1. It has come to the attention of forum staff that Dollshe Craft has ceased communications with dealers and customers, has failed to provide promised refunds for the excessive waits, and now has wait times surpassing 5 years in some cases. Forum staff are also concerned as there are claims being put forth that Dollshe plans to close down their doll making company. Due to the instability of the company, the lack of communication, the lack of promised refunds, and the wait times now surpassing 5 years, we strongly urge members to research the current state of this company very carefully and thoroughly before deciding to place an order. For more information please see the Dollshe waiting room. Do not assume this cannot happen to you or that your order will be different.
    Dismiss Notice
  2. Dollshe Craft and all dolls created by Dollshe, including any dolls created under his new or future companies, including Club Coco BJD are now banned from Den of Angels. Dollshe and the sculptor may not advertise his products on this forum. Sales may not be discussed, no news threads may be posted regarding new releases. This ban does not impact any dolls by Dollshe ordered by November 8, 2023. Any dolls ordered after November 8, 2023, regardless of the date the sculpt was released, are banned from this forum as are any dolls released under his new or future companies including but not limited to Club Coco BJD. This ban does not apply to other company dolls cast by Dollshe as part of a casting agreement between him and the actual sculpt or company and those dolls may still be discussed on the forum. Please come to Ask the Moderators if you have any questions.
    Dismiss Notice

Dolls, Desire, and the Perception of Reality

Aug 14, 2007

    1. That would be a step up from the job I have now, lol (work was absolutely mind numbing today). I'm not sure how the UN would feel about having DoA as a reference XD
       
    2. THANK YOU, Bunnydots, Idoru, Clea and all the others who offered balanced critiques from an educated position.

      We do NOT all have to agree, and we are not all ignorant morons who need to be 'spoonfed' intelligent discussion.
       
    3. I respond according to how I’m being responded to. If defending a certain point of view evidently makes someone “uppity,” “uptight,” “pretentious,” “sensitive,” “willing to be offended,” and “ignorant of historical ethnology” (funny, considering what I’ve been doing for the past years) then I’m not going to feel particularly inclined to mince my words for those who don't like imperative verbs. The suggestions (which clearly don’t apply to those who aren’t picking and choosing what to respond to, if you’ve read them carefully) are there because a debate is not just about “I agree,” “I disagree,” or a circle of being offended at someone else’s offended-ness, it’s about why you’ve taken a certain position.

      And if people aren’t actually talking about drawing parallels with other dolls & reality debates (other than yaoi), then I’m going to get the impression that they’re perpetuating a double standard when it comes to freedom of speech and expression. If they keep repeating examples of rape and abuse in heterosexual stories as if they have the same negative connnotations on orientation as they have on yaoi (when heterosexual rape stories are really based on gender), then that’s another point they’ve skipped over. If they’re coming back to the same old “pop culture is comparable with long-preserved traditions like national dress,” “Japan does x too” and “it happens a lot anyway” fallacies, then again, it looks like they haven’t read the previous responses. If they don’t acknowledge the simplicity of a Google search or the number of international members on this site, then the argument is no longer about “research is too much to ask” and rather “I don’t wanna because I don’t care about how they see their culture.” Then it begs the question of “why are you on a heavily moderated venue full of people who do care about courtesy and seeing inoffensive content?”

      Once again, freedom of speech and expression are not without accountability, and it’s a moot point on a privately owned forum. You can dress up your doll in full SS officer garb topped off with a KKK hood and a burning cross and call him Pedo Hitler Jesus, but where that content belongs is an entirely different story. Freedom of speech does not mean freedom from speech, either. Otherwise, it’s just another double standard. If you have a problem with the forum rules or you don’t want people to point out things like the finer points of kimono etiquette and how wrong your 45/60 looks, then perhaps you should seek out a venue that does allow uninhibited creativity. Shitori’s points remind me of the threads about contentious BJD names, photographing underage dolls, and BJD sex & nudity, which are other examples of many people being cautious of religion, culture, not wanting to see what could be construed as child exploitation (for both personal and professional/legal reasons), and other people’s perceptions of reality. But when it comes national dress, it’s “only you are hampering their fun.” How is this kind of debate any more politicized than similar threads that deals with ethics and what is “okay?” If you’re uncomfortable with discussing “deeper peripheral issues surrounding our dolls” as the Dolly Debate describes, then you are always free not to participate.

      The cultural appropriation aspect is divisive in itself, because people either seem to be disagreeing with the idea that appropriation is cheapening, or they’re defending appropriation as an outlet for creative freedom in the BJD world. I don’t see how I’m making my friend an exception if I’m pointing out someone who has been mistaken about the specifics of culture before. The only reason why I brought up her other projects is because someone asked for examples of what to do right as opposed to what’s being done wrong. As for me supposedly generalizing Westerners and making them look bad - I’ve already qualified my statements. I said that social/cultural insensitivity comes across as nothing but apathy and downright laziness, in the same way that I said that dictating how other cultures should feel about appropriation is seen as arrogant and patronizing. It means that yes, other cultures are going to have a different perspective and those who don’t deal with such a huge number of immigrants are going to feel more insular than Western countries. It does not mean anyone has the intent to offend, it’s not dealing out adjectives against a specific person’s character rather than their argument, and it certainly does not apply to the Westerners who do not culturally appropriate. I don’t know how many times I have to repeat this, but: “Westerners tend to initiate the most contact with foreign cultures, and therefore their role in cultural appropriation on a worldwide basis has more impact than clashes between different ethnic groups.” Can you dispute this?

      Telling me that Ireland and Ukraine have national dress is a vague statement and doesn’t fit into the context of “Westerners” that has been repeatedly established, meaning immigrant societies like America, Canada, Australia, etc. Do Irish and Ukrainian national dress get appropriated and sexualized on the same level as Asian dress? Do Ireland and Ukraine have a history of absorbing and appropriating Native American, Latin American, African, or Asian cultures? How do you know that sexualized national dress are just extreme examples? There are entire fields of study devoted to Asian fetishism and Orientalism, one example being how the “sexy geisha” has been marketed as a multi-million dollar prostitute icon. You can’t throw a rock without hitting the “sexy doll in sexy kimono” in the BJD hobby, either. The “Asia does x too” argument keeps getting brought up, but no one has produced evidence of Asian examples actually harming Western identity or portrayals, let alone examples of Asian BJD communities that make offensive gimmicks out of Western fashion or Western-looking dolls. Unless you can bring your argument back to BJD, two-wrongs-make-a-right fallacies are still not relevant. Otherwise, it’s just turning into a general off-topic argument of who stole what from where for the sake of being defensive.

