Doll Nudity Warnings - Why?

^Yeah, I saw the other thread, but this is going in a slightly different direction. They spoke more about the difference between nudity and porn in the doll world. This one's talking about whether or not people should be warned about artistic doll nudity.

I'm not sure if I get the nsfw point just because I don't think I'd go to this site while I'm at work. ^^; Because let's face it: if you don't think these dolls are beautiful, you probably think they're creepy so people will ridicule you anyway regardless of what the doll's wearing in the picture, I think. Plus there's that other group of people who'll be all "Aren't you too old to be playing with dolls...?". I just think that people who'll think you're weird for looking at artsier pictures of dolls will probably think your weird anyway for liking the dolls.

The different backgrounds thing is a good point. I wonder if there's anyone here who's honestly offended by doll nudity though...? o.o

 

warnings are a good idea for the whole being in a public place situation. I can also see someone not wanting their kids seeing detailed dolls. I personally wouldn't have much of a problem with it, and I have absolutely no problem with nudes. I'm an artist. plus if you own a doll you see them naked anyway. I think a warning is a good idea because of the people who might be around the computer while you're checking the gallery

 

We forget that this is an international site. There are other countries and religions that have bans on any sort of nudity, even unrealistic doll nudity. It's best to have a warning.

 

I'm not bothered in the least by tasteful nudity or by doll nudity, but I'm also very strongly for nudity warnings. I often browse DOA at cafes or in the library and even on breaks in the lab where I work, and any nudity -- even doll nudity -- would be totally inappropriate in all of those places. It could potentially get me in trouble at work and frankly I don't want to explain doll nudity to passers-by at the library or my favorite cafes, and I don't feel that I should have to.

Furthermore, when I look at DOA in my workplace it is in fact totally acceptable. I worked 20 hours a week before and am working there as a volunteer now, but I would often spend time at the lab when I had free time between classes because it was a quiet place to sit where I didn't bother anyone. My time at that point is my own and I can browse what I want to browse, but if my boss/acacemic advisor, who happens to be rather straight-laced, walked in and saw me looking at photographs of naked, anatomically correct dolls, she might think badly, and I'd rather that not happen. It's not my business to try to "expand her horizons" about the artistic merits of doll nudity and/or the idea that nudity is nothing to get upset over -- she's my BOSS.

Asking that people warn for doll nudity is not in any way being prudish, or moralizing, or suppressing their freedom of expression. It is kindly asking that they be polite and, as far as I'm aware, follow the rules of the forum. No one is asking them not to post images of naked dolls; they're simply asking that they let people know before they click, so that if someone for any reason does not want to see it or wants to save it for later, they can refrain from clicking at that point. I think it's presumptuous and rude to believe that it's your responsibility to decide what people should be comfortable seeing and when, so the best practice is just to let them know what's in there.

Honestly the fact that there's debate about this really frustrates me. It always gets into people saying that we shouldn't be offended by nudity and that THEY are just FINE with it so no one should have to warn people, and that's absurd idealism. Sure, in a perfect world maybe we should all be comfortable with nudity, but the fact is that many people aren't, and unless we only ever want to look at DOA when we're alone in our homes there are going to be times when even people who ARE comfortable with nudity won't want it on their monitors.

 

I look at DoA from work all the time (in fact I'm at work right now)- when the office is slow nobody cares if I'm browsing the net (I was actually telling one of my coworkers about the dolls I buy the other day and showed him some of the Leeke dolls I was looking it). But there's a difference between general internet browsing when things are slow, and something that could cause offense to a coworker or client. From a few meters away, some dolls can look pretty close to human, and I can see how someone walking past might confuse a naked doll photo for a naked person photo. In addition, what Krissy says above is true- people come from so many different backgrounds and upbringings that a "just get over it" attitude isn't always appropriate.

It only takes a few seconds to write "NSFW" or "Nudity" in a thread title, so I figure it's better to be courteous to others and let them know it's in there.

 

Umm, sorry? No need to be offended, I was just curious because I thought that most of us here had dolls and at one point or another have seen them naked before, so it really made no sense to me since it's nothing new to anyone. Plus, I didn't think people were looking at this site from public places (which, even without the doll nudity, I personally wouldn't). Personally, I still kind of think people who'd be weirded out by a nude doll are probably pretty uncomfortable with the doll itself anyway, but I guess that's just me (in regards to the public thing anyway, which is why I think it's kind of a bad idea to browse this site in public in the first place).

