Representing your doll sexually?

This topic is really interesting, because I find that a lot of people have the
idea that dolls (not just nude bodies) are sexual in some way – like the commonly
used “sexy-doll” comment you’ll see a lot in posts here. Now, I don’t know that
all the people that use “sexy-doll” comment actually believe that the doll is “sexy,”
but I can’t really fathom the idea of an inanimate object being sexy, so I just think that they
mean “cool/pretty/nice/etc.”

Personally, I enjoy taking photos of my dolls while they are nude, I don’t think that makes
them look sexy or trashy because they are dolls. I never pose them in sexy/sexual/explicit
manners and I never intend for the shots to be seen as “sexual/arousing” in any way, shape
or form. Whatever the viewer thinks/feels when they see my photos is their own personal
dilemma. I see the term “artistic-nudity” a lot as well; I think that it just comes to “eye-of-the-beholder,”
what might be artsy-nudity to some, might be trashy to others, similarly what some might find
sexy others might find unexciting – it’s just a matter of opinion.


- Enzyme

 

I always prefer looking at good photos to looking at poorly shot photos, whether they have sexual content or not. So there's that.

I am most fond of beautiful, artistic nude shots, but there's a special spot in my heart for some of the things people might consider "trashy" as well. The OP mentioned up-skirt shots, and that's a great example of something I'm more comfortable with in a piece of obviously not-real art, since I don't have to worry that the model is being exploited. Ditto shots that feature scandalously short, tight, or see-through clothing - in humans, I don't want to see such things on anyone I'm not planning on having sex with; on a doll it's pleasingly racy without being uncomfortable.

I don't like other people taking sexual photos of my dolls, though, or even posing them in sexual ways beyond leaning-in-close or maybe hand-on-thigh. People who want to go beyond that often seem to have a very different idea of my dolls' personalities that I'm not comfortable with.

As for the idea that people call their dolls their children, well, I'd just like to point out that my mother still calls me her child, despite the fact that I'm a grown-up woman with a husband. Because of our actual familial relationship, it would of course be messed up if she wanted to take racy photos of me. But people who call their dolls their children don't have that actual familial relationship - they're just using a convenient word that both conveys the feelings of affection many of us have for our dolls, and implies the way we take charge of them. I don't see that particular term making a sexual photo of a doll any more trashy or disturbing.

 

I feel very much the same way. I'm absolutely fine with things done with dolls that would make me very uncomfortable if the people involved were actual real human beings. With real people there are many more things to be concerned about.

 

I personally wouldn't shoot my doll in a sexual manner. I think it's kinda awkward shooting such thing. I'd feel like I'm some kind of porno photographer. >w>;; But that's just me.
I guess if people want to portray them sexually that's fine. >_> If that's in their interest.

I just don't really want to come upon it without knowing that it's portrayed sexually/nakedness like on a thread or a site. Especially if the site has young kids where they might come upon it? As much as it might be a doll, it's still representing something that kids should not really know about till they're a bit older.

 

First, I agree with most of the above posters on the thought that the doll that is depicted in any way that can be considered sexual - even if the poster of the pic doesn't think that in the first place! - should represent an adult character. I am okay with Mini-sized dolls representing adult characrers, too, but I would only pair them up with another Mini-sized ones. I can see that some owners can make an SD-sized/MSD-sized pairing look okay if the MSD-sized doll is a mature Mini, but for myself, I'd still consider it too risky. Second, the viewer has to be aware what he/she is going to look at - a warning would be good.

And third - I think there are places where pictures of dolls that are "sexy" or taken in a sexually objectified way can be considered appropriate. Take ConDoll, partly deviantArt, private LJ-accounts or blogs. Slightly erotical themes, as long as they don't violate the policy, I wouldn't mind seeing here or on other not primarily sexually themed doll forums - for example, dolls partly clothed and positioned as if they were passionately kissing, or dolls in pretty lingerie that is not too much see through - because come on, a 13-year-old usually knows about those things and these kind of pics would be no more shocking than looking at a clothing catalogue or a romance movie PG-12. I am not really into full nude shots of dolls or upskirt pictures unless VERY well done artistically, though. And I think that often than not, just a hint of sexiness is not only more fitting for display than a full nude shot, but also... well, more sexy.

I am a bit confused about people who call their dolls children and then taking pictures of them in a sexual way. But I think it might be because they don't really mean the "children thing". It is just something of a habit, calling the dolls like that. I see it happen more in the Dollfie Dream community, too.

 

The Finnish BJD site has a section for r18 material. You have to request to see it when you're 18 or older. Maybe that would work here too. Not that I see a great need or reason to represent dolls sexually. I wish I could see that section though, there are some parts of a photostories I follow there. But I'll have to wait a year more, lol.

I myself wouldn't do a photoshoot of that for sexuality, but for my story. I'm interested in what goes on in the brains of sexual people though, so it would be nice to see sexual stuff done with dolls. ...Now that sounds wrong. But something art-like illustrating the sexuality of people would be nice to see.

