Do you believe that some owners mistreat their dolls?

Abuse does have very strong connotations relating to people/creatures, though. Most people, when they hear 'abuse' think of things like "animal abuse" or "child abuse" or "verbal abuse" or "spousal abuse". All really horrible things - on a completely different level of awful than anything that could be done to a doll.

You're completely correct about the dictionary definition, but it can't be denied that 'abuse' has some very strong connotations that make it seem a bit thoughtless to attribute the word to dolls.

ETA: I actually think 'maltreat' is the best word for what we're all discussing - it still keeps the emotional/'moral' element without any connotation of causing distress to an animate being.

 

Please, everyone, don't make comments on who deserves to or should own a doll. It's at best pointless and at worst hurtful to imply you have to fulfill some criteria to own a doll.

Everyone who fairly bought their doll deserves it. Anyone who wants a doll and is prepared to save up for it deserves it.

Sure I don't like to see dolls scribbled on and dressed in cut up socks, but I would never question whether that person deserves to or should have the doll. If they enjoy it and are not getting into dangerous debt for it, they should have it. End of story.

 

Of course! Within reason, what you speculate is true. When I posted, I had no intention to tie the individual in question to the treatment of other peoples dolls/belongings; I simply meant that the way they treat their dolls is none of my business. However, if bringing other people's belongings/dolls into the scenario, I'm sure most would be hesitant for obvious reasons.

Therein, it is the the responsibility of the person who lets the other hold/touch their doll, to make sure that in the hands of another, nothing happens. Ultimately, the owner has the choice of whether or not to let another handle their dolls. xD

I think it's a separate issue. If it's the reasonable case where you just think, "oh we have separate values..better not" then I don't believe it is quite judging them or their character. They are how they are. Nobody is thinking outrageous thoughts like ">8U OMG THAT IS SO WRONG" "I FEEL SO BAD FOR THAT DOLL" "WHAT ARE THEY DOING" etcetc... It's just self-righteous and demeaning towards others, if by those thoughts you [general you] feel that you can own it "better" or the doll "deserves better" or something like that. I think in that case it is just more of an issue of protecting your own, which everyone has a right to. I'm sure we're all paranoid when a thing we love is in the hands of another.

 

I wouldn't argue that "abuse" has those connotations, but they are fairly weak in my mind, and only appear in regard to the noun form. But to be completely fair, as a verb, "abuse" doesn't automatically cause my mind to travel to, well, anything. Just its definition. When I see "abuse," I understand it to mean "use improperly." It's unfortunate that such a concise and eloquent word has taken on a peripheral meaning in such an overwhelming way that the OP can't even use it correctly without risking accusations of poor word choice.

 

But that's the way the word evolved. I can think of several other words that have evolved to mean completely different things. "Abuse" now has very strong, negative connotations. Hence the "accusations" about word choice. Personally I think "mistreat their dolls" is fine, as it gets the point across without all the associations.

I agree with Laelen. There's a difference between respecting different values (thinking X treats their dolls differently than Y) and asserting your value over another (stomping up to X and demanding they treat their dolls like Y).

 

To answer the actual question of this thread, "Do you believe that some owners mistreat their dolls?"

And if by mistreat, we mean, act irresponsibly with very expensive collectibles, then yes, yes I do believe that some owners mistreat their dolls.

There are a whole range of things owners do, knowingly and unknowingly, that can permanently damage their dolls.

Simple.
Of course, this is easy to answer once we stop focusing on the word "abuse."

 

I know what abuse means, and I firmly stand by what I originally posted. Many people here believe their dolls are "real" or harbor some supernatural soul. My issue is when people draw parallels of dolly abuse to human and animal suffering.

If a person wants to spend money and manhandle their dolls with greasy hands, drag it by its feet, head skidding across, the floor, so be it. Who cares? You aren't disrespecting the doll by doing so. Would I treat my possessions (including my dolls) this way? No. Would I let someone handle my dolls if they treated their dolls this way? No.

Also, a large majority of owners who "don't take care of their dolls" don't perceive themselves as mistreating their possessions. Excluding a few, people who drop cash on a ball-jointed doll don't buy it so that they can destroy it.

 

What about "drug abuse"? That's the strongest connotation it holds for me, and it certainly doesn't mean "beat the hell out of your drugs (physically or verbally)." It means "misuse drugs." I don't think the word has evolved yet, it's just a little misunderstood in certain contexts. Evolution of words takes hundreds of years, and the primary usage of "abuse" (verb) still accords with Merriam-Webster.

And mizbelle is right. We should stop focusing on the word. Because I think the answer is that yes, some people abuse their dolls. Of course, the real argument is whether or not violent treatment can even be considered improper treatment, since the doll is the person's property to do with as they wish. So it should be in their prerogative to throw the doll across the room or sand its ears off, right?

I don't think so. In a far more extreme case, consider if someone purchased a Monet painting for their personal collection. That expensive piece of art is theirs to do with as they wish, right? But if they chose to cut it up and turn it into confetti, or burn it to cinders, then there's no question in anyone's mind that the person is a monster. I consider BJDs to be beautiful and artful, and damaging them either purposefully or out of negligence is akin to harming a unique sculpture or painting.

