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
Severe ongoing issues and concerns with Dollshe Dollshe Ban

Role Reversal - Objectifying Males in the ABJD World

Mar 22, 2012

Page 1 of 8
    1. While debating with my boyfriend over the lack of practical, female superhero attire, and general attitudes towards women in the (still) male-dominated comic book world, I brought up his own disgust regarding the clothing and depiction of male dolls in the ABJD community.

      From his heterosexual and fairly average male mindset (as I don't have one and cannot speak from it), he sees a lot of the clothing and costumes hobbyists put their male dolls in as being too revealing, unrealistic, and often impractical for the character (ie: a warrior with his stomach/chest bared, waist wraps/skirts and no shirts, or simply snug leather pants and nothing else). Even taking into consideration that hobbyists typically do not have access to some of the items/materials necessary for depicting a Crusader, he finds the portrayal of male dolls to be very unrealistic.

      Have we, as a female-dominant community, done to our male dolls what the comic book community has done to female superheros/villains? IE: Do we dress our male dolls in clothing that is impractical for their occupation, just so we can see more of their muscles? Are our depictions of male dolls based, at least in part, in fantasy?

      Also, if so, are we even aware of the "role reversal"? Do some intentionally sexualize/objectify their male dolls because of the sexualizing/objectifying of females in other male-dominated communities (such as the comic book community)?
       
      #1 bewaretheshort1, Mar 22, 2012
    2. I laughed until I cried. The answer is "yes it is impractical and sexist and no I am not sorry."

      Besides, come on...REAL Crusaders, Barbarians etc were pretty stinky and stupid, if well covered. My fantasy ones bathe every day and read obsessively. And like cats. And wear almost nothing. I am sure the doll-vixens your boyfriend would have like beer, never have headaches, and watch the 3 stooges, and it's all fine. :D
       
      #2 fishcake, Mar 22, 2012
    3. Interesting topic. I don't personally dress my male dolls in the way you've described, but I hadn't thought about it like that. In a way I feel like it could be used to prove a point to guys who see nothing wrong with how women are portrayed in comic books; the ones who say "Oh but men are objectified too!". I was just recently reading a really good blog entry about it on tumblr which pointed out that men in comics are objectified in a different way than women- they're about power rather than sex. Given that a lot of male bjd scuplts are quite beautiful rather than manly, I'd say it would make a lot of men uncomfortable with the way some owners dress them. My first thought was "Serves them right, see how they like it" but when I think about it more I don't think either gender should have to feel uncomfortable and objectified like that.
       
      #3 Chibi Kitsune, Mar 22, 2012
    4. He-man. Conan the Barbarian. Every super hero that just wears a super tight spandex suit but isn't bullet proof like Superman. 300 (you know, the guys who were actually suppose to be naked while fighting?)
      And every other super hero who goes around shirtless or without armor and just the POWER OF THEIR MUSCLES.

      The only issue is now? It's women making the men take their shirts off instead of a testosterone filled display of male !!!Power!!! There is no unspoken Requirement for the dolls to look this way. There's just as many shirted mendolls in nice outfits that any guy would walk around in.

      And as for comic books? He should read that article I can't find anymore about what the difference between a man being half naked in comics and a woman being half naked in comics really is.
       
      #4 PrinceDuCiel, Mar 22, 2012
    5. LOL yes! This! I mean, guys can avoid the (very small) bjd hobby rather easily. It's harder to avoid the comic book hobby because it's...almost everywhere (almost). The comic book hobby is so much larger! It's like when people got annoyed with all the female fanservice on Gaiaonline. I mean, c'mon, if you want male fanservice, go anywhere else on the internet. This kinda applies to the bjd hobby. If you want to avoid the female fanservice, or find some male fanservice, make your own doll or, ya know, avoid the (easily avoidable) doll hobby, haha.

      This may seem hypocritical but...c'mon...I think we've pretty much accepted that fanservice can and will be everywhere. Female fanservice is just a lot harder to find.
       
      #5 Pannytheangel, Mar 22, 2012
    6. There's probably some truth to the OP's boyfriend's observation, in all honesty... But it's worth noting that nothing is universal, among either comics fans *or* the doll hobby. Personally, I don't dress my male dolls in a particularly sexy way. But then, I don't do that to my female superheroes, either. :lol: (That's Shade in Shadow, one of my City of Heroes MMO characters. We had a huge blow-up on the City forums a few months back about a similar issue... How the art crew kept making "badass" outfits for the male toons and "sexy" ones for the females. And how tired of cheesecake some of us had become.)
       