      I’ve also stated before that intent has nothing to do with anything. You can swing a bat backwards and accidentally hit someone in the face, and the fact that it was an accident isn’t going to change the fact that their nose is broken. You are free to not apologize, but it also means being accountable for the backlash. The same goes for posting offensive content on a publicly viewable venue. If you can’t handle said backlash, then you are free to go play in a sandbox that won’t have multitudes of people who have a problem with inaccurate cultural depictions and/or appropriation, dolls named and modeled after deities or genocidal leaders, violent yaoi, sexualized children, etc.

      I’m not even sure what is being argued from the other side anymore. Are people arguing for the right not to give warnings or label their photostories? Do they have a problem with DoA policy? Do they see it as unreasonable to listen to the concerns of international members, but not of those who oppose depictions of poorly done homosexual relationships, violence, pedophilia, nudity, blasphemy towards a religion, etc? Do they want to publicly display possibly controversial content without having to explain the thought process behind it and clear up any miscommunication? Are they saying that having separate venues for expression take away people’s “fun?” Are they seeing “x is considered offensive to group y” as an attack on their artistic freedom, although an opposing viewpoint doesn’t necessarily translate into actively stopping them from doing what they want? Because frankly, mere statements of "I [dis]agree" or "people will always disagree" tell me nothing in terms of actual reasoning, they have no factual or educated backing, and they're in no way conducive to a debate. If that's what it all comes down to, then there is no point to this subforum.

      Which is like the thread that speculated “because there are some sweatshops in Asia, are BJD are made in sweatshops?” without any basis. Misinformed statements about other cultures and social groups are more prevalent than you think. This is kind of repetition is why I feel people are just jumping on the cultural appropriation aspect without connecting it to themes from other threads.
       
    4. "than you think" ? What makes you think that I don't understand the kind of misunderstandings that go on around certain cultures, groups or whatever? Misinformed statements aren't good but that doesn't mean that we should forbid them or look down upon those who just happen to be misinformed.
      I don't care if most people belive we have polar bears walking the streets where I live just because of some people who are misinformed. I don't care if swedish people are portrayed as blonde sexualized stupid girls with braids just because some people are misinformed. You can try to inform people of what is correct but never should you urge upon others that they are wrong and that they can't go around and say or do whatever they want because it might be misunderstood by someone somewhere!

      I'm gonna use your example to explain what I mean.

      *Someone posts photos of their doll wearing a rather daring kimono, simply because they like the way it looks on their doll.

      *Someone posts photos of their doll wearing a rather daring kimono along with a report, writing about asian culture and how geishas where prostitutes and that the kimono was made this way to look sexy and show off as much skin as possible.

      The difference is huge and I don't think the second example would ever happen here on DoA.
      I think the number of "is it wrong to:.."-threads have grown alarmingly and suddenly we have a forum where some people are worried about the pics they post because they fear to be looked down upon because of what they have done with their dolls out of creativity!
       
    5. I don't think anyone is intentionally trying to stomp on anyone else's toes here, but I think there might be one heck of a misunderstanding going on.

      I believe that most, if not all, of us on this board have a fairly good idea of what constitutes true reality, ideals, and fantasies (let's not talk about portrayals yet; this is just about perception and understanding things in general and perception does NOT equate to 'the true way' one might think) and what separates them from each other and I don't think anybody's accusing anybody else of having particularly skewed judgement in that area.

      I also believe that nobody should - and I don't think anybody really does - fault anybody else for their perceptions and their portrayals of said perceptions because perceptions are in the eyes of the beholder and well... the beholder is each and every one of us and each and every one of us has his or her own unique opinions and ways of seeing things. Additionally, most of us here have stated that in terms of dolls, our dolls are oftentimes portrayals of non-realities - fantasies of sorts - and so... who can fault someone else for their imagination?

      However.

      When it comes to the 'and does it matter/how does it matter' question, feet are getting stomped on left and right.

      It isn't necessarily that people are portraying XYZ that necessarily gets people up in arms over it; it's the significance - or possible significance as the situation may be - that does it.

      I believe the reason for this has to do with fear - a FEAR of how a portrayal of something can translate into a projected perception of reality even if the intention was not to portray reality in the first place. And if the portrayed perception follows stereotypes or doesn't stray too far away from the actual truth/reality, I believe the fear gets heightened even more.

      Do we REALLY want to be raped?

      Probably definitely not. I don't think too many people will disagree over this and because of this, the fear of it being perceived as reality - that rape is okay - when portrayed isn't as strong. People are disgusted because of the emotional response, but the actual fear of rape being acceptable/an okay thing isn't really there. Again, who wants to be raped?

      Do we REALLY want underage kids having sex with adults?

      Probably not. I don't think too many people will disagree with this, either, but in some cultures, this issue is still an accepted thing and is probably more accepted than rape is. The fear, then, that such a thing is acceptable as portrayed to those who strongly believe against such pairings is stronger.

      Do we REALLY believe that Japanese people eat Pocky, drink Ramune, eat ramen, and watch anime all day?

      ... Probably not, but I sure know enough people who are positive that that is a major constituent of the Japanese culture. And why? Because it's what's in the media all the time. In anime. In manga. In the gossip. This is why my friends of Asiatic descent scoff and laugh and lament at such portrayals. It's everywhere and people believe it and they don't like the fact that people actually believe that.


      Do we REALLY believe that gay men are effeminate and/or enjoy crossdressing and enjoy being 'taken'?

      ... No. And yes. And no. And yes. And - And why? Because there ARE some gay men who are like that and because that image has been heavily stereotyped and pushed out for the public to see. But it sure as heck isn't the end all be all to the gay community and the 'other' side of the gay community that ISN'T that portrayal isn't getting the coverage or visibility that it needs or wants and so the outcry against such depictions is stronger because the fear of more people believing such a thing is stronger, whether or not the person who depicted whatever actually believes what they depicted or not.

      As a person of the LGBTQ community, I admit to feeling a bit frustrated when everywhere I look, I see what looks to be heterosexed homosexual relationships being portrayed.