 

I guess it can be summed up as...

Yes some people are not careful with their dolls, but who cares?

 

shao, exactly that. What else is there to say?

 

This is pretty much the same debate as the thread on whether unskilled modders should be permitted to have dolls.

I really wish we could get around the idea that a doll is some precious, entrusted item and start viewing dolls more like what they are: luxury material property that anybody can buy if they have the cash, and once bought, can freely do with exactly as they please.

 

I personally shudder at the thought of my to-be doll being in any situation where he might be harmed or 'played with' by anyone I don't trust.
At the same time, I think how any given person treats their doll is completely up to them and I think it's terribly rude to tell someone that they should be more or less careful with what is theirs.

 

Child abuse is universally understood to mean "to physically harm children". Thats the strongest connotation the word has in my mind, and to compare "doll abuse" to "child abuse" is... well... lame.

Also, I don't consider a person a monster for destroying a piece of art work they purchased for their own private collection. A real monster is someone who takes all copies of certain literature, for example, and burns it to prevent people from reading it. I think these distinctions are important if as a society we want to function together peacefully and efficiently. I don't think its fair to categorize and punish someone who burns their monet to someone who rounds up and burns every copy of Catcher in the Rye or Lolita.

Also, evolution of words doesn't take hundreds of years to happen. Any significant event can change the connotations and even denotations of a word in a heartbeat. Or at least a generation...

 

I think these persons aren't real collectors. And this kind of doll is like every other toys for them. They don't appreciate this artistic works really.

 

i believe that dolls have feelings inside them. >__<" if the person really loves his/her doll very much, then their treatment would be different. They would be taking a very good care of them (cleaning them, talking to them and etc.) That's how much i know about a good owner.
If the person wants to get the doll ONLY, then there's no connection between them. then what for the person buy the doll for? the worst is that they allow other children to play with their doll. seriously, if it was me.. i wouldn't let anybody touch, other than people with dollfies. What if the children break the doll's parts? Would the person be worrying about the repairing or about how hurt the doll would be? x__x" this person really sounds like one of my friend. she just want to get a doll to mix into other people's group. she took it as a fashion. when the fashion is over, she would keep the doll away. i felt so sorry for the doll. >__<"

 

Yes, some people are careless with their personal possessions, and it's too bad to treat a valuable thing in a way that could potentially lead to damage -- but all I can do is take care of my things and be happy that I still have things that I've owned since I was five, and that they're still in pretty good shape.

I don't think that dolls have feelings other than what we project on them, so although I hate to see a lovely thing damaged, it doesn't bother me in the way it would if I saw someone mistreating their pet or their child.

 

Well... I think you CAN mistreat a doll. The author of the thread also said, the word 'abuse' should not be taken too deep, so I guess I won't.
Still, I say it so that nobody get's me wrong, mistreating a doll is COMPLETELY different than abusing a living being. But I think everybody knows that, no matter how much they love their dolls.

Well, but I think I'm very sensitive when it comes to my doll...
When I first got my doll I invited my best friend to celebrate with me and when she took her, she moved her limbs very harshly. I told her calmly that I'd really like her to be more careful.
She wasn't so harsh on her, that I feared she'd break her but it was just painful to look at it. ^^'
Other experience.
Once when I carried her with me I asked an other friend to hold her for me because I needed my hands. She took her carelessy with one hand, like a glass of water.
I asked her politely if she'd hold her with both hands because it made me so nervous...
I don't know if I'm overly sensitive or if this is 'normal' for a doll owner, but in these situations I felt that my doll was slightly mistreated...
(Then again, what's normal?)

 

i doubt that many people treat there dolls badly because of how much they cost. they will alway be people that do but they also most likely don't take care of most of they're own things because they're lazy/don't care/didn't earn them etc.....

personally i bet i could make a few doll people cringe..... i'll take my doll in the sun once in awhile and i sometimes leave just whenever it lays. my doll nose dives regularly and i touch its face... but take other precations like the rooms my dolls are in are always dark and i coat it with UV cut msc and putting it up in once in awhile. resin is tougher than people give it and takes alot of abuse. i've seen a kid swinging around a bjd at a meetups and it was in good shape. (the first time i saw her do it though my eyes about bugged outta my head!) i'd much rather enjoy them than leave them in a box....

 

Maybe some owners do mistreat their dolls but it's up to those owners to do what they like w/ them coz they own 'em. It's like buying a brand new ferari and then letting in drop on the clift.

 

Dolls are nothing more than very expensive luxury items. Just like an Xbox, a PS3, a fancy car, a really nice computer. to NOT use those things to your full enjoyment is a huge waste of money, just like the dolls. If you bought your doll to play with them, then how is that abuse? And which doll are we talking about? A bobobie or a Volks one-off? You can't just generalize and some up ALL dolls into one general catagory because a person who has several dolls may treat each one completely differently depending on the doll itself. No, I don't believe people "abuse" their dolls based solely on that fact. Dolls are material objects, breakable or not. You buy it for what you want it for and who cares what anyone else does with theirs, it's not your problem.