Sex and Nudity within the BJD Community

· What are your thoughts on BJD photography showing scenes of a sexual nature or implying sexual content?
They're dolls. They're just dolls. They're really not hurting anyone even if they are photographed in a sexual way. I personally wouldn't take 'sexy' photos of my (future)dolls only because they're not that type of 'person'. Ha ha.

Do you think that people who photograph their dolls having sexual intercourse is considered to be perverted or an expression of artistic form and love? What about if the sexual scenes are of a form of rape or abuse? Should people be allowed to photograph such scenes (photographs of this content are not allowed on DOA)
Hm...well, I call myself perverted all the time and my friends always call each other perverted. I don't really think there's anything really perverted about photographing your dolls having intercourse but it's not my cup of tea(even if my dolls did have sex I certainly wouldn't photograph it). About rape...the difficult thing is distinguishing whether it's simply a part of the story or if the owner just wants to have rape in their photostory 'just because'. I don't agree with rape. I think it's one of the worst things a human being can do to another but I would never try and censor someone if they wanted to put rape in their story as long as it's not glorifying rape or abuse. That being said I think that rape is really over used in writing, which is not to say that it's not an important issue but rather that well...in a writer's pov it's pretty unoriginal(I mean, how many rape fanfictions etc are there out there? a lot.) I think people should be allowed to photograph whatever they want but that doesn't mean I'm gonna look at it.

· How do you feel when BJD's are reffered to as being "Sex Dolls" by people from outside the community? Do you believe it's wrong for them to think such things when there are dolls such as "Full nobility royma" avaliable? What about Unoa dolls being created by a famous hentai artist? Mods such as the XXXL Dollfie Dream bust? The fact BJD's are often anatomically correct? Are all these aspects which contribute to people having a negative image about BJDs?
Well, I think it's slightly ridiculous for someone to say, based on one source, that bjd are 'sex dolls'. Gentaro Araki's previous hentai work has nothing to do with Unoa dolls really. Yeah, so he drew some hentai-he didn't make the dolls so that guys could go and get off to them or something. They just pretty, sometimes sexualized dolls. Just because some are sexualized however, doesn't mean that all unoa are made to be like that-they're cute and are meant to be dressed up and if some guy does buy one that doesn't mean he's a perv and is thinking of his doll in a sexual way. I just don't think Araki-san's current work should be related to his other work seeing as for the most part they have nothing to do with one another.

· What about the differences in culture between doll owners. Whilst one person may have come from a society where nudity and sex are considered to be beautiful things, another may have come from a society where such subjects are considered unacceptable. Is the cultural barrier something that changes peoples opinions on sexual content in doll photography?
I think yeah, culture does have something to do with it. I mean, even when I just got into the bjd hobby I thought some people were totally nutso when they talked about 'bonding with their doll' or 'my doll's sad because of _____" but that was pretty much culture/hobby shock(because now I'm exactly like that ha ha). In the west we're pretty much taught from a young age that some things you 'just don't discuss". Little girls don't even know what they have because their parents are too terrified to tell them in a completely normal way that they have a vagina! And so when we go and see these anatomically correct dolls that have some characteristics(psychical) of humans we freak out and say "oh my god! that's so pervy!" when it's not meant that way at all.

· With so many nude photographs of real women and men out there in the world, why should photographing inanimate objects that portray similar statue to human beings be considered wrong? Would it be acceptable for someone to photograph a naked Barbie over a naked BJD? How do you handle just plain doll nudity in photographs?
I think it's dumb to consider it wrong. Art is meant to show off the beauty of something(or the ugliness of something on the flip side) and the human form is beautiful so I can't see how making a statue or a doll after ourselves is perverted.... I think people would see a naked barbie doll as more acceptable because we've grown up with barbies. Barbies are seen as non-human creatures that have pretty hair and no other characteristics besides her breasts that label her as female. They're okay naked because they're PC. They don't show nipples and therefore won't offend anyone who could possibly be offended by their child undressing a barbie to see what was under her clothing. Barbies don't offend anyone because barbie and ken are no longer male or female. They're just known to be because one's barbie and one's ken since that's how it's always been. Doll nudity doesn't bug me as long as it's done tastefully. There's a difference between showing a woman with expression who is nude and just throwing any random girl on a couch with her legs spread or something.

