Sex and Nudity within the BJD Community

No-- you can protect Photobuckets etc. with passwords, and you can make your personal server space password-protected as well. And, on 18+ forums like ConDoll, viewing requires membership, and membership is restricted & moderated. When a photo is in a properly adult-safe space, the public is not going to find it accidentally, without looking for it. That is why we need to support/maintain adult-safe spaces just as much as child-safe spaces, so there is always a proper place for everything to go.

Yes, I took all of those quotes directly from her post 2 pages back: Sad, inappropriate, giving BJDs a bad name, etc. etc.
You can express any opinion you want, as long as you're willing to stand by your words & accept the backlash from the people you're denigrating in the process (as it sounded like she is, because this is a Debate).

I don't think you're understanding the basic point: Yes, sometimes it IS necessary to depict such things fully. Some characters are very centered around their own sexuality; others are not. Some people's narrative styles are very explicit, so showing the full monty is necessary; other people's narrative styles rely more on implicit events, so showing the full monty is not necessary to them. You feel it's not necessary to depict sexual situations in order to tell your particular story. But another writer's universe does require him/her to "Go There" constantly, without flinching, because to flinch would go against prevailing style. And you cannot pass judgment on whether one style is 'better' than the other, because each has different audiences. Does that make more sense? Think of it as being different worlds.

How about rereading "The Little Prince"-- he really got into trying to grasp what life was like on planets that were incomprehensible to him, and to understand the inhabitants. ^.^ That book is still such a great source of wisdom & empathy.

There's an interesting thought. There does seem to be resistance to the idea that someone who could be "into THAT" [whatever That may be] is also into a lot of the same things you are, and therefore can't be completely insane, and therefore may be on to something....

As to the Male Gaze Only myth in the first part of your paragraph: Yes, it's absolutely still in effect, as you have noticed. Heterosexual women who enjoy looking at naked men are still seen as being a bit odd. Go figure.

 

Perhaps i fail at using photobucket then ^^;; Cause to my knowledge, if you were to password protect a photobucket account, then the images are unviewable if posted, and you can only see them if you go into the account and put in the user specified password. Although, i suppose there are levels of security on those things that i havent discovered. I've never messed with them. Psh. I'm prolly the worst computer major ever.

oh. whoa. Kay. In that case, i agree with you. That'd be like saying romance authors give authors in general a bad name.

I'd like to point out that i said it "isnt always necessary", implying that in some situations it still is ^.~

What i meant was more along the lines how there are some people who will have a sex scene just for the sake of having a sex scene, without it having any real purpose. I know full well that there are some characters who's sexual situations/past/present/whatever are integral to the story and their personality. I won't deny having a few of them myself. What i meant in the "not necessary" part was that its not particularly neccessary all the time to include the graphic scenes. For instance, i've got two characters who, for quite a while in their story, have a tendancy to throw themselves at eachother and enjoy the "company" like unfixed bunnies. While i intend to indicate this, i don't intend to take condoll appropriate shoots, but thats just personal preference. I fully understand that other people like that and are okay with that. (I also won't deny being a member of condoll, even if i don't intend to post ^.~ )

Also, on the thought of condoll, i know that you have to be amember to see anything at all, but--while illegal, of course--what's stopping kids from joining anyway, if they say that they're of legal age? thats the issue with the internet. But thats also a whole different issue all together, of parental internet supervision and such, that i for one would like to avoid ^^;;

....Apparently, thats something i should read prior to rereading it. o__O;; Looks really interesting though ^^



On a side note, i apologize for being really wordy and failing to get my thoughts accross anyway. i seem to be good at failing like that ><;;;

 

Actually, without the tongue, which seems more silly and smarmy every time I look, and if her mouth were not quite so wide open, I think Bleu Citron is very interesting and appealing. I really like everything above her mouth.
I am sure many people would look at her and think nothing but cuteness. I tend to think it is as you suggest-if Bleu were a tiny no one would have thought about it.

 

Not at all... All of my Photobuckets are password-protected, but that's what I use for my hosting here. It just means you have to use the password to view my actual Photobucket albums. But I can host any photos I want in this Gallery from my protected buckets. (On DOA, though, I just stick to 13+-friendly. For all the aforementioned reasons. ^^)

Exactly, yes! It may be true to people in certain circles, but universally speaking I don't think that's a fair claim. (Like, I think "Sex in the City" is appalling and gives women a bad name, but since so many people adore it, I know it must have something solid at its heart.)

If one were to really worry about BJDs "having a bad name", it's already happened because we're grown adults who buy thousand-dollar dolls and give them names & backstories. XD That is why I refuse to worry.

Without the tongue in, she has this louche/contemplative look that reminds me-- and you will please forgive the comparison-- of Madeline Kahn selecting the eunuchs in "History of the World Pt I". Yes. Yes. No. Yes.

I think she's a very interesting-looking doll, but I really would like to know the intent behind her (and her removable tongue part).