      To me, personally, the 'best' thing about same-sex relationships is the inherent equal-ness between the partners. Same organs, same hormones, and no more inherent/engendered tendency towards the 'I wear the pants, you wear the skirt' or 'I penetrate and you take' mentality.

      So yes, seeing the whole clean cut 'top' and 'bottom' and 'girly boy' and 'macho boy' can be a bit off-putting and exasperating for me to see.

      If I only saw it once in a blue moon or if most people I knew believed that guys really aren't (not all of them at any rate and a good majority from what I know) that way towards each other and in relationships, then I wouldn't get so peevish at times, but yes, my fear and gut reaction of 'ANOTHER person who believes that stereotype' drives me towards the cringe factor because I can't help but feel that one more stereotype equates to one more strike against the other less visible side.

      Again, if nobody believed that and if it were truly just people's fantasies at work, that's one thing, but I've been in the slash fandom community entirely too long and let me tell you; there are a LOT of people who sincerely believe that most gay men have heterosexed relationships and that the 'girly boy' and 'butch man' is the ideal.

      And it isn't. At all. It's part of the spectrum but it isn't the end all be all.

      And because there's so much struggle to get ALL of the 'I'm in a same-sex relationship' lifestyle varieties out there for others to see and acknowledge, it can be and is (to some) threatening and defeating to keep seeing one variety being constantly portrayed.

      My dolls are in a same-sex relationship and I model their relationship after what I myself believe in and I do this for two reasons. One, because that sort of relationship is something I fiercely believe in and two, because I want to make a statement with my portrayal.

      For me, it's no fantasy. It's real and it's out there and if people can see that and maybe think 'hey, there's that out there, too!' so much the better.

      And that's MY choice - something I consciously chose to do because of what I believe in and because I want to make a difference.

      But not everyone thinks like me or believes what I believe or perceives what I perceive and I know that and I respect that and therefore, I respect other people's portrayals of whatever they choose to portray.

      But now you know why I, and maybe some others, might feel strongly about an issue such as this.

      Because there's a struggle going on. Because the OTHER voices want to be heard, too. Because we're scared that everyone's going to believe these portrayals to be the end all be all. Because the sad fact is, despite the actual beliefs of the people who portray such relationships, people really DO believe such portrayals and entirely too willingly and probably because it is closer to something they can understand and accept.

      But it isn't really you, you who portray such relationships, that we're frustrated at. We're frustrated at the people who just won't see beyond it and sometimes it seems that the only way to make them see beyond is to discourage the portrayals of the stereotypes.

      I'll reiterate and state that for me; it isn't necessarily the portrayals themselves or the people who portray them that creates anxiety.

      It's the FEAR that the portrayal is taken as fact and not challenged and completely believed to be the truth when in fact, it is not, that creates the anxiety and YES, I sometimes can't help but believe that portrayals seem to only further the stereotypes.

      But more than that, I definitely believe - and fiercely believe - that everyone has his or her rights to his and her own imagination and/or sense of reality and what comes of it no matter how shocking, crude, or vanilla the results may be and so even though I sometimes find myself cringing, I still appreciate the imagination and thought and the desire and willingness to share and can thus appreciate without being overly influenced by my cringe factor.

      But if you'd like to 'help out' with the cause so to speak, I'd sure appreciate that, too. ;)

      And how?

      By knowing and believing that there's more than just the stereotypes out there and if you ever find yourself talking about the subject, you can say that you know at least one who isn't of that stereotype because I'm one myself.
       
    6. Because you picked out that one paragraph instead of addressing the whole volume of my argument. And because of this, I will have to repeat myself yet again.

      To paraphrase your other post, you said that freedom of speech should be allowed as long as people (using Nazis as an example) don't try to pass off things as fact. Then what is the point of saying that misinformed statements shouldn't be criticized when they're obviously based on ignorance and a lack of facts? People have the right to basically lie, but others don't have the right to correct them in response? Once again, double standards on freedom of speech (a.k.a. a moot principle on a privately owned forum).

      You may not care, but you don't speak for every Swedish person in the world. And unless Sweden's ethnic identity or national dress are being made into a gimmick and misrepresented in Western BJD collecting on a large scale, it has nothing to do with what's being discussed. In the context of things like West-East appropriation, LGBT stereotyping, religious disrespect, sexual interactions, etc. and how they're reflected in BJD, there are plenty of people who do have a problem with not-so-kosher imagery. Plenty of people do adhere to a strong sense of reality and a sense of consequences in this community, which is the whole point of this thread. Seeing how DoA is a PG-13 venue for relatively tame content with an international memberbase, I don't see why it's such a big deal for people to declare how much <insert disturbing content> matters to them.

      Which is highly contradictory. You can tell them what is correct, but you can't say that they're incorrect, either? Once again, freedom of speech goes both ways in a publicly viewable venue. If they can't handle being misunderstood or being called out for saying the wrong things, then they need to find a less-diverse sandbox instead of appealing to a false sense of free speech. They only have themselves to blame for a lack of clarity and inability to take what they dish out.

      The intent is different, but the result is the same. You're sexualizing a cultural symbol when it isn't meant to be used as such. And seeing how some people are arguing for the right to perpetuate the second example since artistic freedom should allow them to distort historical meaning according to their creativity, it's not such a farfetched concept. I've already gone over this and explained how a lack of intent does not translate into a lack of damage, how it's their prerogative to apologize or not, and how it's their responsibility to handle the resulting backlash, so I'm still not getting the impression that people are actually paying attention to what's being posted.

      This is a subforum centered around ethics, which is inside a private forum that clearly has the right to censor and regulate its content. If they feel caged in because they can't say whatever they want without repercussions, then they're in the wrong venue. It also goes back to how being challenged with different opinions in a publicly viewable venue (as opposed to being prevented from speaking altogether) is not an infringement of free speech, and people who feel otherwise should seek out a place that allows one-sided discourse.
       
    7. I agree with you about the fear thing--its something that has come up in every thread about content. I will also add to what you said here that there are also some people (though thankfully not the majority) who are afraid (or assume, maybe the better word) that what is depicted is a direct reflection of the doll owner rather than plain old fiction. That disturbs me more than anything.

