Imagination? Or psychosis?

One thing worth mention is that we shouldn't forget that not all of us are American, Western or JudeoChristian and that animism is a normal part of some cultural and religious beliefs. I personally don't believe my dolls have souls but it would be perfectly reasonable for a believer in Shinto or some Hindu and Shaman traditions to think an inanimate object does have a soul. In which case implying they have some sort of psychosis seems a little rude.

 

As I see it, and from my Western point of view, there's a general spectrum of behaviors in the doll community. Except as I describe below, I don't think any positions on this spectrum are better than others. And as with any attempt to categorize, there will be some who cross over in minor ways. Still, I think this more or less covers every permutation I've witnessed in my years here.

1. People who don't name them, don't talk to them, and for the most part treat them as art or collectors' items to display.
   
2. People who name them and/or develop "characters" for them, but don't talk to them in seriousness, carry them around everywhere they go, or do "human activities" with them like watching TV.
   
3. People who name them and develop "characters" for them, and sometimes, in pretend and for fun, speak to them or take them out and about.
   
4. People who do all of the things in #2 on a regular basis.
   
5. People who do all of the things in #2 on a regular basis and expect everyone else to be OK with it.
   
6. People who do all of the things in #2 on a regular basis, expect everyone else to be OK with it, and think all doll owners should behave the same way.
   
7. People who do all of the things in #2 on a regular basis, expect everyone else to be OK with it, think all doll owners should behave the same way, and say that they believe their dolls are creatures with awareness even though they really don't. They say that they do, however, for a range of reasons.
   
8. People who do all of the things in #2 on a regular basis, expect everyone else to be OK with it, think all doll owners should behave the same way, say that they believe their dolls are creatures with awareness, and genuinely believe that.

I only take issue with the people I described in 5, 6, and 7. I find it offensive that anyone would choose to behave in a manner that mimics mental disturbance on purpose with an expectation that the rest of Western society will be OK with it. It can be argued that it's not imitating mental disturbance because deep down one is ___, ____, or ____, but the bottom line is that strangers, both in real life and online, are not going to have the full context needed to recognize that. To them, it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck. It is self-centered and absurd to expect that no one will think it is, in fact, a duck.

The people described in 8 are, IMHO, a lot more rare than claimed. That is all I will say about that.

 

1. Nobody on this board is qualified to diagnose somebody with a mental illness. And even if they are, that's a real quick way to lose your license. If you're really curious, why not talk to somebody who's actually qualified to talk about it? They're going to give you an accurate answer. Barring that you could always read the DSM.
2. It doesn't matter what anybody, on the Internet or otherwise, says about or "defines" a mental illness. It is what it is. Play armchair doctor all you like. It won't change anything.
3. You're assuming too much. Somebody's internet life, particularly a handful of posts on a board, != somebody's real life.

 

Ahaha, very true. I can't count the amount of 'cousins of Britney Spears' or 'Half-siblings of Miley Cyrus', etc I've met on the internet. Because someone says this or that about their life on the internet, does not make is so. If so, I would say I were rich so I really could be in real life too.

And it's true that you've got to realize a lot of people will claim to be more mental online than they actually are offline because for some reason they expect more acceptance or because it's fun to over-exaggerate on a forum when it gets you more attention, where no one most likely will ever know you offline. I've seen people rant about how their friends thought they were weird or insane because they talked to themselves while others were around, I meet them offline and for the 2 years I know them in-person, they never once do this around me, a bit odd, no? If it were such a bad habit they did around other people, I wouldn't have been any different. If they could just turn it off like that, they would arounds others too, not just me. And if they were more comfortable with me than their other friends, they would do it around me too since they were 'comfortable' enough online to. Except that's not the case, the case is it was most likely an over-exaggerated internet lie, which you will run into a lot on the internet.

:EDIT: Lizzard, you forgot one type of person. Those who name them, don't talk to them and carry them around, etc. :EDIT:

 

QFE. Nothing more to add, except the fact that I can now officially say I'm #2.