· What about the need to find a romantic partner for your BJD? Whether or not they choose to engage in sexual activities or pose nude for photoshoots. Do dolls really need to have a girlfriend/boyfriend? What about same sex couples? Is it frowned upon to do such things seeing as they are "just dolls"?
No, dolls don't NEED b/f or g/fs but pairing them with someone makes them more human because many people DO need someone. Going back to barbie again, she doesn't NEED ken but has him anyway(I could go off on a tangent about women and men needing each other but won't) because he was made a companion doll for barbie. I have a lot of same sex couples planned for my dolls. One look around the gallery will tell you that many people feel the same way-there's nothing wrong with same sex romance because love cannot restrict itself to one gender. You(or your dolls) 'love' who they love. Homosexual couples shouldn't be frowned upon simply because it happens in life whether people like it or not. That being said I don't think I've ever seen one owner tell another "your dolls are disgusting, they're gay/lesbian".

But it all comes down to: if you don't like what you see you don't comment that's all there is to it. No one's FORCING you to look at the pictures and no one's saying your a bad person for not wanting to look. Ugh....major rant!

 

I agree with everything JennyNemesis said.

On my own thoughts:
1) I think the "sex-doll" is different from the "ball-jointed doll". That has a market of its own, and DoA is not connected to that market.

2) It's hard to explain about culture, because within culture there are also factions. So it is the poster's responsibility to give at least a warning that the content of his/her post may be offensive even though it falls within the parameters permittable in DoA. Just as consideration.

3) i appreciate and respect DoA's ruling: "DoA is a 13+ forum, so we do not allow the following in photos, photostories, or textual content: pornography, rape, paedophilia, extreme gore, or glorification of torture. Do not link to adult material."

In the future, we might have material that others might think are like those listed above (but of course, everybody has their own viewpoints on what is such and such). nevertheless, for me (and might be applicable to all), as respect and compliance for DoA's rules, I have the responsibility to label whatever I post appropriately, and respect others if they think I mis-categorized along the way and take appropriate correction.

alternately, if I think my content is really not DoA-safe, kid-safe, work-safe, I would not post in DoA. for those who want to see such content, however, I'd put my own website link in my profile page instead and also label that appropriately (as html text, not easy-one-click. let them copy and paste to browser). I think those who want to see such content understand why these measures have to be taken.

 

JennyNemesis talked about the first thing that came into my mind, but I'll share some of my (somewhat oversimplified and abbreviated) thoughts, too...

When we're kids and we play with Barbies and we make Barbie and Ken press their little plastic pelvises together to simulate copulation, that's our little kid way of coming to terms with our own sexuality. How does that change once we become sexually mature adults? I don't think it does. I think that the folks who play with their dolls are doing the same thing - the same healthy expressions and exploration of sexuality. It's not wrong or unhealthy. If a person has taken a certain view of sexuality shown in a public place, it will probably seem really jarring to them... again, like JN said, the same people who get bent out of shape about Justice, David, the Kool-Aid man, and various other totally ridiculous things that have all of dick to do with being sexual beings and more about NO, REALLY, TAKE IT AT FACE VALUE. People project whatever it is that they want to project on the images they confront. That's the undeniable truth of art - it's all subjective.

Is it wrong to take pictures of little kid dolls simulating copulation? For me personally, yes, it is, and getting into why I think so goes against the wishes of the OP as those feelings are very personal. I don't know that I believe anyone who does this is automatically someone whose name should be on a sex offender registry, though. I think it's just another way to explore sexuality, maybe it's healthy for the people who do that, I really don't know.

I couldn't care less if someone takes pictures of a full-on doll manpile with a donkey thrown in. Pictures of three tan Bermanns getting rude with each other, that's fine. You want to take pictures of a scene of some boy dolls at a pretend BJD frat party slipping roofies into the grasshoppers of vulnerable college freshmen lady BJDs, you be my guest. I took pictures of my Lishe suggesting that she had been fresh with my 1:6 scale Solid Snake doll with the intent of getting laughs. However, I don't think it's unreasonable to expect that there's a very good chance that someone unaffiliated and uninterested with the hobby could indeed see your photos and get the wrong idea about what the photos mean and what kind of person you are. There is that chance that someone might see the photos you took that are supposed to represent a rape and become really offended by it. There's a chance that someone will just dismiss it all as the product of a perverted mind. The decision that everyone needs to make for themselves is how YOU feel about it. If you know that you do not have thoughts about real, breathing people that could end up becoming the "true crime story" basis of a future episode of Law & Order, then you need to decide if worrying about the opinions of people who don't "get" BJDs are important for you to consider when you assess the kind of person that you are or wish to become. How is it best for you, the artist who may be reading this, to react to these situations? Do you have to defend yourself or do you need to apologize and explain or do you tell the person criticizing you or your photos thanks for the feedback and call it a day? There's a million different approaches.

