Our Strange Addiction?

The reason why people view "addiction" as something negative is that an addiction is by definition something that is continued despite negative consequences.

Here's one definition that I found:

You may joke about being addicted to something you like and spend a lot of time on, just like people may joke about going to rob a bank to pay for that new LE. That's just jest, but addiction can have serious consequences. It's the difference between not going out for drinks one evening, because you promised to be part of an online game activity (but go out for drinks another time) and spending every waking hour gaming until you are estranged from your loved ones and end up being hospitalised due to exhaustion, dehydration and malnutrition. It is the lack of moderation and the constant need for the activity that makes it an addition.

Spending a lot of time and money on something does not make it an addiction, but when someone can't stay away from dolls and doll websites for one week without feeling moody or restless and having concentration issues and problems sleeping, I'd say that's a sign of addiction: the need to have this activity to feel normal.
Dolls make me happy and there's nothing wrong with that, but the absence of dolls does not make me unhappy. If I were to redecorate my house and had to box up my dolls until I'm finished, I wouldn't feel unhappy. If I wouldn't be able to function normally without my dolls, I'd say I'm addicted.

 

Except, that's just the thing -- the word has not lost its meaning.

Just because a term can be bandied around in jest or histrionic hyperbole does not strip it of its actual meaning. It doesn't change the real definition, which still will be assumed in most contexts unless someone knows to do otherwise.

Going from what polyhymnia mentions above, the urge to fit 'addiction' as a label on certain things dumbs down and dilutes the term 'addiction' until 'addiction' cannot be said to apply at all, and it's just 'really likes a lot'. That isn't an addict, that's someone who really likes something a lot, which is not inherently negative, and not even really worthy of note one way or the other.

 

I'm fully aware of the bad truth behind addictions. I have family
history of it. Somehow through my own awareness I've avoided
repeating history. So I feel very lucky. But this is DOLL Addiction
we're talking about. And honestly the OP wasn't really thinking of
it seriously in those terms!!
@ Muisje
I like your POV though. My guess is that the people who refuse to
believe that doll addictions can exist either have nothing to compare
or judge it against or they might be in denial and feel that people are
pointing at them. lol I'll likely get in trouble for that, oh well.

The point is nobody here is taking it seriously to the extent that they
will believe/admit it's possible or even exists. I will point out though
that in America we use the word Addicted to death. So it makes sense
that people, for the most part, are having trouble with it.
They have a singular idea/visual of what an addict is and they are basing
it on THAT. For instance: I have a neighbor who is an absolute drunk.
BUT he has a full time job, a wife, a house with renters. So does that
mean he's NOT an addict just because for some reason he manages to
have "normalcy" in life? From some of the posts you would believe they
think so.
I guess you are ONLY an addict if your life is in complete shambles.
Absurd. But that seems to be the basic belief by many here.

edit: I understand basing addiction in it's worst form by drug addiction..
but there are other forms too which make more sense to compare with
the OP. Shopping addiction. Where people feel the compulsive need to
buy anything/everything that catches their fancy.
If you base it on drug/substance addiction then obviously its easy to
dismiss it as nonexistent in the hobby!!

Omniomania.

 

There are non-chemical addictions and behavioral patterns. My workaholic thing is a good example; people can be sex addicts, and there are other non-chemical addictions out there. Could there be shopping addicts who get into dolls? Sure. If it wasn't dolls, it would be something else, though, and for those individuals, it really isn't about the dolls -- it's about the browsing/spending/shopping behaviors.

As for the person you cite: on what do you base your opinion that he is an addict? Does he define himself that way? I don't mean to be harsh here, but I would be hard pressed to say that someone has a problem if I'm not intimately familiar with their circumstances beyond what I know of any of my neighbors... a room mate, maybe, or a family member. To be fair, I have seen people who go out and get totally blasted once in a blue moon but are perfectly sensible, functional human beings, can stop drinking without difficulty, and don't have to to get through a day/party/year/etc. without stress, so 'has been observed drunk as a skunk sometimes' doesn't necessarily mean there's an addiction involved.

In my personal view, it's principally about what is in control: you, or the thing -- whether the thing is a cigarette, glass of vodka, doll, credit card, or anything else. What is in control is a part of a thousand little decisions made every day.

