Dolls and feminism

Men and women act differently, that doesn't mean one is more cunning or less evil than the other. If you look at male serial killers, most use guns, knifes, axes, chainsaws to kill their victims, and their victims are usually strangers. Many female serial killers use poison; their victims are usually relatives, acquaintances, or people in their care and it takes weeks before the victim dies.

While many men are more open in their behaviour and they use physical violence, women usually are more secretive and out for emotional suffering. So, I'm not surprised that the statistics say women commit less crime, because most 'evil' women do is hard to proof.

This is partly why it is hard for male victims of domestic abuse to be taken seriously, or for children, whose mother is abusive, to be heard. There is a huge taboo to say bad things about your mother. The overall opinion is that the bond between an mother and a child can't be broken, because mother instinct is a strong thing. A mother always loves her children and takes care of them no matter what (as opposed to the father I suppose).

Saying your mother hit you will result in anger "how can you say such bad things about her. She's your mother for pete's sake!" and disbelief "I couldn't have been that bad".

 

Prewarning, abuse of the words "think, believe and feel." But none of this is indended as fact.

I wasn't ever really into dolls. I was more into running around with just my imagination. And I don't really agree that female BJD's are damaging to a... balanced (?) woman's self image, others maybe more prone to this. But then those self same women could find a myrid other things in the world that make them feel the same way.

I'm not a feminist, I'm not the type who thinks that being a sex object or a mother is the epitome of feminity either. I believe all women are different, and simply by identfying as female makes us that. I think that choice and personality are often forgotten in these debates. Not every woman wants to be in the kitchen, but not every woman wants to leave it sort of thing.

As to actual body issues... as a child I didn't watch much TV, I lived in the middle of nowhere and I wasn't into dolls. And yet I developed some body issues. Why? I do think my mother had something to do with it as even at a healthy weight she would constantly complain about problem areas and diet.. then binge when she didn't lose what she wanted.

Dolls in general I think have become fairly sexualised and narrow fielded, more so the plastic factory dolls like barbie and bratz. But there is also the fact that it's cheaper to use the same body mold over and over then to make a new one for every doll, clothes that fit, etc. I won't say it's any more unhealthy then any other part of our culture, but it's there and it won't change unless consumers do really. A company only makes what sells after all, even BJD companies.

For BJD's themselves. I believe that, like many objects with human-esque figures since people first started painting and carving, they are idealised. What the ideal is depends on the artist, and who finds it beautiful depends on the audience. I feel they have far more variety then many other types of dolls out there, even within the companies themselves as several have different body types avalible and I don't think that they in themselves are harmful. It's what has already been programmed into the person that is.

Sorry for not including any of the current discussion, this post would have been way to long. DX

 

See, this is why I chose to not really say anything in this debate. I knew someone else would say everything I would want to get across but a lot better.
Uhm... so instead I will leave a quote from another wise person.
"Be excellent to each other!"
Ted Theodore Logan

 

I think that's the one thing people need to take into consideration at the end of the day. Yes, we should strive to be equal, but sometimes there's certain attributes that one gender is more likely to have then the other. In Criminal cases, it's just more likely that it's going to be a man who uses physical violence or act agressively. It doesn't mean that a) all men do and b) women aren't capable of doing such things. On the other 'end of the spectrum', usually it's the woman who has the nurturing side and cares for children, but again, it doesn't mean that all women do and that men aren't capable of nurturing and caring for children.

It's just a statistic to keep in mind, but not apply as a definitive statement.

I believe BJDs are just a reflection of what you want to percieve or act out. Since they're so customisable, it's almost impossible to pin one attribute onto them, because there'll be a doll out there to counteract it.

It's when off topic companies deliberately use dolls to try and reflect something that will affect any audience negatively. For instance, Monster High dolls are marketed to be different and against the grain. But Clawdeen's bio says she constantly plucks and tweezes her hairs out to look attractive. What sort of message is that to young girls? Although people here have said they never listened to the subliminal messages Barbie/Bratz/MH dolls puts out, there's probably some young child out there taking it in and destroying their confidence in their natural beauty.

 

There are girls out there with more body hair then is considered normal. There is nothing 'wrong' with them, it's just how thier body is. This could send a negative message to those girls...

 

So you're saying that if someone is naturally hairy, they should shave and pluck to look 'ordinary'?

Ok yes, she's a fantasy creature, but if she has to shave off her natural traits of werewolfness to be accepted in Monster society, then something really is wrong!

I didn't even see it as like shaving your privates, so I'm kinda going lolwhut? Where did that come from?

 

Just... no. The reasoning that female serial killers use poison might be true... but that still doesn't mean that "what evil women do is hard to proof". Poison can be prooved, too, in most cases. Also, many male killers and abusers kill and abuse their relatives, acquaintances and people in their care as well. Statistics say that it is most likely for a female to become a victim (be it murder, rape or abuse) from a male she knows - family, acquaintance, someone who is meant to care for her. What does it say about male violence? It can be as "sneaky" as female violence.