 

I can't control other people's actions nor how they think. What they do with their dolls in their own homes has nothing to do with me.

Honoring the dolls, and their makers, is how I see these dolls. The original Barbie & Ken were marketed to children for play. Anatomically accuracy of the dolls wasn't the point. It was about children's play & having fun.

Wasn't the original dollfie created as a gift of love by the creator to his wife?

Having, myself, spent 4 years drawing & painting from live nude male & female models, I was shocked at how many of my school mates actually believed these were "sex" sessions. It took alot of my explaning how it was art & nothing more.

After all this time, I believe it is in the eye of the beholder, & the heart of the collector, why they bought the doll & what they did with it.

When in college, I was horrified to hear that one of my classmates, a guy, would go to thrift shops & buy up baby dolls. Later, in his family's garage, he would heat them, burn them into grotesque shapes. I asked him if he had ever thought of sculpting his own figures instead of burning dolls? He hadn't thought of it, tried it & stopping the doll burning.

All I ask is that when doll collectors & lovers show their dolls in public, please keep it G-rated because we are showing to the community who we are. And I would hate to have us labelled as perverts by any one. The media is always hungry for a story, make them move on to another juicy morsel elsewhere. Your private parties, private play & private photo sessions are your own.

 

Well what isn’t overused in photostories/stories, honestly?

We have themes about love/hate/sex/world peace/world conquer, etc…. In every facet of like we have these themes. I don’t see how singling out rape/sex in a writing is just.

Honestly, what is original anymore? It is kind of crash to say something like that. What if someone was really proud of their work and someone was raped(becuase that was part of the story!), and you just said, “Oh it’s been done before!” I make it a point to not say that one thing is over played/over used/or over done!

We can't all be original creators, we cant all be born 20 years earlier to think of the first “insert item”! We all modify what we have seen in our past and we all deserve respect for trying it no matter how many times it has come up before us! I have realized, I can only be as original as the next person! In which case, I am not original!

I don’t condone rape, murder in the real world because honestly it is inhumane. However, it is a part of life and it will always be a part of life, and so it would make sense to make it a part of doll life. I am not saying that that person should take what is being done in the doll world and emulate it; but you know what, a person’s psyche can be so twisted that it would have done it anyway. I am tired of people using excuses to make things just, we are beings of free will and we know in our gut what feels wrong and what feels right. It is inane in our psyche—even before we are taught anything! If someone is going to rape someone it is only a matter of time and opportunity! Not how much dolly porn they watch! (this can also go for murder!)

 

I must say this, before i consider answering anything else. I know I for one love to write, and as a (hopefully mature) aspiring writer I like to think that even though there are some things that people dont like, that doesnt always take away from a story line. It might be necessary to the plot for tow characters to interact in some way, otherwise the story can't continue as it was meant to. Say, if one character gets raped or somthing by another, it'd be quite difficult to brush over the fact and pretend that it didnt happen if its a big deal in the plot. On the same note, if two characters sleep together and one gets pregnant or it sets off another plot issue or whatever its necessary to at least alude to it. If its more of a teen story, then maybe it'll only explain a bit of the actions leading to it, but if its a story made for mature readers, then why the heck not explain everything, its a part of life. There are more than enough sex scenes in movies that we can't avoid, i dont think its so horrible to have them elsewhere as well, especialy when they are in specific places or taged or whatnot so we know whats where.

From my experience of wandering the forums here, it seems a LOT of people use their dolls as shells for characters, and these characters lead lives and have stories. During these stories, anything can happen. Its up to the creator of the stories to decide what comes next, even if that includes a sexual situation. I will admit to using sexual situations in my own stories, and even in storied i plan for my dolls and future dolls. I willa dmit, yes, there will be relationships and actions that make certain relationships change and evolve, and i'm not going to just brush over the fact that y'know, he trie dto get her into bed, she refused, and thats why they're really awkward around eachother right now.