 

I would be willing to stake a very large amount of money that a lot of people browse this site from public places -- libraries, coffee shops, cyber cafes, work, wherever. For some of us, everywhere is a public place; I have a young daughter, and I would prefer to be warned before seeing certain materials that could prompt questions I am really not ready to answer yet. She's too young for that, plain and simple. (And frankly if anyone tells me that I 'shouldn't be looking at the site around her' then they're saying I shouldn't look at the site at all, and--to quote a friend--that's complete bull pucky.) I also surf the site from work, in my downtime, and I'd rather not end up in a situation where I have to explain doll penis to my 83-year-old boss just because someone decided a warning was unnecessary.

In short: just because you don't think you would browse the site in a 'public' location does not mean that everyone shouldn't. Thus, a simple warning is a nice, courteous expression of consideration for our fellow DoAers. It takes ten seconds to type. It isn't a chore for anyone, and it could potentially save jobs and a lot of embarrassment (or worse, for those who come from cultures and religions that have more restrained attitudes towards nudity and such).

A warning is a simple courtesy. There really shouldn't even be a debate about a gesture of courtesy.

 

I agree with chibaraki and Tez.

I just... don't understand. Does it kill to simply add one word - "nudity" into your title? Putting "nudity" into a title isn't somehow magically making all of the photos in the thread get censored, or in any way impeding upon the subject matter (if anything, it's highlighting it even further). It's called common courtesy, and being considerate of other people; polite behaviour that allows other people to exercise their freedom of action and look only upon things they wish to look.

I sometimes look at dolls in libraries, and occasionally on the bus/other public places through my cell phone. I personally have nothing against nudity - I'd like to consider myself something of an artist, and I'm going into the medical field - I think it's a beautiful thing and all that(...if clean and well-kept. I'm not that artistic). I also have nothing against my little sister seeing naked people/dolls, provided its not pornographic. But other people may have other opinions, for whatever reasons they have, and I think it would be beyond rude to force my beliefs on them when they are not doing the same to me. Nor do I want to explain to people who glance at my small iPhone screen from far away that I'm looking at pictures of anatomically-correct dolls, and not pornography, which would be one weird conversation.

 

If I knew people would get offended, I wouldn't have asked in the first place... Curiosity killed the cat, I guess.

 

Must make it hard for them to go to art galleries and museums, all those classical sculptures and nudes painted by old masters.

Such a shame they are so keen to find offense where none is intneded.... but it's their loss, I suppose.

Teddy

 

I don't think anyone is offended. "Irritated" could be a better word, because the whole debate basically boils down to a question of whether exercising courteous behaviour is necessary or not.

Again, I personally have nothing against nudity, and if I hit up unlabeled threads at home I'm entirely fine, but I realize that not everyone is. It may be a sad state of society where nudity is such a taboo subject, but honestly, surprising people with doll penis isn't going to change that situation one bit.

 

Alright, irritated. Either way, I didn't think people would get so... irritated, and it's weird to me because from my perspective, it's over nothing (yes, from your perspective or someone else's perspective, maybe not, but that's not what I'm talking about here). Just.. I don't know. I guess it's too late to say "forget I said anything"?

 

I'd classify my reaction as 'annoyed', for the reason you stated -- that it boils down to whether or not people should be courteous to their fellow collector. I don't see it as any kind of a statement on the condition of society or whatever, it just is what it is and politeness never hurt anyone.

Though I'd also like to say that in the case of the workplace (from my viewpoint), whether or not nudity is taboo is entirely beside the point. It's bloody distracting and it's unprofessional. I try to put myself in the shoes of my clients: what would I think if I saw XYZ item on the computer screen of someone who was soliciting my business? I routinely ask people to hand me thousands of dollars for purchases, and having something that distracting on my screen could well scuttle a whole deal. I'd prefer to not take that risk.