 

Well, I guess the only way I could maybe see it being a problem from an emotional standpoint would be if one had to have the doll with them, but it was in a situation that really wasn't an appropriate time and place (in a sense that it would actually get them in trouble in some way). However, I think that:
1) it would be highly unlikely to happen anyway, and
2) considering how small bjds get, it's easy to have one with you and know one would be the wiser. Stealth bjds, lol
I would hazard a guess that the vast vast majority of the time people have dolls out with them it really isn't a problem and it would be unlikely to become one. I don't personally worry or wonder about people who take their dolls with them places -- I've done it before in the past, but don't do it much now outside of meetups or at cons. I think I'm too shy to feel fully comfortable without a group around me -- kudos to people who can proudly take their doll everywhere. They may in the end be exhibiting fewer issues than I have

 

Lulu78, I sincerely hope you'll reconsider your decision to delete your posts and leave the board. There are bound to be disagreements in a debate topic (isn't that the nature of debate?), and I believe there's room for every voice. Please don't silence yourself. And please don't think anybody is spanking you for your opinions.

 

Uhm... wow. You know, actually I think I'm going to bow out for a while because not only did I get labeled an addict myself based on spending behaviors, I just got attacked for asking a question politely and treated as though I was trying to crucify someone. That's something I am just not in the mood to butt heads with. So, uh, yeah. Wow.

 

Yes.

I've seen alcohol addiction in my family (multiple generations) and my husband's family (multiple generations). That the addicts were high-functioning in no way diminishes the addictions themselves. The families, to a greater or lesser extent, molded their behaviors around that of the addict, just as the addict molded her/his behaviors around the addiction.

Addictions don't have to be big and splashy to be terrible. I think some addictions, like surreality's workaholism, and shopping addict's compulsions to buy, may be even more painful than strictly chemical addictions/substance abuse, because they are the extremes of qualities/virtues that Americans* revere: the Protestant work ethic, and consumerism.

I think it's important to be precise with language. There are terms to cover a range of behaviors (that could be applied to doll collecting or just about anything). When I first saw the title of this thread, I thought it was about actual addiction, and that really piqued my interest.

*Not to limit the discussion to Americans, but speaking for my own culture.

 

I came here hoping to see my posts and the quotes people used
deleted only to see that surreality felt attacked & believed
she was labeled an addict. I know that I never accused you of
being an addict, but something I said obviously got under your skin.
You questioned whether I had the right to call my neighbor a drunk
alcoholic/addict and unfortunately because of the circumstances
behind my reason for mentioning him, it opened up a can of worms
emotionally so to speak. But nothing I said was impolite either, it
was just the truth. Instead of feeling bad abut my situation and then
agreeing that you might have been wrong to question my comment
about a neighbor, you chose to feel offended? Well I felt hurt too.

When someone repeatedly tries to quit a "behavior" that is causing
them health problems, interfering with relationships with others &
making one act like a bad person publicly, causes them to verbally
and physically assault neighbors, then I'm sorry but they ARE an addict.
You can defend yourself, but don't bother trying to defend a total
stranger. This person does not deserve defense.

Collecting BJD's in itself is not a "strange addiction", what one does
after might be considered strange, but it seems the overall belief is
that nobody could be addicted to buying/owning BJDs. I do happen
to know of a sweet old woman (who is passed) that collected so many
different types of dolls that her house was overrun by them and her
daughter had to store boxes and boxes of them in her own house
and even then there was no place to sit or stand when she came to
visit her. Was she addicted to buying & owning dolls? *shrugs*

 

BTW they can't delete your words if it's a quote inside someone else's post-- those stay on your perrrrrmanent recorrrrd. So everybody can still see those bits of what you originally said. Better to stand up for your words, anyway, than try to redact them later as though nothing had happened.

 

What's the difference between choosing to feel offended and feeling offended? Also, why does she have to "agree she was wrong"? People can question what's said in debate threads, and it's not like every neighbour who has ever been accused of being an alcoholic from a distance is automatically and in fact an alcoholic. It's a pretty common accusation to get thrown around, so please understand that people may be wary about it.

Just to niggle on the last bit, acting like a bad person in public doesn't mean you're an addict. It just means you're a dick. The two can be mutually exclusive. This person sounds like both, but not so much like he collects BJDs.

This is not how I've read this thread. I'd say the more common line of thinking is that it's possible but very rare. And the more pertinent point is that I don't think you can determine if people are or are not by their behaviour on this forum. That's even farther away than just seeing what your neighbour does. If someone seems to be buying a lot of dolls, there are several factors to consider before considering them addicted, such as:

Are they lying?
Is it really that they're buying an unusual number, or is it just that those are big events for them that make them post more on the forum? In other words, do you think people are buying lots and lots because you see a lot of posts?
They could be buying up everything in sight, and still actually capable of stopping themselves at any time (they just don't have to because of their resources, such as loads of money and a huge house).
Are they, like me, the type who likes to throw around words like "obsessed" and "addicted" and *insert preferred thing here* crack" -- not uncommon for geeks?
What can you really know about their home lives/finances/collecting habits/mental health from an online forum or even a meetup?

