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

I personally do not find genitals of either sex beautiful. I prefer the simple, stylized versions typical in most sculpts to highly realistic ones.

 

Because they are supposed to represent children and genitals have a habit of being there since birth. Doll makers don't sculpt genitals because people are going to take pictures of them; they sculpt them, because they're part of the human body and are no stranger than a mouth, a toe, or the right pinkie.

 

It's also worth noting that 'body shame' is not a universal. What's considered 'never to be seen' varies considerably by culture and era.

Most of the posters on the boards are Western, so it's understandable that a lot of us are accustomed to fairly heavy restrictions on modes of dress compared to some parts of the world -- and if you think people wearing very little aren't being 'shamed' by being called sluts and whores and all the rest to bring them 'back into line' with heavy coverage or conform to social norms, you haven't been paying much attention to the culture around you -- but it would be short-sighted to forget that simple reality.

 

There's a great Frank Zappa line -- "What's the ugliest part of your body? Some say it's your [vulgarity]; I say it's your mind." That one makes me wince and grin.

My Barbies used to hang out together naked. I liked Tutti (yes, I am old), because she looked reasonably like a 6-year-old kid. She didn't have genitals, but she somehow looked pretty natural. Barbie, on the other hand, looked really weird because she had breasts but (at that time) just had a square block between the hips. Because BJDs are so uncannily accurate, and so lovingly painted and sculpted on the faces and hands, to me they look odd with a slit between the legs, the way the first poster linked to. It's a sudden transition from accuracy to carelessness.

I really liked (can't find the link) the body sculpt somebody in this thread linked to, with soft pubic hair that had been painted as delicately and carefully as an eyebrow. For me, that hit a sweet spot between "I can see the little boy in the canoe!" and "I have never, ever seen a woman who looked remotely like that".

As far as liking the body parts themselves -- I hold with the comedienne who says that if anybody's close enough to see mine, he better be getting busy, not critiquing!

 

You....You are my new hero. That was hilarious.

As for the actual topic, I like my dolls nude too. I can use them to pose as little models, or to sit there and be pretty in all their nudity, in an artistic fashion. I HAVE seen some male dolls with sculpted pubic hair, or more fine detail to the penis, but I have yet to see a female doll with the same level of attention. I like my dolls to be realistic to a point, and being a woman myself, I find that the little "groove" or "slit" feels a little...impersonal I guess. It does feel thrown on last minute.
I wouldn't want anything that would compromise posing, the resin, or clothing like the other members have said, but I don't think it would hurt to add just a little bit of a labia and clitoris, considering that I haven't seen a female doll that can CLOSE their legs, which would cause the pubic area to rub against the thighs or joints as such. It should be moderately safe.
The girls that I have are MSD's. I haven't looked much at their pubic region because their sculpts are children, and that would just feel highly inappropriate. For the "younger" scuplts of both boys and girls, I think UNDERdetailing the genitals are a bit of a better thing, whether you have a clean mind or not.
I do agree that a bit more attention to the genital scupting would be nicer on the more adult sculpts of dolls, since they DO have nipples.

 

I don't really mind either way. I mean I would be fine with it being more realistic but I don't really mind if it is not. Just doesn't interest me much, I keep underwear on mine anyway. I can sort of see why some may want that however, for artistic purposes.

 

I can see the appeal of more realistic genitals for dolls but it's not very...realistic? to expect. Practical would be a better word probably.

Human gentials are complicated because they need to be that way to do their job. Dolls are simplified because they merely need to imply form and don't need to serve a purpose beyond that. Very detailed doll genitals are more likely to get in the way with clothing and positioning so for many sculptors, they probably don't feel much need to make something that detailed when most people dress their dolls.

That said, if the sculpt of the dolls don't serve that form function for you, then you have every right to add that detail yourself! The human body itself is not morally wrong and inappopriate in and of itself, regardless of what society says, so I don't see why that should apply to dolls either. I imagine most people who would opt for more detail with their dolls simply want to celebrate the human body, and a doll is a perfect way to do so.

 

Ha! So I'm not the only one bugged by that. That's probably my biggest beef when it comes to a lot of fashion doll bodies I've seen -- they don't have to go super detailed with the genitalia, but it would be nice if the shape was actually somewhat natural looking.

 

I feel like there should be something there at least representing the lady-parts, but I don't think it has to be completely accurate. I wouldn't be against it, but I just don't think it's necessary to have something be completely there on a doll- who doesn't need those parts to begin with.

Barbie, for example, is a shame. She has a crack, but nothing in the front? (Sooo many sex jokes come to mind, but I'll refrain!) I think what our BJDs have, in contrast, is adequate enough, despite not being completely correct- neither male nor female are.

 

I've read through some of the posts but not all. It's funny because I was actually staring at my Aidolls (Custom House) Bisou UU and wondering why there wasn't a slit there since her bum was so defined. And she is a child but I was just questioning the realism since she is such a realistic looking girl.

I actually prefer a more realistic body. It's not because I take nude photos of the dolls or because I want them to run around nude. It's just a question of realism. I'm not talking about functional parts just something that looked real. I don't find it creepy or weird. I question why we are so afraid of the nude form that it creeps us out or makes us think it's weird when it's so natural and normal.