There is still. just. simply. more. male. violence. statistically. Really, it is just statistics. Not interpretation. And saying that is not an offence or an insult towards each individual man. No, men are not all "evil". Women neither. That's all.

I think the "shave and pluck" of Clawdeen is considered comedy, but of course it is also something that shows that she is in some way a teenage insecure girl. "Being an ordinary girl" is something highly wished for when you are a teen. I used to cry my eyes out because I was not able to be "ordinary" (in my opinion, that meant: blonde, blue-eyed, heterosexual, curvy, socially competent, speaking without a dialect, interested in dancing, horses and teenage romance books, etc etc etc - would I have been all of those, I would probably have considered the opposite of it all to be "ordinary", LOL).

 

I meant that the emotional abuse women might use is hard to proof. Harder than, for instance, a blow to the head with an axe. Poison is detectable in most cases, of course.

And I still believe the statistics show more male perpetrators, because physical and sexual violence are more often researched than neglect and emotional violence. Not because the first two are more damaging, but because there is hard evidence for them. Neglect and emotional abuse cases often go by unnoticed.

Recently, I read a (Dutch) research indicating that neglect and emotional abuse are by far the most common forms of child abuse and in most cases it's the mother - not the father - who's responsible (probably because it's usually the mother who looks after the children most).
I don't see why it's so hard to believe that men and women are equally capable of doing evil. It's part of human nature and we are all humans, last time I checked.

 

It is not hard to believe at all. I absolutely agree that they are equally CAPABLE of doing evil. I just say that statistics show that male violence is more prevalent. Capability and prevalence are two different things.

As for neglect and emotional abuse, they are not only hard to prove in females, they are also a rather rare sort of "violence" to be researched statistically. More differentiated and profound research of this might actually show some new statistics... I guess the problem with it will be defining neglect and emotional abuse as objectively as murder can be defined. But as soon as I see some statistics, I will gladly talk about those as well ^^ Is there an english version of the Dutch research paper? Or german? Or would you link me the Dutch one? Maybe I can manage to translate it somehow. I am really interested in these things.

I am not quite comfortable with blaming the child-caring mothers for everything, by the way - to speak of their guilt objectively, we would need a control group of child-caring fathers to compare with - since we can compare everything else, like violence by strangers, by partners etc. between male and female easily.

 

I would just like to point out that precisely because emotional abuse/violence is not as widely researched as physical violence, we can't say that one of the sexes offends more in this category than another. Women could be the majority of emotional abusers, but so could men. Or, both sexes could be equal in this respect. Until there's concrete statistics about emotional abuse, it's all conjecture.

And, I do agree that both men and women are capable of being evil.

 

Now I'm really curious. Do you think all women who remove their pubic hair are consciously infantilizing themselves? There are plenty of people who overall find any body hair unattractive or offputting and I don't think it has anything to do with wanting to look pre-pubescent to please a sexual partner.

As for the Monster High character in question, does it actually say where she plucks and tweezes? Most people I know shape their eyebrows and I am not sure it can be indicative of a deep seated self loathing of who they are.

 

“My hair is worthy of a shampoo commercial, and that’s just what grows on my legs. Plucking and shaving is definitely a full-time job but that’s a small price to pay for being scarily fabulous,” from: http://www.foxnews.com/entertainmen...nster-high-doll-sparks-outrage/#ixzz1icKYW4a7

I think Harlequin-Elle is right for a big part of the cases, Kim - I can imagine that many women only shave their privates - and their legs - when they think these are going to be seen. By men, usually - unless said women are homo- or bisexual, then of course by women too.

By the way, I also know of men who shave their privates - and legs - too. It is kind of modern right now. But them also, they shave if they think they will be seen mostly. And they are still few compared to the women who do.

And Anna, yes! Exactly! You have worded it much better than I was able to.

 

The article kinda sums up what I'm saying (although in a more I'm really outraged!) way. And I just don't see how it's funny to see someone feel insecure about their body image, or anything.

Grown ups and older teens may be able to see the ironical side, but that doesn't mean preteens or young teens will see that irony too. They'll just be seeing "If you have body hair, then you're not socially acceptable."

 

So no, it really doesn't say where she plucks and tweezes since she's pretty openly saying she has really luxurious leg hair that is worthy of being seen in commercials, or at least that is how I am reading it. I would imagine being hairy all over would require a lot of grooming, if one was a teenage werewolf.

Every doll, because they are idealized images, in the end are going to be under the scrutiny of "This made was to look attractive." I honestly wish there was less of a focus on being attractive in our world, but as long as society pushes for people to be engaged in monogamous relationships as soon as sexual maturity hits, it's never going to happen. I even think the insistence that certain things can be beautiful is just reinforcing that need to be attractive that is forced on everyone. I am not a skinny woman, and no, I do not think fat rolls are beautiful. Do I have them? Yup. Do I need to hear people tell me that fat can be beautiful to like myself? No.

