1. Become a DoA Archivist!
    Volunteers Needed!
    Dismiss Notice
  2. The Mod team regrets to inform the community that Mirodoll is now banned from Den of Angels. Please view the following thread:
    Mirodoll Banned from DoA
    Dismiss Notice

A frank, mature discussion about doll-vaginas. (nudity)

Oct 24, 2010

    1. CAUTION, THIS IS ABOUT DOLL VULVAS. (henceforth described as the proper term, doll vulvas or just vulvas)

      -mods feel free to delete on grounds of indecency or duplicate thread-

      Why is it that my beautiful female doll has such pretty, perky breasts, lovingly sculpted to look realistic, and yet her vulva is just a rough slit, gouged into her like an afterthought?

      http://img843.imageshack.us/img843/6797/dsc00451i.jpg

      she has nipples, and I painted uneven areolas on her, much like my own, but I'm at a loss as to attaching pubic hair or labia? Why have I never seen dolls with realistic vulvas? (I removed details of vulva parts here)

      I understand dolls are made to be stylized, and some specifically beautiful, (or ugly)
      but the vast vast majority have these slits, or nothing at all.... surely sculptors are not extreme prudes, they sculpt nipples and breasts, buttocks and penises- why not vulvas?

      vulvas can be beautiful, I've sculpted one for my 60cm Ai and it's like a whelk, it's got a slightly darker color on the inside, and one longer lip that curls in a graceful swoop.
      I just don't understand why the vulva, a symbol of creation and femaleness, is overlooked. (her new vulva is not pictured, I'm still working on it)

      For:
      it can make a doll more realistic
      it's something that is both personal and unique
      they don't take up much room
      you can sand it off if you don't like it

      Aginst:
      just like accurate penises, there is only so much space
      attachment issues
      wear and tear due to location
      mostly covered up by clothes


      What say you? are slits okay, since they are just dolls? is it embarrassing that our perfect, beautiful resin children are smooth and sexless? Would a vulva be ugly, or offensive?

      do bear in mind this discussion is intended for adult dolls, *but can range to younger dolls if you enjoy realism- just like a tiny boy baby can have a tiny penis and testicles, a tiny female baby can have a little bitty vulva that is similarly innocent.

      --edit, parts could also be silicone, pvc, or sculpted from non-resin bits, just a thought--
      --edit, this concerns the OUTER portion of the vulva, not the inner parts! just to be clear--
      --additions would be stylized, and not hyper-detailed, as that would be weird on an otherwise smooth doll--
      --edit edit, NOT hyper detailed!! NOT...--

      *this is an example, I do not want parts on my Pukipukis or tiny Anthro! Size also has a lot to do with it, as larger dolls can afford more detail


      IMPORTANT NOTE: one of the reasons this bothered me was (generally) women in the US are kept in the dark as to their genitalia, shamed and told to be afraid of anyone finding out they bleed, much less that it's something that happens on average every 27 days. many women don't even look at themselves, perpetuating ignorance about their bodies.

      BACK ON TOPIC: do you hold dolls as realistic or stylized? if so, how does that effect you, knowing they are based off the perceptions of our bodies. AKA if you're lovely sculpt is so perfect- flawless skin, beautiful jawline, blushed lips and mesmerizing glass eyes- how can something so important to humans be overlooked or recreated so casually.
       
    2. I'd say that this level of vulva-detailing is about equal to the "Frankly just a clunky sausage" level of detailing that that penides get. Note the lack of scrotum on even the most "correct" of boys. For variety, I suppose you could put some kind of dimpling on the labia majora, or even sculpt a little bit of the minora with addition/subtraction and a very fine blade, but other than that, I really don't know.

      I'm interested to see how this topic pans out!
       
    3. What say you? are slits okay, since they are just dolls? is it embarrassing that our perfect, beautiful resin children are smooth and sexless?

      I don't ever take pictures of my dolls in the nude , so it doesn't really matter to me (personally) that the genitals are not perfectly accurate. Although come to think of it, I don't think that I have ever even looked this closely at my dolls' crotches; the clothes go on right away. I would hardly say a line that looks this way is "sexless." It certainly looks much more feminine than masculine.

      The lack of detail in doll genitals is pretty equivalent to hands. Hands are usually much more visible, yet there are rarely any lines on the hands or finger joints.

      Would a vulva be ugly, or offensive?
      Not at all. The only issue I can think of is that such a delicately sculpted area could be easily damaged (similar to the reason why testicles might not really work all too well on some boy dolls).
       
    4. Just as I don't expect every male doll penis to be worked up with detailed veinage, or scrotal sac to be appropriately hanging or extremely textured, I don't expect a lot of detail in the female genitalia. If someone wanted to, that would be fine, but it's a narrow area you're talking about, and I'd rather opt for strength and thickness of resin there over a beautifully sculpted but structurally thin floor to the resin pelvis. (If anyone wanted to do an apoxy project, the results would be interesting, but no more than for any other modding project.)

      I've blushed the area on a doll or two, or softened the indent line, and have been content with such minor "treatments", since not every set of female genitals is wide open to the world 24-7. There are many that have all the structures hidden by the labia majora except during sexual activity. They are no less valid an arrangement than full exposure and hardly qualify as "smooth and sexless".