      There's nothing wrong to having an emotional response to a photostory/photoshoot, and pausing to think about a piece of contraversial subject matter isn't bad either. The trouble comes in when people get so bogged down in the minutia that they lose perspective. Images can be very powerful, there is no doubt (though that too varies). However, not everything is on the same level when it comes to giving serious offense, not every community is the same, and not all doll owners handle subject matter the same way. Things can't be lumped together willy nilly and treated the same way--all bad or all good or all indifferent. When a kimono that is put on a doll wrong becomes akin to a slur, it threatens to trivialize the larger issue. An emotional response shouldn't turn into a knee-jerk reaction.

      I also fear (to bring up the dreaded F word again, ha ha ha), what the alternative would be. I very much support free speech and dislike censorship. People need ways to express themselves, even if what they're expressing isn't most what we want to see--maybe it's the artist in me, but I would hate to see people's creative outlet taken away because they might give offense. This to me, is much more damaging than issues of national dress, sexuality, fill in the blank with your favorite issue___________. Censorship takes away something far more basic than national dress --it takes away our ability to speak, to share, to communicate. That's why in every "it it wrong to show X" debates that have come up I've always argued on the side of the artist.

      Well said, and also the key to getting along in a large varied art community.
       
    8. Just a quick post.
      Nereina I do agree that stating "Japan does it also," really has nothing to do with anything.
      I do not think you are uppity, uptight or pretentious. I believe you have every right to tell people you think them wrong in this topic and outline why this is your belief. They have the right to do the same. Until this debate descends to the level of name-calling, I hope it is not locked.
      I should have stated that freedom of speech does have consequences and carries a burden of responsibilty. And speech may be protected but this won't help at the moment a rock is hitting your head because your free speech offended someone.
      Correct me if I am wrong, but you thought, in essence, I was at least tolerating doll rape photos, abuse and Lolita content, but saw no problem if someone posted a photo of a doll in some thing like a sexualized kimono? If so, I think I see your problem with that.
      If I said, more or less, that tampering with national dress is fine and all in fun, then I am going to retract that position However, if someone posts a gallery pic with a doll in a Zulu costume and calls is African, I am not going to criticize as the gallery of this fourm is not meant , as I understand it, for critique. How you, or anyone, handles that situation is subject to the hosts of this forum.
      This may not have anything to do with anything but perhaps it will provide fodder. On the internet there is a site ran by a Chinese fellow who sells the Four Treasures, or brush, inkstones, rice paper and ink- the tools of calligraphy. He has reams of material devoted to the history of the materials and even descriptions of the artists who make the inktones as well as descriptions of the mines and fascinating regions such as the Dragon Tail, from whence some of these stones come from. . On ebay one can find many other Chinese sellers offering inkstones whose origin and quality are, to put it kindly, dubious.
      I never ever associated kimonos with prostitution and never heard of such a thing until this thread. However, long ago, I did casually think geishas provided the services of sex as well as refined company. This was a common misconception I believe many years ago, and may still be fairly common. I did learn better.
      I am descended from Irish immigrants on my mother's side-I didn't know Irish had a national dress.
      Let me ask this: are you comfortable with doll images of rape, violence, child with adult and incorrect national dress being posted on other venues which allow uninhibited creativity?
      Another thing. you wrote &#8220;Westerners tend to initiate the most contact with foreign cultures, and therefore their role in cultural appropriation on a worldwide basis has more impact than clashes between different ethnic groups.&#8221; Can you dispute this?"
      I would like to know if you can prove this. I am trying to think how I would prove it but it may take awhile.
      As an aside, during Japan's economic boom in the last century there was quite a bit of fear-mongering about the Japanese buying up America. The reality at that time was that the Dutch actually were far ahead of Japan in that regard.
      Which is why I respectfully ask if you could somehow point us toward proof of the contact business.
      I am going to say this and you can explain the difference or rip me up as you like, but if enmi does not speak for every Swedish person , then someone is sure to post you do not speak for whole cultures. So I will take the damage :)
      I do admire and salute your tenacity.
       
    9. I'm not saying people should never be offended by anything, but if people have the burden to think about what they say, then people also have the burden to think about how they act in response. You can throw a rock at someone who makes you angry, but be prepared to be charged with assult. It goes both ways. Everything has consequences--sometimes unintentional ones, but we still have to live our lives anyway.

      Neriena you said this in a previous post about an example of a kimono in a sexual picture giving people the wrong idea (in this case that geisha=prostitutes):

      But is it damaging every single time? Will people preceive the image as you do? Or will they immediately think "wow, beautiful doll" and maybe "beautiful kimono". Unless the image is labeled as such, I don't think most people on the forum would think "that's a geisha, and geisha=prostitute. Geisha are not the only people to wear kimonos--it would take a lot more visual information or a specific description to make that an easy assumption to make. I would also say that using a particular article of clothing in a sexual picture does not necessarily sexualize the article of clothing--most images of that nature are about the doll first and foremost.


      Intent really can matter (even if you personally don't believe that), as intent can cause people to add more visual clues to invoke a specific response. This is not saying that it's impossible to unintentionally give the wrong idea, but a lot is going to depend on the particular image (it's impossible to accurately lump everything together and assume they'll all cause the same sort of response) and what the viewer brings to it. If you have intent, the creator is much more likely to leave less up to personal interpretation.

      While there are plenty of sexy dolls, and some of them wear kimonos, they aren't necessarily sexy geisha--they aren't necessarily refering to that icon. They aren't necessarily refering to anything but their own inherent beauty possibly enhanced by a pretty article of clothing. You are making assumptions not only about the intent of the creator, but how the viewer interperates the image. ABJDs are often photographed looking sexy, because they are very beautiful, not so much because they are specifically Asian. Their particular aesthetics (note that I said aesthetics and not ethnic characteristics) lend them very well to sexy images (they are often marketed that way by bjd companies who's primary market is Asian and not Western). This where it pays off to try and understand the actual community you're talking about and go beyond studies on Orientalism--just because Orientalism exists doesn't mean you can apply those studies to every instance of a doll wearing a kimono or that every owner of said sexy kimono wearing dolls have an Asian fetish. Sometimes it's just about the individual doll and that individual doll's beauty.

      You said a while back that it was not the viewers burden to view an image the exact way the creator defined it (or something like that). However, can you assume that most dolly people will see the images as you see them? You, like everyone else, bring your own baggage with you when you take that virtual step into the gallery here. You see things through the lense of an activist, but can you see things through the lense of an artist? or a simple bjd lover? or of someone who looks at gallery pictures to see their beauty and nothing else? Can you accept that not everyone takes away from a picture what you take away?