I think the only reason naked barbies are mor aceptable is that a) they lack detail and are horribly unproportioned and b) they seriously FAIL at posing. They are lifelike enough that you can pretend that they're human and all, but so unrealistic it takes away from any situation that might occur. I think part of the reason BJDs are often seen as being sexual is the fact that they are capable of being posed as such. Barbies couldnt do very much in that respect. (however, my friend and I still had our barbies have sex when we were in 6th grade. We had odd stories. barbie would usually have a baby within the next 20 minutes XD)

On the thought of doll partners, this again falls back to stories and writing. You may have a story about a single person, however, that person intereacts with many others. Otherwise it might be a boring story (though i'm not saying its not possible to do otherwise) The fact is people are social creatures, and we'll often see something that is personified (like dolls) as being lonely if they are the only one. Especially in this case, becaus the dolls as characters interact with other character dolls, so it only seems appropriate.


As a final note, and this is just my opnion here, but theres still something about something likea houndXyosd pairing that freaks me out, and i can see how that could be taken horribly. That would have to be explained fo rme to be comfortable with it. like, diferent species or something ^^; Even then, i'm not about to point fingers calling someone a perverted pedophile. Its part of their story, not mine. Its my choice on if i'll look or not. I wont bash them for anything. Just like i wouldnt want someone to bash me for having a relationship, hinted or not, between an msd and an sd. *shrugs* To each their own, i think.

 

Hobbyywhelmed said
"
An aside, regarding nude angels - it really was only around the beginning of the 20th century when they had a problem of people requesting the covering up of nude statues in museums. In one famous case, someone actually got so worked up over *dirty* nudity that she went with a hammer and chisel and broke off the offending bits. In a museum. Where she didn't have to go, if she knew she'd be offended. Never underestimate the irrationality of self-righteous fever--"

You so rock!!!

I have never understood the ferver of people (surprisingly, mostly young people) who make such an issue over romantic storylines involving dolls. You've got everything from accusations of pedophilia, to perversion, and even the writers of these stories, myself included, are subject to judgement about our own love lives. I see it as a kind of insanity.

These dolls to me are art objects, which inspire creativity. I think it's perfectly wonderful that some people are inspired to write stories with their dolls, it's a terrific way to enjoy the dolls, and express oneself.

The dolls aren't "sex objects", but if a story goes in that direction as part of it's development, I see absolutely nothing wrong with that.

 

· What are your thoughts on BJD photography showing scenes of a sexual nature or implying sexual content?
I don't have a problem with photography showing nudity and sexuality but there is already so much sexual innuendo on tv, movies, advertisement... that it just get's to be too much. If the photos are tasteful (which is always of course a concept that varies) they can be a beautiful thing, I draw a lot of female nudes too and I'm not a pervert But if it is really explicit I'd rather not see it, just because I think it's unnecessary. If the scenes are a form of abuse or rape and they are explicit they would just make me feel bad for the doll... I may sound prude but, why do that? It's supposed to be a fun hobby, isn't reality hard enough? I prefer not to see such things.

· How do you feel when BJD's are refered to as being "Sex Dolls" by people from outside the community?
If someone said that to me I'd just laugh my head off, how could they be used for sexual purposes??? Appreciating the human body doesn't mean you have to be thinking about sex, that's just narrow-minded, if people want their dolls to look realistic and have a nice body that's just an appreciation for beauty.

· Is the cultural barrier something that changes peoples opinions on sexual content in doll photography?
Nowadays people can get access to so much information that the way we think is less and less restricted by our cultural frame.

· What about the need to find a romantic partner for your BJD?
I guess it's just part of the doll's story. Also couples provide good photo opportunities and then of course there is that thing that we've all been led to believe since birth: that we can only be happy if we have someone, so we want our doll to have someone too. Personnaly, I like to see couples, either they are a boy and a girl or same sex couples, no problems there, the same way that I find it natural in real life.