      Besides, my doll characters (like all the humans I know and the human I am) are more than just the symbolism of their genital parts, and exhibit creativity on many levels, and express their femalesness (and maleness) through their entire bodies and personalities. So I'm not that concerned with the detailing of the female genitalia (yes, it would be an interesting variation, just like the multi-positioned plug-in penises of a couple of male dolls, but it's certainly not a requirement), just as I accept a deal of stylization (and flaccidity) on the male symbol of creation and potency.

      There are painters and sculptors who celebrate genitalia as the focus of their art (sometimes very LARGE art), but would it really be more satisfying if every painting or drawing of a female nude had to be structurally detailed in the pubes? (And btw, in most girl babies I've had to help diaper-change, the "little bitty vulva" is very much just a tiny slit. Untill you have to start dealing with the consequences of a really bad plumbing arrangement in the species.)
       
    5. i'm actually quite glad someone ELSE brought this up, haha.
      I am currently comissioning a dear friend to work on my girl's vagina/vulva because i do feel, with the advancements in doll penises, the 'playing field,' as it were, need to be level. People are always modding or blushing or buying phallic attachments, merkins, what have you, to their male dolls but the 'scratch in the clay' look of the vulva is hardly ever given any attention.

      In my view, both sets of genitals should be treated with the same level of interest or disinterest. Sculptors seem to favor males, and so do modifiers, and i think it has a lot to do with the taboo around female genitals being more 'private;' although, from what my friend is telling me, sculpting and attaching a tiny set of lady parts is quiiite difficult.
      Should my girl's mod pan out, i plan on being extra careful not to chip or remove her new genitals for just that reason.
       
    6. I am completely indifferent to my dolls' genitalia. If they had no genitals I'd be fine with that (and I did have a doll on an angel body for a while). As long as however their genitalia is sculpted doesn't interfere with their ability to pose or wear clothing nicely I pretty much have absolutely no interest what's down there. I'm not concerned with realism to that degree and I don't photograph my dolls nude so it's just a complete nonissue for me. More detail wouldn't offend me, but neither would less.
       
    7. I don't think they need more than that. they are DOLLS. they do not need to have super realistic genetalias. a lot of boy dolls dont have detailed penis either. it would just be awkward in my opinion :/
      and honestly, if they were super detailed it would be porn if you take a pic of your doll in that angle...

      and i dont see what kind of detail should be added? when girls are just standing up it usually look pretty much like what our dolls have (unless the small lips are coming out). so you want a vagina like they have spreaded legs? Ôe
       
    8. I wonder if there would be a danger of chipping and other damage if there were small resin labia, etc. I don't see the problem with the current slit line. Some people blush them or attach pubic wigs. As far as realism is concerned, that seems good enough to me. Real labia are not wide open for the world to see, and longer inner lips could be damaged if protruding (clothing, sitting). Think about the problems with larger male doll genitalia. It's resin, so it doesn't give or move with clothing. I think it's fine the way it is.
       
    9. I personally have no preference to doll genitalea. In my eyes it just gets in the way of clothing (my IH boy's solid lump of resin peen is particularly annoying) and my dolls spend their time clothed anyway. In the same way as the penis being an annoying lump between the legs of my boy, a doll vulva would not be a soft, pliable thing. It would probably be too fragile to withstand the wear and tear dolls go through.
      I also think sahoma rather has a point too; if they were as detailed as the real thing then arguably the level of photoshoots could become rather pornographic, which I (personally) would not be comfortable with. I much prefer just the suggestion of genitalea *nods*

      Edit: To add, most doll breasts are not that realistic at all. I know my Elfdoll Tasha's breasts look like she is wearing an invisible push up bra :/. Even, say, Iplehouse Jessica's large breasts are too perky and centred to not be enhanced were she a real woman with breasts that size.
       


    10. Leenah, I have two words for you: IDilean boys.

      Personally for me, having only Yo-Sized kids at the moment... yes, my kids have genders, but it's more character-based genders than actual genders.

      I don't know... BEING a girl, I personally think breasts are more... aesthetically pleasing than the 'between the legs' stuff. I mean heck... when you're trying to sexualize yourself to go out to say... a club, you normally wear low-cut or revealing tops to show off cleavage... you don't wear say... crotchless panties with a miniskirt that in reality is more like a thick belt.

      I can understand having more detail down there if you're using your doll for artistic nude shots, but I think for most of our resin kids, they prefer not to feel a draft :P
       
    11. Wondering this to,
      why is such a degree of realism that important.
      Especialy considering these dolls are very stylised all over(which is even more visible when you can see joints), why does this paticular part need to be so realistic on something that clearly isn't.


      I don't ever take nude pictures of mine,
      But honestly, I find anything more detailed on either gender verging into a creepy area.
      Slits and lumps are just fine as long as they don't interfere with posing and make clothing impossible to fit.
       