 

I don't really mind, my dolls characters are mainly characters who are sexual and not shy about it, and while I wouldn't do an actual sex-photoshoot, I don't mind portraying them as sexy, seductive or fetish-y. I think all those things can be very beautiful, and as these dolls can be anything you want them to be, why not sexy? I personally do not see my dolls as kids, I see them as muses and as things like sexy lingerie, pin-up and some fetishwear(like ballet boots, neck corsets..)inspire me as well, for me they are a logical combination! If you(general you) view your dolls as kids, as an innocent fantasy or a reminder of your childhood, I can see why it would be shocking to see people handling their dolls this way! But that is the beauty of the hobby, the dolls are just an empty canvas for us to fill in, and keeping common sense in mind(as in, don't throw your naked dolls in someone elses face), there's not really a right or wrong way to play with them.

For me, 'sexy' or 'sexual' links to someone(or the doll, in this case)being dressed up to look sexy, so pictures of a naked doll, I don't really get. But again, the base sculpt might be what is so interesting to photograph in a sexual manner to someone else, so that is just my preference!

 

Pretty much. And since I'm interested primarily in costuming, a doll would need a pretty amazingly painted/modded/altered body before I'd have much interest in seeing it without clothing. Conversely I can absolutely see myself taking erotic or suggestively posed pictures of a doll if that was appropriate to the kind of outfit it was wearing. I'm as uninterested in doll porn as I am in its human counterpart, but on the other hand, representation of the human form is my primary interest in art (both viewing and creating) and I'm a big fan of aesthetic (semi-)nudity, but in my opinion it takes a lot of skillful camera trickery and lighting to make an unclothed doll body (and most human bodies, really) reach that level of aesthetics. I guess (don't know for sure since I don't have one yet) I'd be fine with someone else taking pictures of a doll of mine in just about any manner that didn't damage the doll, but I might want to O.K. them before they were displayed anywhere.

As far as dolls being portrayed as doing things which are illegal/immoral for human beings, I really can't say that bothers me at all. There's something about treating the representation of a certain act the same as, and therefore as "wrong" as, the execution of the act itself which inherently disturbs me. I like my freedom of expression. Morally reprehensible acts are portrayed in other forms of art and literature all the time, and not always purely for illicit titillation, but sometimes as a way of exploring our relationship to them as individuals and as a culture, and if dolls are one more form of artistic expression, it's going to happen, and I really don't think there's anything wrong with that. But yes, when you throw those pictures all over the internet, you should probably warn people before they click.

 

Me personally? I wouldn't. I just ... don't understand that compulsion some doll owners feel to do things like that. Hell, I've got enough to deal with in my own sexuality, I don't have the time or energy to worry about my dolls', much less create photostories of it. Doesn't make it wrong--just incomprehensible to me.

 

I personally enjoy artistic nudity. If it's too explicit then it would be bothering. I haven't done any nude shots of my girls and I most likely wouldn't. The most I would do (thanks to the influence of anime) are probably underwear shots. Something light, or humorous, but never explicit.

 

While I find it a bit strange, I personally have no problem with it. But i'm definitely a 'to each her own' kinda gal.

 

To each their own
I'm very open minded, and I wouldn't question somebody doing something 'outside the box of acceptability' like taking nudy/sexy photos of their dolls, as I wouldn't want people questioning me if I was doing something the same. I'd feel strange posting such pictures on the internet, but only because of what other people would think. I think sex and sexuality are beautiful things and nothing to be ashamed of. The dolls are just another medium for people to tell artistic stories about life. Like painting sexual things, or sexual literature and photography

 

I personally wouldn't do it, but more power to those that want to. I understand why they'd want to, particularly if the dolls are "character" dolls and the owner is very into telling their story. And it wouldn't bother me if they did it awfully and took badly arranged naked pictures. If that's what makes them happy, fair enough, I just won't be hanging around the thread to appreciate it

I don't think portraying immoral acts is wrong either. It doesn't necessarily endorse them, so I don't think it's any more wrong than writing a book dealing with immoral themes. Also, you can't help your kinks, as long as you're not hurting anybody else whats the harm.

Obviously find an appropriate venue for your trashy immoral pics tho! And use warning labels!