      I think one of the reason's yaoi comes up a lot, is because it was brought up earlier in this thread, and it appears in a lot of threads--it's fresher in people's minds than some of the other debate topics--some of which haven't been very active lately. Some people also know more about yaoi, having come from that community and for that reason be more comforable using it as an example.

      Saying "X happens elsewhere too a lot" doesn't automatically equal that something is correct. However, it does establish patterns and give clues to the way human beings work and function. It makes X (whatever X is) less of a Western thing, or Yaoi thing, and more of a people in general thing. Something that is widespread has reasons for being so, and they may not be the reasons that appear on the surface. So saying "X happens a lot everywhere" doesn't always prove the point a person is trying to make, but it may mean X is something worth looking at more closely and maybe from a different point of view.

      As for pop culture vs. longer held traditons...they are different, but that isn't to say pop culture doesn't have meaning for people either. There are people involved in various subcultures that get very very protective about their pop culture niche. Can you speak for everyone when it comes to what is important? About what will have lasting value and what will fall by the wayside? What may seem less important now but still have more subtle influence years down the line? Longer held cultural traditions have a very special place, but they aren't the only things that carry importance.

      This is a heavily modded board, but there's still plenty of leeway. Much of the moderation when it comes to gallery posts has to do with keeping things PG13, since there are underage members here. I also don't think you can speak for all 15,836 members when it comes to what they consider courtesy--for some it's not being jumped on or heavily critiqued; for others it's not being flamed in discussion threads; others may have concern over content, but even then not everyone is bothered by the same things. We all have different thresholds when it comes to what we consider offensive. That's why a live and let live (as long as it's ok by DoA rules) attitude comes in handy. You can't force everyone into the same mold--it just isn't feasable unless the board were to become down right draconian, and I don't think very many people would actually want that.

      The fact that this is an international board maybe a reason to think about what you're posting, but it also means that you need to be a little more flexible and a little less quick to take offense. With so many people from so many different places it's hard for anybody (whether they like to do research or not) to know everything they need to in order to never step on a person's toes. Mistakes will happen, so will miscommunications, and all the other little things that make communication a little more ...uh...interesting than we would always like.
       
    10. I don't recall anyone stating one should never be offended, least of all you. I quite agree that people have the burden of how they register a reaction.
      Suppose someone, without comment, posted a photo of two dolls, and one is holding the wrist of the other. Let's say the one holding the wrist has a gun tucked in his or her waistband. People will interpret the photo as they wish. There may be some who are offended because they imagine the other doll is about to be forced into some act or another. Of course, one can be offended, but how they respond is subject to the rules of this forum.
      Likewise an avid student of Japanese culture, who is also a doll owner, may cringe or even be outraged over the kimonos they see on dolls in pictures posted here, but their response cannot exceed the boundaries set by this community without consequence.
      Out of curiosity, has any image been allowed to be posted on DoA and later removed because of protest?
       
    11. No, I didn't get the impression that you were tolerating any of that. I merely addressed the point of intent, accountability for expression, and gauging your audience according to the venue. If someone looks at a gallery post, notices that the doll's kimono is folded right side over the left, and politely asks if the doll is meant to be a deceased character as per kimono etiquette; it's not a critique, but merely a clarification of the creator's message. In fact, clarification is why people ask for specific labels for relationships between certain sizes of dolls or any kind of vague message because multitudes of complaints can get a thread shut down according to the sticky. That's a part of two-sided expression and forum dynamics; critique or not, you are still responsible for conveying a clear message.

      And seeing how there are people who post incorrectly made national dress in the Critique subforum, only to claim that they weren't aiming for accuracy; it really does come across as fishing for only favourable opinions and tuning out everything else. That really defeats the point of "free speech" people are adamantly defending.

      I think it does have to do with a lot, especially concerning my previously linked essay about the preservation of Native Hawaiian and Aboriginal customs and artifacts. It also reminds me of the current "Star Spangled Dolls" kerfuffle in DoA, where many American members were insulted that the American flag was used to market dolls that were entirely sculpted, cast, and face-upped in China. The sentiment was that slapping on an American flag sticker on the headcap of a Chinese doll does not make it American, and that it is grossly misleading to claim otherwise. That kind of strategy puts off the people who see the flag and American industry as something to be respected, just as it puts off Aboriginal artists who come across plastic replicas of traditional designs that get sold under the claims of being "authentic" works.

      Well, that claim was made someone else's part and I gave them the benefit of the doubt. I'm not sure if Irish national dress refers to period dress, the elaborate costumes that are used for Irish dancing, or something else. But this is rather OT on its own, unless someone can bring up Irish national dress or customs being mass-appropriated by BJD owners.

      Yes, I am. That way, people don&#8217;t have to feel slighted about artistic repression while others don&#8217;t have to feel that their culture, religion, experiences with trauma, etc. aren&#8217;t being disrespected.

      Well, the most significant cases of widespread Western to non-Western contact tend to have a history of colonization and imperialism. And by significant, I&#8217;m referring to events that led up to the creation of new countries, intermarriage, and mixed ethnic groups (though imperialism had roots in racist ideology and goals to &#8220;civilize&#8221; people who weren&#8217;t white and Christian). It may open up a can of worms for those who don&#8217;t like the blunt side of world history and this is a very simplified version of events, but I suppose further context should be provided when it comes to West-East relations and how they can affect cultural perspectives of Western and Asian BJD owners.

      To start off: how many European countries acquired territory on other continents in the world, as opposed to the number of non-European countries who did the same? You had Muslims in Africa and China&#8217;s vast trading routes, but they eventually lost their edge by the 19th and 20th century. Meanwhile, the British and the French initiated contact with the Native population in North America, while the Spanish and the Portuguese did the same in Latin America. You later had the massive international bid for Africa, the Transatlantic slave trade and dispersal of black populations, Britain with India, Burma, Hong Kong, and Australia, and France with colonies in the Caribbean and Southeast Asia (Vietnam being a very prominent example, considering the politics involved in the Vietnam war). In later years, you had Americans making their mark in Latin America, the Middle East, and Asia through political and militaristic involvement.

