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

I think the detail in penis revolution happened with the Iplehouse EID model body and the Soom Idealian, so heres hopeing for the vulva revolution soon to follow! Before most male genitals on dolls werent even graphic enough to feel 'teehee' about when undressing them, they just looked like stumps. When I see Idealians junk I literally feel a little embarassed, which I think is a really good example of detail. Most of the time the nipples on dolls leave alot to the imagination...My Elfdoll has amazing detailed nipples, they get a lot of 'wooaah' responses when shes undressed, whilst for example my Soom Super Gem doesnt get any comments even though her breasts are larger etc.
It doesnt have to have crazy detail on the vulva, but something more than just the vaguely placed slit. I always thought the Mini Gem by Sooms really odd, it sort of bulges out and the slit is on the front, it doesnt go underneath.
Even something like a definition between vulva and butt crack rather than a continued slit, I find it really crude.

 

doll penises are very unrealistic too, very tiny and they always look like they belong on a baby, even on grown man dolls

 

Going to jump in here with a little input. =) While I don't mind that the ladies I currently have are undetailed, details are something I *would* like to see on a doll once in a while. It would just be delicate work. I think I would die if there were ever a female ID_ealian.

 

I wonder if it might be something to do with simple desire to not be mistaken for someting specifically sexual. There are many peices on the market that are for sexual observance purposes and I am sure many of the artists want to dissacociat thier works from other with such a purpose as much as possible.
This is my only theory , also I agree that many women dont have anything but a slit vissable most of the time.

 

I don't want to come off as confrontational, but there's way too much variation in the shapes of female genitalia to say that most women have only a 'slit' from front-view. I keep seeing that in this thread. I would just like to point out it isn't necessarily true.

 

I'm glad someone started this thread; it is an interesting discussion. It's not that the decision to buy a doll revolves around the genital sculpting for me, but one of the things I love about the dolls is the detailed realism. I love the veining in the arms, hands and feet of my boys, the detailed collarbones and nipples of the girls, the musculature and curves of the ribcage. My girl has only a crude line carved into the resin for a vagina as thought the sculpter simply flicked a tool across it and called it a day. It's the inconcistenty of the detail that I don't like, and makes me wonder "why bother with the line at all?" I don't demand full anatomical correctness with clitoral hood and all that -- the boys lack scrotum and veining, of course -- but even a simple slit could be approached with the same grace the sculptor gives her buttocks.

 

Personally it wasn't something I'd really thought of until this post. It's not that I don't want that much detail but I don't particularly care either.

I think part of it is the whole idea behind the dolls as sculptures vs. other types of sculpture. I sculpt model horses, tiny ones the size of quarters and pennies, and in that hobby every single detail is critiqued and certain sculptures are widely criticized for not having proper conformation but that is the ENTIRE hobby.

Dolls on the other hand, while fairly accurate, don't have that type of detail. They mostly aren't sculpted to be anatomicly correct, they are sculpted to be especially cute, or beautiful representations and detail isn't where all of the focus is. More of the focus is on the customization, clothes, etc. Personally because of this, while I add proper detailing to both male and female horses, even the ones as tall as a penny lol, I haven't really cared on my doll.

 

I agree with the people who have pointed out that there is basically no "idealized" version of what women should look like in that area. There is such a huge range of what is normal, but you generally only see that if you pick up a number of copies of Penthouse and thumb through them or watch porn. So how would the doll companies settle on one design? As many hundreds of versions of human faces that are available as girl dolls- that number would be reflected by the different variety of female bits.

So for me the suggestion of a slit is enough- and wayyyy better than the neuter Barbie.

Not to mention, the younger people in this discussion may not realize that until relatively recently, NO ONE waxed all the hair off in that area, unless they were porn stars. If you can get a hold of some vintage Penthouse or Playboy magazines from the 60s and 70s, you might be surprised to see all that hair.

I'm not sure who decided that in order to be sexy women must have all their pubic hair ripped out. With the natural hair in place the details of the nether region in women is pretty well hidden. We had mandatory showers in gym in high school in the 70s, so I saw literally hundreds of girls in the shower room, and none of those details were ever visible.

I personally find it a bit disturbing that at this point in time it is generally accepted that to be attractive a woman must be hairless. I associate a lack of genital hair with childhood. With puberty, and sexual maturity, comes pubic hair. So for me, if I really wanted realism, I would be more likely to add hair.

That said, I don't personally find women's genitals to be ugly- I could see sculpting those parts, but only as a work of art (think Judy Chicago). But if i were going to go that realistic, it wouldn't be on a ball-jointed doll, it would be on a sculptured statue. In my mind a ball-jointed doll can never truly be realistic because of the joints.

 

Well put, cirquemom.

It seems that for some of us (myself included) it isn't so much that we demand the detail or the realism of anatomically correct vaginas, just that they are paid equal attention as the rest of the detail. The haphazardly carved slit (at least on the few girl dolls I've handled) seems more like an afterthought carelessly executed on what is otherwise a gracefully sculpted and stylized doll. It's more a case of if you're going to do it, at least put a little effort into it.

Take, for example, the naval. Variations of belly buttons are plentiful -- innies, outies, round, narrow -- yet on female and male dolls there is usually and nicely sculpted, shapely naval even with simple suggestions of folds of skin around the lower edges. The simple, often crude "slit" of vagina is akin to the scupltor using pencil to poke a little dot in the center of the tummy and calling it a naval.

 

I do agree with this. I have some dolls that literally look like they took a butter knife and made a quick slash in the clay. The edges are rough and sharp. Simply smoothing the edges and rounding them off a bit would really help aesthetically.

 

I think that in some cases, there is more attention to the genital area in general than in others. (How's that for vague?) I see a range in the boys, and a range in the girls.