 

Forgive me if I'm wrong as I'm only judging by your post count, but it seems like you haven't been here very long, am I correct? That's probably why you think the irritation is "over nothing". You're right, it's not anything to get irritated about in one situation; the problem is, this debate has come up in numerous, numerous threads and in many variations, and after a while it does get very irritating. I believe two threads (maybe more, I don't visit DoA very often) have been locked because of a version of this debate got out of hand.

And the thing is... someone else's perspective is exactly what you have to consider in this situation. You're not putting a title on your gallery post (or your pictures, for that matter) for yourself - I'm sure you can remember the subject matter well, and view them in a nice slide show on your own computer. You're putting it for others to see, and contemplate as to whether they'd like to take a look at the picture or not.

ETA: Tez - the whole society thing I was referring to was mostly aimed at the other posts who lamented about the subject matter of how it's restricting or whatever.

 

Yeah, I'm a newbie and I did a search and only found one similar topic. I didn't know there were two, but I guess I do now. And after opening this one, I can see how it could potentially get out of hand... Only been open for a few hours and there's already negativity (offense and irritation and the like). This is just so strange to me... @___@ I mean, I did try to see it from another person's perspective before I opened this thread but the fact is, I don't know anyone at all who I think would be offended (not even my 10 year old sister, and she can be a bit squeamish) so I guess I assumed that most people probably weren't because that's the only other perspective I've ever been presented with.

 

Oh, they were threads that may not have necessarily been dealing with this exact topic, but somehow got steered into it and got out of hand.

... I do not believe that a single person that has posted in this thread claimed that they were offended by doll nudity, or by this topic. The only negativity, all three cases, have been explained as irritation over the rehashing of an old topic.

Again, I don't think there are very many people on this forum that find nudity offensive. I have seen a few instances of people getting offended over a certain kind of nudity, but not nudity in general. The main problem lies with other people NOT on these forums, who may find it offensive, and the common courtesy part lies in giving those users who are around people who could be potentially offended a choice of not instigating an uncomfortable situation. This is probably the perspective you should be considering.

 

Sure, most of US HERE have dolls and have probably seen naked ones. The person sitting at the next table in the cafe from me, however, probably has not, and may not appreciate it. And IMO them being uncomfortable with dolls has nothing to do with it -- I've never had anyone get discomfited because there were photos of dolls on my screen, but it's a pretty basic common courtesy thing that you don't sit around in public looking at photographs that contain nudity.

It's well-established, I think, that people DO look at this site in public places, and I don't think anyone would really argue that browsing DOA at a cafe is inappropriate. In what way would browsing a doll forum in a coffee shop possibly be less appropriate than reading blogs and checking my email? And if THAT'S inappropriate why does the coffee shop have wifi?

In any case, you seem to be taking my frustration as a personal attack, which it's not. I'm frustrated by people's insistance on casting this debate as an issue of whether or not DOA members are okay with nudity, when that has nothing to do with it for a lot of us. Like I said, it's not about what I think about nudity, it's about what whoever else is in eyeshot of my screen thinks about nudity, and it's not my place to try to change their minds on the subject so, since I am not a huge jerk, I endeavor to avoid nudity when I browse in public. And I kindly ask that the other members of DOA, who I KNOW will do their utmost to be polite posters on this forum, help me in that endeavor.

Seriously. A little nudity warning never hurt anybody and it helps plenty of people.

 

I feel so immature now-- everybody's giving serious, honest answers and I just want to say 'so people can skip straight to the penis!', which is, of course, not true, but there you have it, Anneko is a silly thing.

=^__^=
Anneko

 

... Okay, I think I'm going to walk away from this topic now. I guess if it didn't work out in the past, it should be closed or something now anyway. Not gonna lie, it's still all really weird to me and it's not like I intended on rebelling against the rule, I was just curious about it. If people want the warning, I'll put one, although I still don't quite understand.

 

Agreeing with chibiraki, Tez and Lelite here that the nudity warning has nothing to do with being prudish, but everything with being polite. It only takes a few seconds to write that word down and many people will appreciate it.

The annoyance this topic brings up is not because people feel offended, but because this debate has been done before and has always ended in a 'prude' vs. 'perv' conflict. Not once has the result been that it is simply a matter of good manners.

But most of all: Check the gallery rules. This isn't really a debate topic, it is a rule of DoA, like it or not.