      Westerners mostly took the initiative to engage in longstanding international ventures while Asians remained adherent to thousands of years of tradition for the most part, so it&#8217;s not surprising that Westerners were the ones who encountered different cultures, dominated over them, and were fascinated by their &#8220;exotic&#8221; qualities. But fascination did not always mean respect, and there was a great deal of objectification and assimilation. There are entire year-long history courses and books dedicated to mere sections of this subject alone, but I hope you get the general idea. My summary comes mainly from lectures and my textbook (Western Civilization, fifth edition, volumes B and C), but feel free to reference the material here for comparison.

      As for Japan - it was an imperialistic power, but its expansions touched on other Asian countries like China, Korea, and the Phillipines, rather than successfully expanding into European, African, or North/Latin American borders. As many people would note, this is still the cause for a lot of anti-Japanese sentiments in Asia. I think this is important to put this in perspective, especially since people still haven't produced evidence of Asian BJD owners appropriating and exotifying Western identity the same way that Westerners do towards Asian culture (Japanese in particular). Asians may be influenced by things like Western fashion, food, and popular culture, but in terms of patriotism, identity, and national dress, they&#8217;re still quite intact and insular to the point that some continue to speak out against Western politics and influence. You see a lot of Western demand to have artifacts from different cultures and have BJDs with diverse nationalities and such, but the same can't really be said for Asian BJD owners (again, unless you prove me otherwise).

      And that person would be missing the key difference between acting as if your perspective as x ethnicity/nationality alone counts for empirical evidence, and pointing out damaging aspects of cultural appropriation on a collective and observational scale with actual links to support the claims. It's the difference between making one experience out to be that of the whole, as opposed to simply talking about the already established experiences of other people. I'm certainly not making my ethnicity (which hasn't even been disclosed) the focus of this debate if I'm referring to historical examples and groups of people who have been affected by exploitation and misrepresentation. But thank you for bringing that up before someone else made a mess out of it.
       
    12. Part 1:

      enmi specifically said &#8220;daring kimono&#8221; in the context of sexualized national dress so it&#8217;s not just about clothing aesthetics or an attractive doll, but giving a misleading message about etiquette and proper form. If they don&#8217;t know about kimono, then they&#8217;re not going to know that it isn&#8217;t meant to be worn as &#8220;daring&#8221; or sexy. The wearer does have an impact on how on how the clothing is construed, otherwise I wouldn&#8217;t have referred to the example of Canadian prostitutes in Western Canada who wore kimono and gave a negative image to local Japanese women. I don&#8217;t form my arguments from speculation or what people may think, especially when established examples of appropriation, misrepresentation, and what people do think about appropriated artifacts tell me otherwise. You also seem to be drawing the wrong connection, because I never talked about linking kimono to geisha. I mentioned the geisha as a separate example of how ancient culture can be hawked in real life with the wrong meaning. The point is, you can have a sexualized kimono without the geisha implication and still have a misleading message in the end.

      I brought up intent because people were implying that doing something wrong is excusable as long as there was no intent behind it. Anyone can claim they didn&#8217;t intend something and backpedal out of criticism, accidental damage, or just lie about something they did intend to do. Even then, intent that is not always expressed properly. If you put up a controversial image, garner negative responses, and later say &#8220;I didn&#8217;t mean to offend,&#8221; then how was anyone supposed to what your intentions were in the first place? That sort of behaviour reminds me of the recent Star Spangled Doll incident I mentioned to Shitori. The creator probably didn&#8217;t mean to offend anyone by using the American flag for a Chinese-made doll, but people were put off by the imagery, they were put off even more by the snarky response, and claims of planning to rectify the issue still did not appease for the most part because the damage had already been done. In the end, taking responsibility for the aftermath goes a longer way than simply explaining your intent.

      Once again, you&#8217;re applying your own meaning of &#8220;sexy doll&#8221; and &#8220;sexy kimono&#8221; without considering the context of that conversation and assuming that I&#8217;m using &#8220;geisha&#8221; interchangeably with &#8220;doll&#8221; when I did not. Otherwise, I would&#8217;ve said &#8220;sexy geisha in sexy kimono in the BJD hobby&#8221; instead of &#8220;sexy doll in sexy kimono&#8221; in the BJD hobby.

      Are you actually aware of what Orientalism means, or are you assuming that I&#8217;m using it as a pejorative against BJD owners with kimono? Seeing how I addressed national dress by itself without ever connecting the thought to fetishizing actual Asian-looking BJD, I don&#8217;t see how your point about Asian ethnic characteristics or photographing the doll itself is relevant. Unless you&#8217;re taking nothing but head shots or nude body shots (and BJD nudity is also a subject of boundaries people set for themselves), what the doll is wearing will evoke reactions given the importance that humans place on clothes and fashion. Revealing (as in skin exposure) national dress is obviously going to draw attention to the reflected culture no matter how much the creator wants to remove the cultural element, and call upon questions of fetishism for those who find it tasteless and exploitative to have cleavage, breasts, or leg as the focal point on a symbol of female modesty and tradition. I imagine it&#8217;s a similar kind of response that people have towards human children that are dressed in tube tops, miniskirts, and sweatpants with things like &#8220;sexy&#8221; imprinted across the back, and it&#8217;s likely why people have a problem with seeing 45/60 photostories, or are uncomfortable with taking pictures of nude underage dolls.

      Unfortunately, Orientalism does apply if you&#8217;re taking parts of an Asian culture and transfixing it on your doll as an artistic statement. And if you&#8217;re of the opinion that you&#8217;re using the kimono with no particular Asian meaning, then it will be seen as utterly ludicrous or obnoxious to many people no matter how far you&#8217;d like to be removed from reality. It&#8217;s essentially picking and choosing the things they like about a culture as if it&#8217;s simple as picking candy out of a jar, and that&#8217;s what offends people when it comes to flippantly using cultural or religious symbolism for a doll.

      I for one, would love to know why so many dolls owned by Western owners have distinct Asian backgrounds and names (even if they don&#8217;t have Asian features) if design aesthetics are what really matters here. The BJD community is not some isolated bubble that is impervious to real life dynamics, so I don&#8217;t think it&#8217;s a stretch to say that attraction to Eastern cultures do play a large part in how owners interact with their dolls; many are fans of anime, manga, J-rock, Japanese culture, or Asia in general. If you&#8217;re just telling me that I don&#8217;t understand the community or that it&#8217;s just about individual dolls and individual beauty, then there&#8217;s not one ounce of debatable material in that statement that links back to the purpose of this thread and why people portray things the way they do. Every subject about ethics in this subforum could be answered with &#8220;it&#8217;s just what people do&#8221; and render debating entirely useless.
       