I think there's generally more detail on the males as opposed to the females, but to be fair, boy parts are on the outside, and girl parts tend to be on the inside. It's just how it goes. In terms of levels of detail, I'd say there's fairly decent parity -- but mostly for that reason, because there's more of the male anatomy to be seen when 'at rest in a default standing pose' than there is for most women.

Is that justification for not doing more? For me, it is, mostly from a practical perspective -- it's easy enough to make a spot to replace the magnet or peg for variably positioned peens, but it seems like it would be a bit harder to have the same setup for female parts without strange joint/seams that would look somewhat more disturbing to my eye -- the line around the base of the penis is easier to forgive than something that might end up looking like Lee Press On Labia.

I can, in the end, deal with the basic single line. It's the Y shape I see at times that really baffles and slightly dismays me. I have seen many a naked woman in my day, but I've not seen the Y on anything but BJDs.

If I was going to design something myself, it would probably have some additional shaping detail beyond what I typically see, but I wouldn't go for the spread look/etc. It has little to do with beauty standards and a lot to do with delicate parts that I'd see being easy to break and hard to make. (Plus, I am going to be really blunt... but so help me, if snapped off a part of my doll's inner labia, should they be protruding, I think I would double over in sympathetic agony and never be able to look at the poor creature again, and I'm not all that animistic in general!)

 

I actually really love the idea of more realistic female genitals on my dolls. I woul definitely like at least 2 of mine have more realistic genitals (my incoming RS Dan, who is supposed to be me in doll form, and my transgendered IH Tatiana because her gender is such a huge part of her life.) It seems like it would be a tricky procedure though. And I would be shy about touching my Tatiana down there since she's so sweet and innocent.

 

I should certainly HOPE NOT, hagarenfangirl. If they did, can you imagine the sanitary conditions, or lack thereof? No, the patch of skin between both "cracks" as it were is quite necessary.

EDIT:

In the spirit of properly appalling people, Dragocorn, (as I have lesbian dolls) I want one of the boy bit persuasion. Or a few. In bright pink. Glittery.

 

The Lacy Rose- I'm not sure how well modding would look overall, at least not adding on the labia. I know a few people said they were working on such a modification, but I was wondering if anyone has any progress pictures? I would think that carving the detail would be the way to go to insure resin continuity and to avoid seams and color mis-matching with the eventual fading/yellowing/what-not. But unless she starts with little or no slit to begin with or a fair portion of thick resin... I guess that kid of mod would be easier on a boy torso?

 

I suppose if you really wanted your girl doll to have a cameltoe showing through her tight clothes, falsie labia could be engineered out of eye-putty or silicone earplugs or something. Anything soft for the clothes to pinch into. After all, real people stick everything into their blouses or underwear, to enhance their Business; I've seen boy dolls with codpieces on; some hard-rockin' ladydolls may wish to get a little wild with their Spandex, too. ^^

I think it is very interesting to see how girl dolls' vulvae get sculpted... or get ignored... it seems to say something about the sculptor's comfort-level. I have only boy dolls, and they have a wide variety of penii between them, and you can really tell the unflinching ones vs. the ones who pulled their punches.

And I must be honest: The first time I saw a 60-Narae with her panties off, I shrieked like a little girl, because I just wasn't expecting such a fully sculpted vulva! As many doll-penii as I'd seen before, this had just never occurred to me. No wonder Narae has that gently contented look going on: she has an actual Happy Place to go to.

Fun story: Friend of mine & I (we're both 40) were just recently watching a 1971 Ken Russell movie, which of course featured mad amounts of full-frontal nudity. My friend gave the most misty-sounding gasp, he clasped a hand to his chest, and he marvelled, "Ohhh...! I remember triangular pubic hair!!" It was so funny & sort of sweet; he sounded like he'd just rediscovered a long-lost brand of favorite childhood candy, or something.

But it really drove things home: Neither of us could remember the last time we'd seen an actual Delta of Venus portrayed anywhere lately. Everybody these days simply expects to see the creepy little Hitler-mustache waxjob.... the eye has been trained to expect it. I wouldn't be surprised if little boys assumed that women's pubic hair grows in a rectangular strip. It's amazing how natural anatomy can disappear so completely from the popular imagination in the space of a just couple decades.

 

On a side note, I love the way this hobby broadens your mind. I, for one, have never spent so much time contemplating the finer structural details of female genetalia as viewed from various positions.

 

Even beyond that, it seems. I was flabbergasted on a forum (about moving to Japan) that some of the younger women were grossed out that Japanese women didn't wax it all off. When I was in my early twenties (36), I never heard anyone say that. Even bikini waxes were only standard when you were actually going to be in a, y'know, bikini or something . . .

 

I think a link over to the "pubic hair" gallery thread is necessary, but now I can't find it??

EDIT: Here it is:
http://www.denofangels.com/forums/showthread.php?8393-How-to-apply-pubic-hair-NWS-dolly-genitalia
Anyway...

At first I was TOTALLY WEIRDED OUT by the concept of dolls with genitalia. But this is because to be, dolls = dolls of children. Having dolls of adults is a somewhat new concept to me, but you can see why I was, er, surprised.

For adults, though, really...it would be just plain stupid to to make a completely physically accurate doll and then just have a big blank where genitals should be. I mean, grow up. But I don't think super-graphic detail is necessary unless the rest of the doll is sculpted that way too. I'm that way about the rest of the doll too, though - I dislike super-defined male muscles with a smooth anime-like face, for example.

My fiancé is 33, and had never been with a girl who had ANY pubic hair before. (And I bikini, if you want TMI.) But I've heard that's only in the US, and only for the younger generations.