 

I think any photography clothed and nude can have potential to be beautiful.
I personally would consider taking pictures of my dolls in a more "fanservice" type shoot (mostly because I am a lingerie enthusiast) even though I do concider my dolls to be my children.
I think many of the more sexually themed photos of dolls are beautiful and some owners can show a more mature side of the hobby tastefully and artisticly.
but that's just my opinion

 

I've photographed my girl in a sensual manner, but nothing sexual. Like she's in lingerie and in some she's topless, but she's not really showing her breasts fully (like her back is facing toward the camera or she covers herself partially). So more or less like a pin up really. I don't think I'd ever take photos of my dolls in any actual sexual acts cause it would not only feel awkward, it would actually be kind of hard to pose them properly for something like that ^^; but I will photo them in intimate moments, like lovers' embrace or nothing really explicit. Anywho, I only have 3 adults, 1 teen and the rest are kids X.x; and in their storyline there's really only 1 "potential" couple anyways :3

 

Someone else pointed out that it would be okay if somebody were to portray adult-looking dolls in a sexual manner, whereas it was bad form to use childlike dolls, and I agree with this.

There are definite connotations circling the appearance of anything childlike, and that's why there are rules set up to protect human children from abuse. People who have fetishes that revolve around children would probably use imagery of childlike dolls in sexual positions for their own gratification, simply because it would be a substitution in their mind, especially with the use of realistic BJDs as opposed to obviously toy-based dolls made for children.

The basic answer comes down to the comfortability of the photographer. If you feel that the images are artistic, then it's your decision. If you feel they are uncomfortable and sexual, that's also your decision. You also have to think about the things people may think or say about them, and be prepared to defend yourself when the time comes, or should it come.

As for my personal opinion, I think they're fine. There are absolutely lovely images of women in lingerie and scanter clothing that make them look attractive, sultry and sexy. And then there are trashy images of girls hanging out in lingerie that just look, well, trashy. It's half idea and half execution (well, mostly execution) and if you do it properly, you could end up with some very gorgeous, svelt, doll imagery that's new and edgy.

 

I really don't care about what other people do with their dolls. I have done topless shoots with my girls (apart from Kari, she's 16, that somehow seems to make a differance to me.) I hope they look cool or intimate. As for other people's shoots I really don't care how graphic they seem. I'm an openminded person, I'm not squimish or prueish about sex. Our dolls have characters and are ment to be real people, real people get naked and have sex. That element doesn't effect me in anyway. I really don't understand people who say they don't understand it or are weirded/grossed out by it, lol. (they must have very sheltered sex lives.) These are only dolls, lumps of resin, how that makes people uncomfortable I will never comprehend. I'm also pretty sure sex between two concenting adults is a lot more messy than dolly sex posed pictures. LOL

 

I just want to point out a bit of a flaw here that does spring up from time to time on the forum. The issue is what constitutes a childlike doll. People can have very different opinions about what looks mature enough vs immature. Someone can intend for their dolls to be older, though some people focusing heavily on the sculpt vs other visual or story cues might want to label them as being younger.

This is something that can come up with mini sized dolls a lot. You get the people who think anything other than a 'slim' or 'mature' mini has to be a child no matter what the owner has done with it, but then you get another camp where what you do with the doll matters more than the sculpt (that's where I personally stand btw). Even with some SD sized dolls, I hear people complain that certain sculpts are not 'mature' enough looking. For instance, I am used to and tend to prefer the softer more stylized faces and don't consider them to necessarily be immature looking, but others have trouble with those features on a doll that is supposed to be an adult. People need to take into account owner intent and the fact that being dolls and not real people, bjds are far more flexible in what they can represent before they get huffy about what they deem inappropriate content.

 

Sure, and that's a very valid point. On the other hand, isn't there the same issue with humans, too? There are some people who always look very young, and some people who look much more mature than their age. Most of what happens in any photography scenario is based on intent and execution. If someone, or something, looks older or younger than the average bean, I think that needs to be taken into account. In the case of doll photography, the owner has to be a little aware of what people may say/think, just because there are negative opinions out there, and in the same vein, there are kind of creepy people out there.

My rule of thumb in any situation is to be aware of what you're doing, and follow all legal guidelines, as well as self-set guidelines for behavior and execution of ideas. So long as it's legal, and you're comfortable with it, I think it;s fine. It's just also a good idea to be aware of how other people may process things, and to be prepared to be touched with criticism.

 

I think it's fine the forum has rules about sexual content, but if there were actual laws against certain doll pornography I would feel slightly disturbed. There is stuff that makes me feel very uncomfortable, but it's doll pictures, not actual rape victims/children/animals/whatever and by making it illegal you're saving no one. There is no victims. This was a big topic in my country a couple of months ago, so sorry for the rant.

I don't mind being on forums that allow adult themes, as long as people label their stuff accordingly. I don't mind looking at sexually pictures, but there is certain stuff I want to avoid.
I don't go out of my way to look for adult pictures, though I do enjoy artistic nude shots a lot.
Personally I don't take sexual pictures for a couple of reasons.
1. It rarely looks convincing. Just silly and awkward.
2. My characters do have sexualities, but I'm not really interested in exploring that side of them. I'm much more interested in their emotional relationships.

In the end I don't care what people do to their dolls. Maybe I'll see their pictures and enjoy them or maybe I won't, but I can always choose to use the back button, if it's not my taste, so I see no reason to limit what others can do.