    13. Part 2:

      Which is a lengthier way of saying &#8220;not everyone is going to be as offended as you,&#8221; no? I do consider myself an artist and a simple BJD lover, but &#8220;artist&#8221; and &#8220;BJD lover&#8221; are not mutually exclusive with &#8220;responsibility&#8221; and &#8220;consideration for others.&#8221; You seem to think that I&#8217;m just making this about me, despite countless examples about people from other cultures and other threads about realistic perception on DoA. That&#8217;s your prerogative, but those examples lead me to believe that many people don&#8217;t see beauty or simplicity in violently glamourized yaoi, rape, pedophilia, seemingly child-adult content in 45/60 photostories, religious disrespect, or cultural misrepresentation. The notions that an artist can manipulate free speech as a one-sided tool and have zero sense of accountability are something that&#8217;s been beaten into the ground; many would argue that it gives a bad name to art itself.

      There was a hoax about an artist who supposedly tied up a stray dog in a gallery, laid down food it could not reach, took photos, and let it starve to death in name of art. Frankly, I don&#8217;t think most people would say that it was just the &#8220;baggage&#8221; of animal lovers that was causing problems for the oh-so downtrodden artist. Elaborate prank or not, it provided some insight on the nature of art and how anything demoralizing and shocking can be turned into &#8220;art&#8221; for a quick profit. The person who is responsible for choosing controversial doll art in a publicly viewable venue is as equally as responsible for acknowledging that each person has their baggage. Can they handle that upbringing, culture, religion, tradition, and human reactions to suffering are not things that are easily discarded? Should the audience have to desensitize themselves for the sake of the artist?

      There are only three pages of this subforum, so I still don&#8217;t see how they couldn&#8217;t just refer to the relevant threads instead of clinging to what was originally a single paragraph about cultural appropriation. If yaoi is the only thing they can talk about, then it defeats the purpose of talking about how realistic perceptions as a whole in the BJD world.

      The fact that it&#8217;s a general thing is what makes it OT in a BJD forum. In the context of actual dolls, it is a fallacious argument unless they have proof of Asian BJD owners perpetuating the same kind of cultural misrepresentation.

      This is a question of priorities and determining if two separate things are as equally important. Frankly, a modern invention that mostly evolves and changes over the years can&#8217;t quite be compared to something that withstood drastic changes for thousands of years. Unless pop culture is something that reflects the history, ancestry, and ethnic identity in a country, I don&#8217;t think imported J-rock will be deemed as important as the Constitution anytime soon on a widespread scale. Pop culture affects specific ages and genders (and is something that you can grow out of), whereas cultural traditions link everyone on a national level when you have insular regions like Asia.

      As long as we&#8217;re talking about behaviour on a BJD community, I&#8217;m going to use existing examples of threads that are rife with similar themes. Otherwise, it&#8217;s a fallacy of arguing from ignorance. You can&#8217;t quite assume that people want or don&#8217;t want x if there is nothing to prove or disprove those assertions. If large groups of people do express discomfort over the questionable subjects I&#8217;ve brought up, then the argument is no longer just about &#8220;well everyone does their own thing.&#8221;

      I agree with that, but I don&#8217;t think anyone goes around looking to be offended by things they don&#8217;t like. I&#8217;ve noticed that people are quick to blame the problem on the person who is offended, rather than examining why they may have offended that person. If you are the one who taking the initiative to create a certain image, then the responsibility of research, clarity, labeling, warnings, and explanation about content has to come from you first. The audience is not made up of psychics and mind-readers.
       
    14. That's because some of us believe strongly in freedom of speech and expression. If someone chooses to explain why they're offended (assuming it's not something glaringly obvious/insulting to much of the community at large) then fine, that's a viewpoint to be taken into consideration. However, you seem to be putting some onus on the person expressing themself to take other people's concerns into account and provide some sort of explanation in advance or at least study up bigtime on why someone *might* be bothered, even where they don't directly come out and explain "I'm bothered by this and here is why". Fundamentally, I don't agree with that approach, or that the person who is freely expressing themself should have that burden.

      Basically a person can express themself. Another person can express themself and say "I don't like what you just said." That's the end of it. There is no responsibility for the original person expressing themself to take special note or even care that someone disliked their words or presentation. If something is truly over the line, that is why we have community rules and mods. I don't believe in self-censorship beyond what is required by said rules and mods. That's all there is to it, as far as I'm concerned.
       
    15. How are they defining free speech, exactly? Once again, free speech in real life applies only to protection from government censorship. It does not apply to public disturbances or private venues, so I don't see why members of the latter category can't voice their standards on what is inappropriate or appropriate for a forum that's heavily moderated to begin with. If free speech is really an issue here, then I'm not seeing a consensus of "let people step on toes" in all the other debate threads about realistic perception, sex, underage content, 45/60, controversial doll names, etc.

      Considering how some people in this thread took on an approach of "people who say they're bothered by x are just overreacting/uppity/pretentious/etc," the premise that people aren't being clear about their concerns is flawed. As I've said countless times; if you don't care about negative reception and go about pissing off people for the hell of it, my argument obviously does not apply. But if people are creating certain images and outright complaining that their free speech is being infringed (in a private venue, at that), that they don't deserve negative reception, or that they're unfairly misunderstood, then it's a case of not being able to handle two-sided discourse. If you can't take the right steps to ensure a clear message, then there's no point in blaming your audience for having a human reaction.

      Now if they're being petulant over how someone disliked their presentation and say they shouldn't talk about what bothers them, then yes, they're ignoring the responsibility that comes with free speech. The fact that there are subject-to-change guidelines on what is "over the line" and what requires mod censorship contradicts the claim of free speech on an online forum altogether, and only reinforces my previous points about separate venues. How is a person truly expressing themself if they have to abide by a subjective standard of "over the line" (which could mean anything) that they don't believe in? I don't pretend free speech applies in my neighbour's home or a daycare, and it's just as irrelevant on any private forum. This thread is about defining what constitutes "over the line" for people and how/why that matters to them, so repeated opinions about free speech isn't doing much in terms of providing a debatable subject.
       