      #6 Brightfires, Mar 22, 2012
    7. An male fan service is in Everything. Advertizing. Movies. Even childrens shows! Look at Looney Toons!
      A few woman standing around going "Hi we'd actually like to see some hot males sometimes?" Isn't exactly forcing men to be objects. It's exknowledging that women have sex drives as well.
      I very much doubt Any women really wants to turn men into objects. Women like em funny, smart and entertaining. Look at the profiles women give their male dolls. they are generally expansive. Female dolls owned by male owners quite often don't have the same depth. There are exception to the rule! But not as often as I'd like to see.
      I have had a male friend say of his girlfriend who he honestly likes "She's not the best looker but I can deal." I have Never heard a women say the same. And he's an honestly nice guy! It's just, so pounded into your brain it's not even realized.
      *breathes* Sorry ranting but I feel strongly about this.
      fyi I'm not a straight female so i feel I'm a Little objective in this? ^^;;;
       
      #7 PrinceDuCiel, Mar 22, 2012
    8. There is a good dose of fantasy in a lot of people's doll characters and worlds, and you know what, there's nothing inherently wrong with that. Not everything has to be realistic, not every warrior or whatever has to be historically accurate. Ultimately it's a fun imaginitive hobby. And yes, unlike many other types of dolls boy abjds tend to genuinely very good looking, and sometimes their female owners might want to show that off a bit -- that's not really any different than what men tend to do, because women aren't so different from men when it comes to sex and finding other people (or in this case dolls) attractive. It's a ridiculous double standard that says only men like to look at pretty depictions of women, but women don't feel the same way about depictions of men. This is a natural phenomenon, and also doesn't have to be a bad thing depending on how far things get taken.

      I also think that some ways that female owners like to dress their male dolls might throw some guys for a loop, because it isn't what they expect. For instance the idea that women must want someone tough and manly -- well some women do want dolls that are tough and manly, but there's a lot of boy dolls that are made very pretty by their owners and don't fit the common Western stereotype of what manly is.

      I don't objectify male dolls as an intentional response to what men do. But I do happen to find men attractive so that sometimes affects how I choose to style a male bjd (and what I decide his love life is like ;)). When I decide how I want a doll to look it partly comes down to my taste and partly as to what fits their personality/character, so right now I have a couple of pretty boys, and some boys that don't really dress sexy.
       
      #8 Taco, Mar 22, 2012
    9. I'm seconding the power issue. When women are bared it is to sexualise them, objectify them, weaken them (even when they appear physically strong) and therefore make them w*** fodder for males. When men are bared, it is to display their muscles, their strength and therefore their power which is someone that men want to be.
      This is typical of our patriarchy in which male power and privilege rules and the male gaze is key.
       
      #9 Akudem, Mar 22, 2012
    10. :thumbup Really-- cry me a focken rivah! Suck it up, guys. Jam that shoe on the other foot and STFU. On the day that somebody goes back and fixes the "impractical and sexist" way that women have always been portrayed in movies, TV, photography, art, comics, toys, advertising, and games, THAT is the day men get to complain about the female gaze & female fanservice.
       
      #10 JennyNemesis, Mar 22, 2012
    11. Yes, I do objectify my male characters. No, I don't care what men think about it. It's about time women started forcing men to deal with the female gaze and not take their shit in regards to all of the objectification we endure every single day. Cry me a river, indeed.

      And while on the subject of comic books.... God bless you, Kenneth Branagh, and that entirely gratuitous scene of Chris Hemsworth shirtless in Thor. I appreciated his rippling abs and pectorals and the fact that I didn't even realize Kat Dennings had breasts until I saw a picture of her in a different role. It was the first completely female fanservice driven comic book movie I've ever seen.
       
      #11 Kim, Mar 22, 2012
    12. Yes, yes, and yes, and do I care, no. But at least here we'll go both ways with both male and female dolls, can't quite say the same of the comic book world.


      Lol I thought I was the only one, when I saw her in 2 Broke Girls, I was like oh wow she's got boobs.
       
      #12 Cloudedmind, Mar 22, 2012
    13. Wow, this is equality. What wisdom. We should allow all repressed minorities to force the majority group to 'deal with it'. Some whites should be enslaved, Heterosexuals shouldn't be allowed to marry, and we should objectify men. An enlightened viewpoint indeed.
       
      #13 Emberly, Mar 22, 2012
    14. I think how you dress your dolls is not equivalent to this:
      Srsly.
       
      #14 fishcake, Mar 22, 2012
    15. #15 Laoky, Mar 22, 2012
    16. Serious subject!

      I personally don't like the eye for an eye. Nor do I believe in de-sexing Everything. The objectification of women needs to be scaled back and a little bit of man meat is healthy as well. Neither should that translate into reality or how we deal with sexism. No eye for an eye.


      and to keep it on dolls! There should be as many sexy leather strappy outfits for male dolls as there are for female dolls!
       
      #16 PrinceDuCiel, Mar 22, 2012
    17. Maybe so, but the poster was asserting that they are allowed to objectify men (as an entire group) because the group has history of objectifying their associated group. By that logic, can't any oppressed group 'deserve' the same rights? Just because you view one form of oppression as less than others (objecification vs. slavery as an example) doesn't mean that it's any less right.
       