I certainly appreciate a slit of some sort over the weird nothingness. I would certainly appreciate and desire a more sculpted looking vulva than a tiny dot or slash as some have described. I think in that case it's either do it or don't. Don't put a weird little dot there, either make it look reasonable or don't do it.

I really want to get more mature dolls. I love my babies but I really would like some more mature looking dolls too and I would appreciate their bodies looking real all over. I don't think a sculpted vulva would be obtrusive in any way unless it were overly sculpted and cartoonish.

I can attest to a woman's body looking vastly different from one woman to the next. I don't know that the doll would necessarily set an ideal by simply having a little more definition. Certainly our ideals are already warped by the sexless dolls we've grown up with...

I can certainly appreciate that some would like a more realistic body not for anything pornographic but just because they desire a realistic doll. For me, I don't shy away from sexuality and I don't really have an issue with nipples (I was watching something recently and the actresses nipples were very visible. I was with my mom and I remember saying, "boy it must be cold in there." and we both sort of chuckled.)

I will say that their bulging leg joints threw me off far more than any genitalia ever could. At first I found it very ugly and I hated it but I've grown used to seeing it and it no longer bothers me.

 

I saw an SD with a very detailed penis...I thought it was weird and just couldn't turn away
it was...I donno just weird

 

To be honest, I think a nude doll looks less weird with detailed lady parts that she does with no lady parts whatsoever. I've seen female dolls whose genital areas are just weird, slightly elongated (?!) pieces of plastic. Actually, I think the elongation is due to the joints in the hips. Never mind. It looks strange anyway.

Personally, I think the anatomical correctness of BJDs is part of what separates them from... say... Barbies. And imho, the human body is beautiful, and shouldn't be anything to be ashamed of- especially in a work of art such as a dollfie.

Would I mod a doll myself to give her more detailed lady parts? Probably not, mainly because I don't do a whole lot of nude photography, and therefore the mods would be kind of superfluous. But that doesn't mean I'm against the idea. If you're going to make an anatomically correct doll, why not go the whole hog?

 

Well, if the genitalia is MORE detailed and realistic than the rest of the doll, that's a little weird. I haven't seen a doll like that, but it seems like people do that in lots of types of art.. like I guess they feel self-conscious or they get distracted by the sexuality, and it stops them from using their better artistic judgement and stylizing it in the same way they would other things.

 

I would rather my dolls be less detailed than over detailed. Most people think that anyone who likes dolls who's not a little kid is weird as it is. I really don't want people thinking I'm some sort of pervert.

 

I'm not sure if you can see it very well, but I actually went in and carved out some vaginal detailing on my Mayzee (Luts senior delf body)

 

I don't collect mature girls but I can say my boys have some fine detailing going on below the belt and I'm not sure why female dolls have such stylized genitals since that is the case. What's good for the gander is good for the goose, I always thought.

 

I once saw an artist doll that had a vulva so detailed, she actually had the vagina (yes, the hole).
and I thought that was REALLY weird, because 1) it must look weird in clothes 2) it looks like she has her leg spread at all time.

I don't find genitals beautiful on either gender, so I do not need nor want my doll to have something super detailed. my dolls pretty much always have panties to hide their 'almost-is'.

BUT I must admit that I don't understand why some companie spend so much time on sculpting the penis on their boys but their girls have no details at all. Ô_o in general, I feel companies don't spend as much effort on their girls. just by seeing how their are always billions of updates on the boys to pose better and all, and the girl... nope. improvement of the neck, new size. that's all. :/

 

Well said, surreality.
And I don't think genitals are weird or anything but I don't really care for them enough to want them more detailed as they are on the usual BJDs today. Since I don't see them that much as I don't do nude photography, I care more for fingers or the face.

 

I don't really care either way, but I do prefer female sculpts that has a little more detail than just a V shaped impression between their legs. However, how detailed her girlie bits are would never influence me to buy or not buy a doll.

And... I do have to add this. Sometimes a slit is realistic. I don't mind a doll having a simple slit and slightly rounded outer labia, because I personally find that attractive and totally normal (for reasons I won't get into but shouldn't be too hard to deduce). Which leads us to...

I think it's one those of things where we do tend to want to see what we personally look like and relate to because we consider that "normal". No matter how idealistic a doll is, I think we're a little more prone to judging the covered up bits based on our own ideas of what they should look like.

 

Wow, who knew this would be such a hot topic on here? My one femail doll has been sold an for the six months i had her, i neer bothered to take offf the undies she came with so I am not sure if she even had a dollgina to speak off. Now with this discussion, I feel like I should have looked.

I guess I see the argument from both sides. if someone appreciates these dolls bcause of how they represent the human form, then it is not unusual for them to want more detailed genoitailia on the doll. If that need leeds them to blush or modify the doll to increase their comfort with it then that is fine I think. I have not done so mut if folks want to photograph their dolls naked hen thqt is up to them as well. it is their doll and you really do not have to look if you are offended by resin nudity.

On the other hand, if oyur dolls are seldom naked and you don't intend to photograph them that way, you may have no need for their genitailia to be as detailed and you may not care that the female dollgina looks like an afterthought. I would not say that one stance is 'right' and the other 'wrong'. It should be within everyone's right to explore realism in their dolls to any extent that they feel comfortable and the rest of us can either choose to appreciate it or just not look. I do not think it requires being up in arms so to speak.