TL/DR My point really is, when you say some people on the board/in the hobby are no-doubt-about-it addicted, skeptical and/or offended reactions are pretty much guaranteed.

 

Quote of the Day.

 

I've decided to stop being a part of the nonsensical debate topic
after this post.

If you still feel like you have any place to question whether I have
a "right" to label my neighbor as having an addiction (to booze..
NOT dolls!) that's your business. Ask his wife, she'll tell you.
I brought him up to make a point that you CAN have an addiction
without it ruining your life, but that point was completely lost here.

Also I'm not sure why surreality felt "attacked" but it certainly was
not by me. I was also hurt by her implying I have no right to call
someone I know, who has caused me A LOT of emotional distress,
by verbal attacks and a physical altercation spewed by threats, an addict.
Perhaps I know him better than someone who has neither met nor
lived next door to him for twenty years?
(and I did point this out in the post before, which I have since deleted)

timid made an interesting comment: " My point really is when you say
some people on the board/in the hobby are no-doubt-about-it addicted,
skeptical and/or offended reactions are pretty much guaranteed"

Sorry but I don't agree. There are really only two reasons why anyone
would feel offended (but I'm sure you'll add more) by the thought of
there being BJD addicts on the forum (or in the entire world!!):
1. They are called out by name (which obviously did not happen by me)
2. They already question their own habits and thus feel they were
being talked about.

You can say "all aren't" but you cannot say "none are"

*waves goodbye*

 

I for a time, had an unhealthy need to have my first doll with me. But I was going through a very horrible emotional state, and he became my security blanket of sorts as I have a high fear and anxiety for people and things leaving me. (yet I'm also terrified of becoming a hoarder so I purge out the old several times a year...and keep only what /truely/ is important.. thusly me and my daughter can share a small bedroom with only a bit inconvenience) My doll wouldn't/couldn't reject me while my marriage was falling apart.

Once I realized I'd gotten rather unhealthy with my attachment though, I learned to back off. But I still when I"m in a funk will snuggle up to my boy (he's the most snuggly) and talk with him about my sad things.



On a day to day though, I'm a little obsessed with finding them props... and like rhapsodies I'll announce when I'm home to them and say good night. And if I've 'neglected them' for several days give them a lil hug before going and doing whatever (usually attempting and failing at a photoshoot) But, I greet my Daughter and cat first..

 

I'm "new" to the hobby (I've admired for years but just ordered my first actual BJD) and I'd say that I'm overwhelmed, but not yet addicted. Whether or not I'll truly become "addicted", I'm not sure. Though I highly doubt it. I will most likely spend a good chunk of time, money, and love in this hobby as I do my others however. BJDs are just so lovely I find them hard not to love! I think I'm more "addicted" to looking up pictures and information on BJDs more so than buying them. If I ever say I'm addicted, it's probably just as a term of incredible love. Not anything unhealthy.

 

I believe that you can be addicted to many things, or maybe the word addiction is too strong, and been used more carefully.
Personally I do not feel like an addict, but I can not deny that if I am interested in something I will try to get as much as I can for it. I love CLAMP, so I have all their manga and Artbooks. I love Harry Potter, so I have all the books twice and in many languages, and of course the movies and many other examples.
I think that any person is free to collect anything they like, but do not forget to live their real life and do not hurt their loved ones.

 

For sure there are those of us that are right up there with Davecat, and that episode with the ventriloquist girl. Our addiction is not really hurting us or anyone around us (unless your are becoming financially destitute for your dolls, which I know happens).

 

I have only seen a very few people who are TRULY addicted to BJDs, and who would seriously benefit from some help. I think they truly thought their dolls were their children, and they took it to unhealthy extremes. It just got...creepy. Most other people I know, however, are simply passionate about what they do. Nothing wrong with that.

I'm sorry to see this issue has caused so much strife.

 

I believe that given the right emotional conditioning, most people could become dependent on most anything. For people with addictive or obsessional tendencies, this is even more true. But there is a clear line between being addicted or dependent on something and being an enthusiast. Few would question someone who has a boat keychain, saved up for years for the perfect yacht, and has a model of a ship on his desk right beside his family pictures. Most would say that he is an extreme hobbyist. I believe that BJDs tend to get more flak because they are something of an emergent or niche hobby. Additionally, BJD enthusiasm is somewhat divisive as one either likes them enough to drop hundreds of dollars on it or they do not. There is little in between. Therefore the bias is obviously that those who like them a lot will tend to get them and those who do not will have a hard time understanding why anyone would. There is also a cultural bias in North America against 'girl hobbies' which certainly does not help!