 

Do you think that maybe the way young dolls are photographed in sexual positions and stuff is kinda like hentai? If there's a 'rape' or a young girl doll photoshoot, isn't it kind of the same as the rape of a young hentai character...? It's kinda the same principle... I can't explain properly
But it's kinda like if you like it, but it may upset others then keep it to yourself *cough* or post on controversial doll *cough* and if you don't like it, don't go looking for it... yeah...

I am really bad at explaining myself! Apologies

 

One thing I find really weird is that even on a huge doll message board like this one, which is specifically for BJD' is that some people feel they need to hide a male dolls penis when showing arrival photographs for instance.

There seems to be no problem showing females.

So are people embarrassed? or is there some other reason for lowering the hand to cover "the parts that should not be seen"

 

I can only answer for myself, but i used to browse DoA during my lunchbreak at school. The school had a 'no porn/nude pictures/whatever' online browsing-policy so to me it would have caused problems to click a link that contained any kind of nudity.

´

Anyways, being an asexual myself i don't really care much for sex-related subjects. I'm not into dolls doing the naughtyness, but if other people enjoy that kind of stuff- then good for you. There's enough room for all of us here on DoA which i find to be quite amazing.

 

oooooo so many good points! I think I'll add my two cents, as this is a subject I feel REALLY strongly about. so, please note that when I use the word 'you', I'm using it in the universal 'you the reader' sort of way, not directly pertaining to the person who asked the question.

. What are your thoughts on BJD photography showing scenes of a sexual nature or implying sexual content? Do you think that people who photograph their dolls having sexual intercourse is considered to be perverted or an expression of artistic form and love? What about if the sexual scenes are of a form of rape or abuse? Should people be allowed to photograph such scenes (photographs of this content are not allowed on DOA)?

Alright. Actually, I quite enjoy 'sexual nature' in photos. I am a self labeled 'pervert' (not unhealthily so), and have a grand interest not just in the act of sex itself, but in the psychology surrounding it. This extends the the less socially acceptable aspects of rape or abuse.
So, Through the lense of my own interest, it's only logical that people will photograph these things. Dolls are a legitimate (if not normally recognized) avenue of exploration into interesting issues. Whether the photographer is 'perverted' or not, has nothing to do with the pictures of the dolls they take, and being 'perverted' in the common use of the word has absolutely nothing to do with right or wrong. If someone uses dolls to artistically explore concepts that they are uncomfortable with exploring in other arenas, then more power to them. If somebody's just taking naked pictures of their dolls boinking because that's how they get their jollies, Who cares? it's their own d*mn business and it makes them happy. If they choose to share these pictures in places with people of similar interests, then they're making the world a better place.
The only time it becomes someone else's business to judge right or wrong of it is when it's presented someplace it shouldn't be. IE, a sexual photostory here on DOA or anyplace else that people of immature mindset (I don't mean this in a derrogatory way, I just mean people who are mentally too young to deal with complex issues like that) have access to it. Also, proper marking even on other sites is a must, to allow people who simply don't want to see it to avoid it properly.
As far as being allowed... If I'm sitting at home alone piling my dolls together naked with little miniature whips and chains and taking pictures... Who's going to stop me?

· How do you feel when BJD's are reffered to as being "Sex Dolls" by people from outside the community? Do you believe it's wrong for them to think such things when there are dolls such as "Full nobility royma" avaliable? What about Unoa dolls being created by a famous hentai artist? Mods such as the XXXL Dollfie Dream bust? The fact BJD's are often anatomically correct? Are all these aspects which contribute to people having a negative image about BJDs?
These are all aspects that lead to some people having negative views on BJD... but does it really matter? There's a hundred and one Hentai sites devoted to Sailor Moon or Gundam Wing, and some parents are going to panic about the show because of it, but that shouldn't ruin it for the rest of us.
People who choose not to further their research into the dolls may think of them as 'Sex Dolls', but that doesn't make it so. Honestly, anything with genetalia becomes sexual for most people just by association. Whether something is really 'sexual' or not though, is based on the viewer, not the Item. A pair of hiking boots is non-sexual, correct? ... now as someone with a foot or shoe fetish. Suddenly the answer is different. To some people (even owners) they are 'sex dolls'. Again, this is neither right nor wrong, this is simply a different purpose for a different person.
Now, a side operation about the 'full operation' boy... What do you think the company's reasons are for offering this mod?
The only one I can think of is sexual-situation based photography, or just to please the 'look-what-I-got!' mindset. Any other opinions? I'm genuinely curious.