 

I'm a #3 in Lizzard's list, and most of the dollie people I've had the opportunity to meet so far are either a 2 or 3, with the occasional 4 and 5, but that maybe becuase I've only met a few of these people during meets, where most of the the oddities that outsiders see with our hobby are veiwed as normal.

I think we all might be bit nuerotic over our dolls, and I definately channel my inner child with my dolls, but I really don't see much issue with people collecting shelf babies, but I do find it odd becuase that's not at all how I view mine. Mine are being bought to be played with.

 

Haahah. I'm more of a #2.

But there are people who think I'm crazy just for having dolls--period.

Being crazy is totally used and abused too much.

Really, people should be free to do and believe what they wish. People can believe in all kinds of bizarre things--and hey, it's (usually) a free country and they're allowed, you know?

If they, themselves, feel like they have a problem and it's messing up their lives, then they can go consult a psychologist or psychiatrist. But otherwise, people need to relax and mind their own business.

 

My dolls are characters. In Kaz's case, a character was built around the doll and she became her own story. In Peter's case, the doll was built around the character in order to perfectly replicate him. For both of their characters, I 'talk' to them and they 'talk' to me, in that I imagine conversations between myself and their characters in a way of better understanding the characters that they embody.

Having the dolls there can amplify those conversations, because it gives me a visual anchor to remember who it is I'm 'talking' with. I think any writer knows that their characters start to tell the writer what happens, instead of things being the other way around, and there's nothing particularly crazy about that happening. But when the person loses control over their actions based on what the characters are 'saying', then there's a problem.

I'll admit to being a bit judgmental when it comes to other BJD owners. One woman in particular talked about how her doll became pregnant after a male doll visited and -obviously- they had sexual relations while the owners weren't looking, because her doll had fainted (fell off the shelf) twice since, and that meant she was pregnant. So now she needed to buy a new doll to represent the baby from the pregnancy. Perhaps it was in the presentation of the situation, but something about it made me draw back and wonder, "Do I sound that crazy?"

 

...........wait, what? Are...are you serious? That's amazing. You win.

FWIW, I'm #2 on Lizzard's list. Actually, that list might make a good thread regarding the topic of your bond to your dolls.

 

I'm definitely a #3.5 on that list.

I do all the things in number three, pretty regularly. I usually have a tiny stuffed in my purse for trips, and I definitely name my dolls. Of course they're all actually doll versions of pre-existing characters--the character before the doll. But nevertheless, they all have "characters".

And sure, I talk to them in fun sometimes. Usually to say things like, "Oh Ivy, please stand up just for a second--no no you fell down again! DX"
Or, "Torrent, that wig looks fabulous on you!"

Do I believe they have souls? No. Do I believe they hear me when I talk to them, or that they talk back? No. But it doesn't mean I talk to them any less. :P

 

I think the fact you make a few examples out of yourself for this thread's first post had a few people replying to your personal event. If you don't want people replying to you personally and just a topic, don't put personal information or stories into an original post. Saying 'I did this... is it imagination or a mental issue?' could easily make someone reply to you and not the subject you're trying to start a debate on. If you don't know what I'm referring to, I mean this bit:

 

Oh! very good point.

Also, again, I would caution people about the all-too-common misuse of the word "psychosis" to label something that really isn't psychosis at all. Psychosis is a serious disease that results in a serious inability to deal with reality in a functional way. It's the same kind of mis-use of language that has people believing that "schizophrenia" means "multiple personality disorder" when they are in fact two different conditions.