    16. Lord, Have mercy, just looking at this make my head spin, really didn't I mention it before? it 'to each our own' meaning, when it boils down to the roots of things, you 'still' remain to 'your' own way of thinking, nothing and no one else would ever change that, so does it really have to invole all of this...agruement over one person thoughts and our own ideas, and how they aren't seeing your side of the mirror? I mean, isn't this thread about 'do dolls reflect our perception of reality? If so, how much should that really matter?' I notice, some just went off and is now defending what they have to say, and trying to make other see it, and if not...force them into it, correct me if i'm wrong...where in that does it invole our 'dolls' reflectioning our personality? beside our dark side showing itself? Sorry just have to get that out. ahem
       
    17. ie. the point of a debate. It isn't about sitting in a nice hippie circle and exchanging opinions, it's about taking a specific stance and sticking to it. Of course we all know that people have their own thoughts, so on and so forth. The question is why they take that approach, and in this case, why some approaches are more trivialized than others.

      Unless they're being tied down to their chairs and are made to view the thread; no, they're not being forced into anything. No one has to participate if they don't want to.

      Well, there's only been six pages of talked-about-to-death examples of controversial doll content and reactions to them (which people still aren't addressing in detail, by the way) that are essentially a question of whether or not they reflect a BJD owner's sense of reality. Is it really that unclear?
       
    18. I think it's less the simple yes or no answer and leaving people be with their opnions and more the 'why' question that keeps the discussion going and the why question is:

      If dolls ARE reflections upon reality, then what is the significance (or possible/speculated significance of this) and what is the impact?

      And following THAT why question comes, "And if there is an impact, then is there a morale aspect to this whole thing?"

      And according to this discussion so far, apparently to some people, it can say a lot and impact a lot and because of THAT, the discussion keeps going as people keep talking about something that's important to them.

      ---

      Additionally, I think people HAVE addressed reactions to controversial doll content and thoroughly, too. Not everyone, but there are those of us out there who have.

      Part of the reason, perhaps, that you aren't quite getting more in-depth explorations of reactions is because some of the reactions - like reactions to improperly made cultural dress forms - just aren't experienced by some of the people here. Without personal experience, it's hard to legitmately give any length of any sort of explanation or discussion without making assumptions and well.. this whole thread is about NOT making assumptions, yes?

      Furthermore, people have been poked at for talking (too much) about things like same-sex relationships and depictions in doll-related stories and photos and their reactions to it and so are possibly reluctant to offer much else in the way of discussion for fear of being dismissed and/or shot down.

      And a last thing - the original post didn't say exactly WHAT sorts of topics were to be discussed and in what amount. If the discussion isn't going in the direction that is preferred, then clarification on the exact topics to be discussed should be made.
       
    19. Nereina, I want to observe that I almost removed my request to prove your statement about Westerners initiating the most contact and having the most impact in terms of cultural appropriation because I sort of forgot the West does include a few other countries besides the U. S. A sort of "Imperialist American Dog " moment there. As I realized the next day. I let it stand however, because it is one thing to contact and another to have impact. Thank you for your answer.
      I believe that pictures posted in the critique section are fairly asking to have things pointed out, in a respectful manner, which might not have occured to them.
      Honestly, I had the vague impression, and others might have had as well, that you are on an Internet-wide crusade. Apparently this is not the case since you have no objection to uninhibited creativity in other venues.
      Maybe this feeling will be better understood by older members: some days I have had it up to here with activism raising its head in each and every facet of my life and leaching the last bit of joy from the most innocuos of activities, and I feel this way mostly because it is the individual who has to buy new compliant products, and pay new taxes and obey new regulations and laws, while corporations essentially bribe their way out of compliance.
      Therefore I admit that when you start talking about cheapening and appropriating culture in the doll world, my inital l reaction is Oh my god it's a bloody doll.
      I reserve the right to take a stance and I also reserve the right to have my opinion changed,by the way.
      Now I am in agreement with you on some points, yet I am still agreeing with Bunnydots in the matter of over-thinking doll play.
      Because we are after all on a board which looks to the Motion Picture Association of America for guidance, which is to say somewhere around PG-13, and we have members, if I recall correctly, as young as thirteen. Not to mention, as I sometimes forget, an international board, with members whose first language is not English.
      Therefore, is it possible that some of the things you may wish of them are ideas which may be a bit difficult for them to absorb due to their age? I am not suggesting this is the case but asking you because I don't know.
      Frankly, I don't like artists who are above clarifying their work and pronouncing people who do not fawn over their offerings as cretons, because they should somehow completely know the artist's intent. However, in some cases here we are talking about children with beautiful dolls. Dolls which are their most prized possesion, and often it just might not occur to them that others do not see what they see and feel what they feel. This may be true of some of the older members as well. Perhaps you are both right depending on the context?
      On the cultural front: I don't want cultures to be lost, and in particular I don't want Japan to change. Which is not to say I want it to remain the land of big-eyed katana-wielding girl's in school uniforms, giant robots with cute boy pilots and hot aliens.
      But I am wishing for some vision of Japan that may be idealized in some ways and the things which are true are already gone really. A native Japanese remarked that he and his friends don't know all the intricacies involved in bowing. And I would not be surprised if the number of Japanese who are just as mystified by kimonos as we are is a staggering segment of the population.
      I am aware that my idea of Japan might be construed as cultural appropriation in the sense of wanting Japan to be what my impressions are, but I do try to be careful about the sources of fact about Japan.
      Just a note: today on the radio I heard that the hot trend for French rock bands is English. Singing in English is no longer the kiss of death it once was over there.
      OP: The question is... do dolls reflect our perception of reality? If so, how much should that really matter?
      Maybe I am totally oblivious here, but is the question how much should it matter to this community only?
      Well, I am still thinking all this over...maybe it's time for the recap episode?
       
    20. Nereina, I'm sorry to say that you come off as very nit-picky to me, and for that reason, I'm tuning you out.
      If someone would like to start a thread addressing the original topic that's not about someone else trying to get their particular view across to the point of beating dead horses to a pulp with a baseball bat, that might be interesting. As it is, I don't see any point in continuing to feed what seems to be one person's desire to rant and have the last word.