· What about the differences in culture between doll owners. Whilst one person may have come from a society where nudity and sex are considered to be beautifull things, another may have come from a society where such subjects are considered unacceptable. Is the cultural barrier something that changes peoples opinions on sexual content in doll photography?
I think it does. Often it seems that people look at something from another culture (in this case, Japanese or Korean dolls being photo'd naked), and assume it's okay because it 'must' be cultural. Unfortunately, this sometimes doesn't extend to people of the same culture. There are quite a few people who would look at the naked dolls from a Korean photographer and say "Art from another culture. Interesting." Then turn around and call their co-worker or family member a pervert for taking the same picture. Interesting how a 'barrier' becomes an avenue for temporary openmindedness.


· With so many nude photographs of real women and men out there in the world, why should photographing inanimate objects that portray similar statue to human beings be considered wrong? Would it be acceptable for someone to photograph a naked Barbie over a naked BJD? How do you handle just plain doll nudity in photographs?
It's not wrong(<--my opinion). It may be considered such, but in the same realm there are many people who consider any nudity in art to be wrong. They're entitled to their opinion, but they are absolutely not entitled to ruin it for the rest of us.
As far as being 'acceptable', that depends on where and how the photographs are being presented.

· What about the need to find a romantic partner for your BJD? Whether or not they choose to engage in sexual activities or pose nude for photoshoots. Do dolls really need to have a girlfriend/boyfriend? What about same sex couples? Is it frowned upon to do such things seeing as they are "just dolls"?
I prefer not to think of it as a 'need', but more as a preference of how to play with your dolls. If they are most fun for you when you have a life story and friends and history attached to them, then there's no reason not to! (I know I do.) Dolls don't 'need' a girlfriend or boyfiriend. Projection of the soul or containing spirit or not, Dolls honestly don't 'need' anything. Now, you may 'need' to get an SO for your doll to make you happy with it, and there's nothing wrong with that. Anything to make your chosen hobby more enjoyable. I personally just see it as an enrichment of the roleplaying process. (Actually visa versa, as I discovered these dolls as a way to personify and embody my roleplaying characters)
Now, the same sex couples thing is a topic I could rant on about forever. But, to keep it brief and on-topic: A samesex doll couple is about as relevant as an opposite sex doll couple. Obviously something about it is within the owner's realm of interest, and so they explore it and express it using their dolls. Why would the sex of the dolls involved affect how much it enriches the owner's experience? (I mean, other than doing something against your own taste)
I may sound like a broken record on this, but who cares if it's frowned upon? People are always going to have opinions, good or bad. That doesn't mean that they have to have relevance to you. They shouldn't be able to hurt how much fun you have with your dolls, and if they help it, then wonderful!

My two cents.

 

This kind of an attitude (which I understand you don't hold) assumes a one-to-one correlation between the world of dolls and the world of humans. Now some people might view dolls and humans in the same light. For those people, I can't imagine that any actions that they consider illegal, immoral, or despicable would be acceptable in the world of dolls. I respect that, but I think it's inconsiderate if they are not going to be understanding of other ways of viewing the world of dolls. As long as one keeps one's views and representations in an appropriate location and warns people beforehand, I don't think anyone should be able to say anything, even if you depict the most horrible actions that humans have or haven't committed.

Let me give an example of another way of looking at the world of dolls. Instead of seeing it as a reflection of human society, it could be seen as a reflection of one's inner self. In that case, one doll raping another might not really be about rape at all, but about the individual's feelings of powerlessness or some kind of power struggle. It could be a way of dealing with fear of rape or fear of situations where you're being assaulted mentally or emotionally in a similar manner. For me, the world of my stories is a world where I can have control over the horrible uncontrollable things that happen in the real world. I can work through them and think about them and feel less scared. My works tend to be macabre and involve terrible situations, but it isn't a reflection of my desire for these situations to occur. If I use a child-like character in a story, sometimes in sexual situations, it's often as a symbol for innocence, usually with other meanings mixed in. But then, my stories tend to be very symbolism heavy because that's the way my brain works. I can't really make a connection between characters-as-symbols and real children because real children bear little resemblance to my representations of childhood or child-like states.

