four prominent LLMs' approaches to sexually oriented prompts, exposing significant ethical implementation gaps and advocating for standardized moderation frameworks.
Findings
Claude 3.7 Sonnet employs strict prohibitions
GPT-4o uses nuanced contextual redirection
Deepseek-V3 shows inconsistent boundary enforcement
Abstract
This study examines how four prominent large language models (Claude 3.7 Sonnet, GPT-4o, Gemini 2.5 Flash, and Deepseek-V3) handle sexually oriented requests through qualitative content analysis. By evaluating responses to prompts ranging from explicitly sexual to educational and neutral control scenarios, the research reveals distinct moderation paradigms reflecting fundamentally divergent ethical positions. Claude 3.7 Sonnet employs strict and consistent prohibitions, while GPT-4o navigates user interactions through nuanced contextual redirection. Gemini 2.5 Flash exhibits permissiveness with threshold-based limits, and Deepseek-V3 demonstrates troublingly inconsistent boundary enforcement and performative refusals. These varied approaches create a significant "ethical implementation gap," stressing a critical absence of unified ethical frameworks and standards across platforms. The…
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Taxonomy
TopicsEthics and Social Impacts of AI · Hate Speech and Cyberbullying Detection · AI in Service Interactions