    12. Honestly, I like my doll naked. nude. unclothed. And it kind of bothers me that she's so immature-looking.
      That's why I'm making her a set of labia and a hood, plus a small bush of pubic hair so when she runs around naked, people can be properly appalled.

      I can understand loving your doll sexless, I'm just saying on mature, full-busted females it seems a touch odd, if not a little offensive if you care about their unclothed appearance. Hyper-realism is just an extreme, too- I wouldn't want my glossy doll to have a bajillion tiny hairs and wrinkles all over the place, just enough thought and detail to show she's a woman, and has lady parts and not just a careless groove in her pubis.
       
    13. I like to look at my dolls naked and sometimes photograph them.

      However, I think the indented slit is a fairly accurate representation of what female genitalia look like when you're standing. You really can't see any of the inside details because they're usually covered by the labia majora. The clitoris and vaginal opening are not hanging out for all of the world to see on the majority of women, and usually are not visible unless the legs and labia are spread.

      It has nothing to do with hating female genitalia or finding them ugly or preferring the penis. It's about practicality and deciding which details are worth incorporating into a sculpt. Most male bodies don't have testicles because of the lack of room between legs and resin's inability to squeeze and shift. It's the same thing here.
       
    14. I don't quite see how it's 'offensive' for them not to be detailed... if you think about it, the only time you'd see any level of detail on a real woman is if she has her legs spread, if you look at a woman who's stood in a neutral stance all you really see is the labia anyway which is pretty much what you get with most female dolls.

      Since my dolls spend most of their time clothed -and even when I do take nude pictures I don't have them sat around with their legs spread- as long as they're the right overall shape to fill out clothes correctly and pose decently I couldn't really care less if they had no genitals at all. I had one of my old dolls on a girl to boy modded body for example but I never bothered to mod him a penis because I was the only one who knew he was lacking in that department and it really made no difference to the over all look anyway.
       
    15. I'll agree with that point as well - Some adult women, when they're standing straight up (Which seems to be the "default" for dolls), just have a sort of straight line, which is the fold between the outer labia, when the labia are big enough to cover everything else. The proportion of this "innie" configuration to the "outie" one (speaking as both a former mortuary technician in a university's cadaver lab and a sapphist) seems to be about equal.
       
    16. For both male and female dolls I think the suggestion of proper anatomy is good enough. I don't go for super-realism in my male dolls so I don't miss it in my female dolls. Going by what Ratty said, I guess it could be assumed that all the BJD girls are just "innies". As long as their bodies are somewhat representative of their gender and have the right shapes to fill their clothing I'm happy.

      If I wanted a doll that happened to have more genital detail it wouldn't stop me from buying it but then I've also bought a "neutered" male BJD because that's how he was made. I'd prefer for him to have something rather than nothing but on the upside he can wear the very tightest pants. Haha, I imagine a detailed female genital could lead to the first instance of BJD camel-toe!
       
    17. Like most others have said, I think it's more of a space issue than anything. Some of those well endowed boys have trouble with pants, the poor things! My boy has a sausage shape with a teeny hole in it, and my girls have a slit. The boy may have a small groove to differentiate his testes, and my 13 girl has a hint of nipples on her moderately sized chest. I wouldn't consider any of it detailed, so to me the over all details are consistant. They've all got enough to show they are X gender, even my genderless one, without being overly sexualized and to me that's all that matters. I'd rather have the scupltors focus on things I see every day anyway, like faces and hands.
       
    18. I'm one of those that just don't care that much about my dolls' parts. My mature boy has a tiny little lump of resin and that suits me just fine since he's hard enough to find pants for. I also have a female to male body I did myself and have no desire to ever sculpt a penis for him. He is no less of a boy to me and I don't plan to ever photo my dolls naked in any context.

      I also wouldn't buy one that did have more detail, but I don't know how good it would look. I've seen a few mods for females and it looked a little strange honestly, but whatever makes you happy, you go and do it. I don't care what goes on between my dolls legs, but I know some people do.
       
    19. THIS. While some women do have labia minora or a clitoral hood that are large enough (or labia majora that are small enough) that they protrude from beneath the labia majora in non-gynecological positions (eg: sitting, walking, standing), many women do not - on many women the only things visible are the pudendal mound and the labia majora unless they are aroused or undergoing one of the aforementioned gynecological exams. And the urethral opening, vaginal opening, and clitoris are almost NEVER in a position in which they would be visibly exposed in a female that is going about everyday (non-sexual, non-gynecological) activities. That's what the labia majora and clitoral hood are for - to protect those parts from over stimulation and exposure. They do a pretty good job of it most of the time.

      If a company released a doll that had a visible urethral opening and vaginal opening, I'd think something was wrong with the doll. And if a company released a doll that had an exposed clitoris, I'd probably not want to buy it, because that just looks terribly uncomfortable.

      If you want a more detailed but still realistic representation of female genitals in a doll sculpt, check out the Dollstown 15Girl body.
       
    20. I would assume sculpting a realistic looking vulva would be difficult or not very cost effective. It may be way too small to get in there and give it the detail it requires, or maybe even impossible. Maybe artists have tried and failed to make anything that looks decent and therefore just gave up?

      All theories, of course. It's fun to ponder...