I also have the problem where I tend to put my dolls in sexual-seeming positions for the silliness of it. My dolls tend to share in my penchant for silliness so there isn't any particular conflict on that end. I don't view it as remotely erotic, but that could be a problem if I was posting those pictures online and someone misinterpreted it. Which is precisely why I wouldn't post those pictures online. I'm not willing to deal with the flack, so I don't do it. Simple as that.

 

I think personifying your doll to the extent of which you start to impress human morals, values and ethics onto it is a bad idea. A very bad idea.

By personifying your doll (which ultimately makes it "human" in context) you place everything that applies to humans onto the doll. Which, imo, is a little silly seeing as it's plastic and inanimate*

Let's put it this way, you're worried that photographing a naked immature doll is the same as photographing a naked immature child? A) Photography a naked child is NOT paedophilic UNLESS you're doing it for sexual reasons (ie. I have plenty of childhood pics of me in the bath, this is not paedophillic but taking pictures *because* a child is naked in the bath IS). B) The doll is a doll, it's not human, the same rules just don't apply. Same goes for adult dolls.

If you're worried about taking sexually explicit photographs with dolls, why?
Why not then worry about workers rights for dolls? Or "doll abuse"?
I could understand if it was animals we were talking about, but dolls are inanimate. No matter how attached we get to our dolls they're still, at the end of the day, manmade. They have no life, no brains, and no way of knowing what you're doing to them is seen as explicit or not.

What are your thoughts on BJD photography showing scenes of a sexual nature or implying sexual content?

No opinions whatsoever. The dolls are plastic and they're not actually doing anything explicit even if you "put them into position" they're still doing nothing more than being a doll, because sex and sexual experiences occur only in animate objects that can procreate.

I think if you purchase a doll and use it to take pictures of sexual explicit scenes, that's up to you but I think you'd be better off watching adult movies. There's nothing innately "good" or "bad" about it. You're not a bad person if you take pictures of your "underage" doll naked or put your adults dolls into sexually explicit positions, because no matter what you do with these dolls they're still dolls. You're harming no one by doing anything sexually related with a doll. You might be a little sad and lonely, but you're definitely not doing anything wrong.

Now if you have sexually tendencies towards young or underaged girls and you go out and buy a doll *because* it's underage. Then you move from doing certain things with the doll you'd like to do with an actual underage child then you act on these impulses and actually go out to do this to an human child then *that* is wrong, majorly wrong.

But until you actually actively seek to do something more than "play with a doll" you've done nothing wrong.


* I'm being brief here. I'm putting aside that the dolls are *supposed* to be "minature humans" after all, that's what a doll is.

 

mightymaus: you have to think of this, though, as well. Picutures, be it photos or drawings, that depict humans in such situations are still human depictions. If you say that they're just hunks of plastic/resin/whatever, and whatever thec ontent is doesnt matter, then what of pornographic art, such as anime and manga? It's illegal for kids to buy such depictions of sexual content, so why are teh dolls different? Drawings have no life, brains, or any way of knowing all the same, but its still seen in a different light than drawings not depicting such situations. If i remember correctly, there is a law in canada (i think iheard this in an article somewhere) that says one can not even own drawings of child pornography. I think some guy got arrested for importing some manga that looked like an older man and a young girl were together.

The dolls may be dolls, but they can still be used to depictscenes of sexual nature. If the scene is intended as such, then it will be seen as such. The same rules may not apply exactly, but they certainly do apply. Sure, taking apicutre of a small child in teh bath isnt pedophilia, but someone can look at it and use it as such. (I think it was a law and order epi saw a few days ago that had some guy with a box full of magazines and pictures of little girls in swimsuits and such, where his wife was defending him by saying that there was ntohing porographic about them at all. The detective replied by saying that it might as well be to a pedophile.)

...i was going to say something else, but i've completley forgotten what it was o__o; I'll remember soon enough. Sorry if this seems oddly rambly o.0;

 

OK... you're wondering how the entire Internet can allow Naughty Doll Photos? Or you're just wondering how people can bring themselves to post these photos in public?

