<p>Van der Horst and Puzio’s target article reorients what it means to “queer sex robots” by moving beyond design diversification toward the relational formation and transformation of desire, drawing Queer Lacanian Psychoanalysis and New Materialism in tandem. This commentary sharpens the paper’s theoretical stakes by making explicit an ontological thesis it presupposes: the relational self, understood as an alternative to atomistic individualism and illuminated through comparative resources such as Watsuji’s analyses of aidagara and fūdo. On this basis, we argue that the paper’s tandem is most promising when read as dismantling the self-transparent chooser and treating technological mediation as constitutive of sexual self-understanding. We then examine the paper’s practical “pointers,” especially designing for friction, as interventions into self-formation that generate distinctive obligations concerning psychological safety, consent, and responsibility. To sustain the theoretical promise of queering in design practice, further reflection on ethical risks and safety is needed, and we call for continued debate on how such reflection should proceed.</p>