      #17 Emberly, Mar 22, 2012
    18. The thing I noticed first about this hobby, is that it is female dominated. (yay!) And that the greater population of dolls are males. Usually girly boys, gay boys, or pretty boys. And it's a little on the hard side to make a male doll look manly. There's just not a ton of manly yet not revealing male doll clothing. And most of my favorite wigs are long fiber. Finding a good manly hair cut for my dolls has been my biggest problem. Especially if you have nothing but MSD's like I do. Seeing as this is truth, it is reasonable for a guy to step into the hobby and feel a little overwhelmed. It's probably the same feeling a girl gets around a male dominated hobby. Personally, I was a little overwhelmed when I joined up by this, and I am a girl. At first I felt very uncomfortable about seeing people's gay couple dolls. Now I see it so much that it's like.. roll your eyes and move on. I have even considered getting a girly boy doll. I imagine males in the hobby feel the same when they first start paying attention to bjd's. Like.. woah.. look at all the nearly naked buff guy dolls. But it is what it is, and I'd like to see any male walk up to a girl and her buff girly boy doll and give her some fashion pointers. I think women have been objectified enough outside of the hobby. But here... it's our way or the high way...
       
      #18 Zodiac, Mar 22, 2012
    19. That's just making a straw man argument, it's completely over the top and obviously not what anyone meant. Look, people are going to depict each other in ways that they find sexy, because it's human nature to do that. Humans are attracted to and like to look at other humans -- otherwise there would never be any little humans running around to keep the species going. That in and of itself is not a big problem and is bound to continue as long as there are people on this earth.

      However, for one side (men) to say we can look at sexy depictions of women and that's all fine and dandy and right, but women can't look at sexy depictions of men because women shouldn't like that sort of thing and it makes us uncomfortable is absolutely ridiculous, unfair, and lots of other not nice adjectives I could use. So yes, guys do need to be able to suck it up and deal with the fact that women like sex too and like to look at images of men that they think are attractive. It's a double standard that's annoying and seriously needs to stop.
       
      #19 Taco, Mar 22, 2012
    20. Sexism can't be boiled down to something as simple as "objectification/non-objectification." Sexism is treating and viewing one individual differently from another individual for no reason other than a difference in sex. And it is important to acknowledge that not all sexism is perceived in a negative fashion.

      When we're out shopping, my partner will often reach over my head to take things down from the higher shelves. Does he do this because I'm female, and he is male? No, he does it because he's well over six feet tall, and I'm not even five-and-a-half feet tall, so it's easier for him to reach the things that are higher up. But if we approached a door, and I opened it for him, and he instead reached over my head and held the door until I went through, that would be a sexist action, because it is not an action that he would perform for another male. It would not be a negative action - it is seen as being polite, and does me no harm - but it would be a sexist one.

      As humans, as a species that is at least partially motivated by sex (some would even argue that our sole purpose is reproduction, and as such, all of our motivations can be stripped down to "have sex, make offspring" - I disagree; though I acknowledge that the production of new generations is a basic function of all organisms, I do not think all individual human motivations can be attributed to this function at this point in our development), we are naturally going to attribute some level of sexuality or sexual appeal (whatever that is to us - different individual are attracted to different things) to many of our fantasies. And that is what these dolls are - fantasy objects. We project onto these dolls our interests, desires (both sexual and non-sexual), thoughts, emotions. To each one of us, these dolls serve a particular purpose or combination of purposes, but all of those purposes are fantastical.

      It's true, the collectors in this hobby are mostly women. There are men, but the women compose the majority of the hobbyists. And while there is variation within the female population of this hobby, and what they individually find sexually attractive (for example, the percentage of LGBT men and women in this hobby is higher than the percentage of LGBT in the general population), the majority of the women in the hobby do find men to be sexually attractive to some degree. As such, it is natural that some or all of the male dolls belonging to those collectors - as objects of fantasy - are going to be sexualized to some extent. Likewise, there are collectors who find women to be sexually attractive to some degree. And it is natural that the female dolls belonging to those collectors are going to be sexualized to some extent. In some cases, that means that dolls are being displayed nude or in revealing clothing. In other cases, it means other things - that the male dolls are going to be displayed as being particularly effeminate, or the female dolls are going to be displayed as overtly masculine, or the dolls (of any persuasion) are going to be portrayed as being skilled in certain ways, or innocent, or jaded, or any of a million other things. This is not inherently good or bad, right or wrong.

      I think it is important to note that the term "objectify" does not mean "look at sexually" or "portray sexually," it means "reduce to nothing more than an object [to be subject to the gaze of the viewer]." Sexualize and objectify are not synonymous terms.

      Since dolls are already objects, one might argue that they aren't being objectified. Conversely, the female - or male - actress playing the role of a character that is wearing revealing clothing not because of it's functionality for the role, but purely because of it's visual appeal to the audience, is being made into an object for the gaze of the viewer.
       
      #20 Kiyakotari, Mar 22, 2012
Page 1 of 8