Your OP was initially asking about "sexual situations", which is a completely separate topic from "rape, pedophilia, and abuse". I cannot stress that enough, because I see a lot of people lumping them together into one category. The Rape/Abuse debate should, in fact, be a completely different debate topic. Many folks who create intense amounts of doll-erotica never even come close to creating rape or abuse photos/stories. Some of us just think that sex is really fun & wonderful, and feel it should be celebrated, and are comfortable showing it in our work. Not all kink is painful and abusive and violent... Some kink is Happy Kink.

Re the painful side of sex: Some people feel the need to create art that relate to topics that you don't personally like-- "controversial topics", if you will-- because they see the world differently from the way you do. Lots of people use art to explore unsafe themes in a safe way. Whether it is basic sex, or whether it's rape/abuse/racism/violence/drugs/etc., people use art to touch on things that they may not be able to express directly in their daily lives (to other people or even to themselves).

Other people who experience painful things, on the other hand, may create art that's very bright and painless and escapist, because they don't WANT to touch the painful issue. This is equally valid as Art. It's simply a matter of whether you use your art (doll photography, here) as an escape from the pain, or as an expression of the pain. People in the "But there's already enough sex/violence in the world! I don't want to see it in my dolls!" camp don't always see eye-to-eye with people in the "The world is ugly/sexy, and I'm not scared to show you how" camp.

Anyway, the reason that sexual doll photos (either noncon or consensual) MUST "be allowed" is because there needs to be a proper forum for everything... as long as it's legal according to the laws of that forum's homeland. If not here on DOA, with its general audience, then on a forum like ConDoll, which has an adult-only audience that is specifically prepared to respond to adult material.

However, Torren has a very good point. Even in the correct forum, one is still responsible for one's content. One is NOT responsible for everybody else's hangups. However, one SHOULD be aware of any possible backlash (legal, or just ideological) that may follow, and be prepared to deal with it. I shan't touch the Underage/Pedo issue any further, because it's already got its own Debate thread (see the OP for the link). Torren's also right that it may only be a matter of time before erotic doll-photos get lumped in with erotic manga, & subjected to the same legalities. PhotoBucket, for example, already doesn't distinguish between doll nudity & human nudity. All my R-and-up rated photos (i.e. "waist-down") are hosted somewhere else.

PS if you're wondering: Yes, even ConDoll has rules about what's kosher to present, & how it's presented, and it also requires proper thread-labelling! Even seasoned kinksters want to know what they're clicking on, so they don't accidentally stumble onto somebody else's kink that makes them go Eww. A gay-bondage fan, for example, may run screaming from a 60/40 hetero shoot. ^.^

 

Sex is an important part of human life as well as a major part of culture. We see sex everywhere &#8211; in art, in writing, in movies, TV, ads, etc. Why should BJDs really be any different? It's expression. Rape or abuse is often portrayed in anything to tell a story. I assume that many people do this to add depth to their characters' backgrounds. Not everything is sunshine and happiness. Bad things do happen. And this furthers creates a story and a more lifelike personality for the dolls.

Sex dolls? Aren't they a bit small for that? And...resin (or vinyl, I suppose)?
I think its silly for people to be all worked up about the anatomically correctness or what have you. They are supposed to be lifelike, but I can't really see them as sex dolls. And the mods &#8211; whatever floats ones boat. I personally like the mods &#8211; gives more of a variety to the dolls. I think there should be different body types available besides male/female and mature/not.

Culture I am sure does play a role in all this, as does perhaps age and religious beliefs. To each their own, and so long as no one tries to shove their beliefs on another, it's good that people have them.

I think naked Barbies would look less artistic since Barbies are not realistic. Doll nudity allows the viewer to see the truly beautiful resin (or vinyl) creation. Someone MADE that doll, why not show off the craftmanship or perhaps the blushing someone has done? Its not evil. There is only evil intent, and I am sure even with the most shocking photos (such as mentioned with the rape/abuse) the person is not intending evil, but once again expressing something. It all depends on what the intent is.

They are art. Many people create stories behind their dolls. Or perhaps bring to life (well, dolly life) a character from their own (or someone else's) writing. It makes them seem more lifelike and less like &#8220;just dolls.&#8221; I doubt many people see them as &#8220;just dolls&#8221; anyway. Theres a sentimental value as well as a monetary value, and a lot of that comes from the characters people make them into. Besides, as someone has pointed out, even Barbie has a boyfriend...and sisters...and friends...to make her more lifelike.

Yar, that was perhaps too long...just my two cents.