What I would love to hear is actually people admitting that, you know, it's ok to be ugly. You don't need to be attractive to lead an interesting or fulfilling life. I'll be the first person to admit I think I have an ugly face, but it's not something that bothers me. I had no control over the genetics that went into forming my bone structure, so why angst about it? Instead, I am happy that I was born intelligent and with a witty sense of humour. These things are much more important to me than my physical appearance.

In the end, it really is a parent's duty to have their child question the things they are experiencing, be it something they saw on a tv show or encountered while playing with their toys, and process the messages they are receiving. Clawdeen's copy could be a good starting place to talk about hair removal and why people do it and body image in general for a parent and child who has the toy.

 

adhara, I think it is the fact that Clawdeen talks about the shaving thing as openly that is comedic - instead of pretending she doesn't have any body hair like it is expected of females in today's society. Jokes and comedy work in the way that something unexpected happens at the end of the joke, hence producing a kind of a semantic interference. That is what the Clawdeen doll does, too.

Also, since it is pretty senseless for a werewolf to actually try and get rid of the hair - she will still be a werewolf - it also shows that you cannot change your body in a drastic way anyway, so accepting it will be the only option.

Comedy can be critical of society, too.

 

dollblue; Except not talking about body hair doesn't mean we're all pretending it doesn't exist. Just because someone doesn't mention topic A, it doesn't mean A therefore cannot exist.

When I talk to my friends, I don't mention my or their body hair. It doesn't mean that I'm pretending I have none, or that I'm assuming my friends have none either. We just have other things we prefer talking about.

Like for instance, if that bio never mentioned she had to constantly shave/pluck wherever, I wouldn't have assumed therefore she has none. I would have just assumed that werewolf = has hair and moved on.

EDIT: She doesn't accept the 'less attractive' attributes (her body hair), all she accepts is the socially accepted parts - her ears, her fangs, her eyes. Criticizing one particular attribute of your body (be it hair, weight, look, etc) is not exactly reinforcing "You should love yourself for who you are" is it?

I see what you're saying on the comedy idea. But as I said before - just because we adults and older teens can see this comedic irony, doesn't mean that preteens and young teens can as well.

 

I agree, 100%. I read an article in a magazine once where a woman noticed that her little boy was always complimented by people saying he was a 'clever boy' and her little girl was always complimented by people saying she was a 'pretty girl'. Although this woman admitted she thought her daughter was gorgeous, she didn't want her daughter growing up believing her only value to others was being attractive, so the woman started to compliment her daughter on other things instead of her appearance and encouraged family and friends to do so too. Obviously if the little girl was dressed up to go to a party she was complimented on her appearance/outfit, but the rest of the time, her esteem boost came through milestones like learning to tie her laces, learning to read and learning her times tables. If she did something good she was a 'clever girl' rather than a 'pretty girl.'

I wish I remembered where I read that.

From a character POV, I understand Clawdeen's wanting to go through all this hair removal - she's a werewolf and she wants to fit in with the other (considerably hairless) girls. This mirrors the current issue women with thick, dark hair have - to remove or not to remove? The problem is, rather than making it a personal choice to remove or leave your hair, it makes it a social one...if a woman grows out her leg hair, someone else is going to comment on it. It makes the woman uncomfortable and highlights the 'expectation' that groomed women remove their body hair. Instead, it should be a personal choice whether to remove or to leave hair, and other people shouldn't be so nosy.

This debate has moved a little way-a-way from it's origins

 

I actually do. It just walks, talks, and quacks that way to me! If you're with ANY partner (male/female) who requires a woman to have a totally bald pubis, that'd make me suspicious of whether or not they actually wanted a grown woman. Could be just my own personal hangup; the infantilization of women in general makes my hackles stand on end (so please don't get me started on lolita style).

Not that it's wrong for anybody-- you do whatever you want to get your thrills and feel beautiful. I have been with guys who were completely clean-shaven from chin to toe, but they didn't give off an infantilization vibe; the excuse they gave was "so the hair doesn't get caught in latex trousers". XD Having worn latex minidresses before, I will attest that this is an excellent reason to denude oneself.... so once again, context is everything.

The best part of feminism to me is that you can CHOOSE whether to wax yourself bald or grow yourself a pubic forest, you can CHOOSE whether to dress primly or strut your stuff in a rubber minidress-- people are free to give you shit for it, but you're also free to tell them where to get off.

And it is my choice to ignore those vile Monster High Bratz things and hope they'll go away. The mainstream market is never ever going to make a happy-to-be-me female doll (they tried once in the 90s, but it failed quickly & resoundingly).... so toys will always present horrible examples for girl-children the world over. For this, I am happy that we have those more militant vocal feminist watchdogs at work. They speak out about this crap so I don't have to. :