Always be careful when labelling someone with a term from a medical field. Half the time we're wrong, even if we think we're well-informed (and yes, I am including myself in that generalization )

On the other hand, I have no problems labelling myself as a #2, (or 3, maybe?) and crazy as a loon, as they used to say

 

First of all, I'm pagan. I'm a druid. I believe in nature spirits and things that dwell in the trees and rocks and rivers, etc. I don't see why some kind of spirit WOULDN'T take up residence in my boys given that they are so lifelike in appearance. Do I think every doll has some kind of spirit/kami/soul in it, no... but given that I've invited those types of things into my life, I know my boys have something in them.

Does that make me crazy? Do we call other practitioners of nature-based religions crazy? I don't think so. ^___^

 

Double post. WTG, server errors. Sorry!

 

This thread seems like an extension of the "do dolls have souls" debate, from a different angle: Questioning the belief rather than the fact of the dolls' debated animism.

I will third (fourth? tenth?) the exhortation to only use accurate terms, especially when describing mental health and nonhealth.

I think Lizzard's list is informative, but too sequential. I have encountered, and personally know, doll owners who perform the habits/traits listed in #2, but sometimes not as a full set (talking to them without carrying them everywhere; setting them up to watch TV without talking to them), or sometimes with an addition of one or another of the traits from #8, but - notably - doing all of this without the expectation that everyone else in the hobby, or everyone else in general, should believe this way & act this way as well.

If there is in truth a stronger trend toward atypical views of inanimate objects in the dollery than there is in other hobbies where the expensive items collected are not humanoid, then I wouldn't fault any members of the dollery for that stronger atypicality. Setting aside all questions of the supernatural/spiritual/animist, it's a fact that a unique face looking back at you is a very strong instinctive motivator to identify and bond with that face.

As to my personal beliefs, I believe in personal truths similar to what yanagi_sen has outlined above me. I don't believe all dolls have an animism to them, because that has to be imbued and nurtured to become strong at all. But I believe that those who are dedicated to and filled with that love and that attention from their owners can become, through that infusion, and then can give it back as well. The concepts of magical familiars and wizardry's servitors, as well as pagan concepts of natural spirits and modern domestic concepts of the love & awareness of pets and animals, have all educated my thoughts as to what, precisely, makes my boys' eyes so full of love when they look at me.

I know I'd get some pretty interesting warning labels, myself, if defining and labeling each others' quirky beliefs were the purpose here. As it's not, I just think that, stating the obvious, possessing a patience for others' varying beliefs when it comes to their dolls -- and having the good sense to politely track a wide berth around when you can't find that patience -- is most crucial here.

 

Apologies, I didn't mean to derail the thread quite like I did. The list I made is certainly not intended to be anything official or even practical to use outside this discussion. Still, since it seems to be getting referenced a bit in fun, I've made some grammatical corrections to make it more clear. As I said before, though, it won't -- and was never intended to -- cover every permutation possible.

Yanagi_San, there are other people like you out there, I am sure, who truly believe that dolls can have spirits (or souls, or personalities, or so on). I wouldn't say that it qualifies as "insane" if it is based on a reasoned, thorough religious worldview and you are otherwise free of "insane" behaviors.

I will say, however, that as uncommon as it is to encounter people who genuinely believe that their dolls have souls, it is even more uncommon to encounter those who believe it but do not insist upon others recognizing it as well. After all, if one believes that their own doll has a soul, it stands to reason that other dolls are the same way. In that case, tolerating owners who don't treat their dolls like living creatures would be tantamount to tolerating abuse, would it not?

 

Lizzard -- I would disagree, actually, and posit that it would depend on how the owner believed that the doll acquired a soul in the first place. If it's a quality that's inherent to being resinated, then was the soul acquired at point of casting? At box opening?

If the animism (or soul, if you will) of the doll is acquired - as I believe - once a quantity of love and attention has been infused into it by its owner, then it makes more sense that all dolls don't have souls, as not all of them have been "steeped" in the sort of attention that would generate an identity and animism of their own. Follow?

So yeah, I guess I'm one of the super rare ones?

 

I wasn't referring to you in particular but to all of us in general It's a very common thing to misuse definitions -- happens ALL over the place.