 

Well, I guess maybe its me, but I don't know what the big deal is about dollies and sex. I do think it is appropriate to label photostories for those who want to know before hand. (I click anything anyways.. )

Sex happens. Its a given in life, I think its only natural for us to want to express this bind through dolls, because it is something that can be more or less important whether in a story or their dolls personality etc.

I dunno, I guess it never occured to be a problem or a debate thing. ^^

 

most of my doll's stories are centered on sex. all the dolls i'm going to buy are doll versions of my own characters from my stories/comics, and i put a lot of importance in the sexual side of my characters. and since my dolls are so cute and realistic... sex happens XD

 

OMG, mine too...they are like...addicted to it. >.>;;;

 

I think I'd be even more horrified if Bleu Citron was a tiny.

Aside from the fact that they're two sculpts with a prominent tongue feature, there is nothing similar between Cupid2 and BC. Cupid2's eyes are wide and childlike and the tip of the tongue cheekily pokes out, whereas BC's eyes are slits and her tongue is lolling up the side of her mouth. If a Puki or Yo-SD had BC's face I'd be worried!

I can't see the Singing Piki or PongPong faceplates as potentially sexual just because their mouths are open either, it's all in the delivery. PongPong just looks overjoyed and even the PongPong sleeping faceplate looks like a child in fits of giggles, not a child (because BC is on an immature body) being sexually suggestive! Bleu Citron might have worked stylistically if she was on a more mature-looking body, but she just looks wrong to me; having that facial expression on that young a body does not work.

 

Hm. Go take a look at the puki mermaid Lorelai, if you will, and tell me that she's having a fito f laughter or giggling or anything. I'd prolly be a bit disturbed if she had a pongpong/singing piki big wide open mouth, but her mouth being open just slightly has a similar effect. She's got a sweet slightly sultry look about her, which, as i said if she were a mnf size, we'd be jumping all over that. Granted, its a bit different since mnf have mature bodies, just that aside it'd have the same effect as Bleu does. Well. Minus the tounge.
(Edit: i'd like to point out that i'm not saying that dreaming flora is an overtly sexual mold. She's a freaking mermaid fairy XD Just wanted to point out the similiarities, and how if she wer ebigger/mnf sized everyone would question the intent behind her)

If her eyes were wide open, or even a little more open, would you have the same idea of her? Or how about if someone took a singing piki/sleeping pongpong faceplate and modded open the eyes to have a dreaming look, like dreaming flora? Would you question their motives?

I agree that its got a lot to do with delivery, however, its bot like bleu is wearing some sort of revealing outfit, with heavy adult-like makeup, or even lengerei or anything. She's got light, natural colors to her face. The tounge isnt sticking straight out, its a little to the side, quite like cupid2's. It'd be really similar if cupid2 had a slightly open mouth, or his tounge was out just a little further. Either way, the tounge is out and is a disticnt part of the mold. Also, as far as i can see, she's got a high-necked, long sleeved blouse on. Its not open, it's not showing any skin. She isnt even posed suggestivly at all.

And i really have to stop going back to look at bleu This debate is making me want to get her, mod her eyes slightly, and make her adorable. ^^;;

 

I'm not particularly keen on the Flora face, it seems 'meh' to me. Perhaps if the dreaming Flora face was on an MNF body I might see things differently, but I'm not seeing a similar sexualised mouth as Bleu Citron. I don't think Flora's expression is cute, I think it's quite passive though, whereas Bleu Citron's expression is very overt. LittleFee Flora also has an open mouth and doesn't elicit the same feelings as Bleu Citron does.

I don't think an MNF dreaming Flora would have the same reaction as Bleu Citron. Even small breast MNF bodies are mature-looking. They can back up their facial expression with the maturity under their clothes. I find the depiction of Bleu Citron in a high-necked, flouncy, girly tunic top and cute page-boy haircut completely at odds with what's going on on her face, even without considering that this highly sexualised face is on an immature body. And if we don't want to go into the sexualisation of an immature sculpted doll, there's the clash of cute/sexy going on too. Cute can be sexy, but when that sexuality is overt, it ceases to be cute. It might just be a marketing thing by NotDollLab...oops, we've created this controversial doll, with this controversial expression...better tidy it up with some ribbons and lace and suddenly she's a cutie pie little girl. Nah, sorry. It doesn't wash with me.

I'm still not getting any connection between Cupid2 and Bleu either. Yes, they both have tongues...but they use that feature in different ways. I've got their pictures side by side on my computer right now and I can't agree that Cupid2 would elicit a similar response if he was on the same scale as Bleu Citron. Only the tip of Cupid2's tongue is showing, you can see considerably more of Bleu Citron's. If Bleu's tongue was poking straight out then that probably would look quite cheeky and cute, but because it's licking the corner of her mouth it gives a completely different impression to Cupid2.

Perhaps part of the reason I'm repelled by Bleu is the same reason I'm repelled by Nari-pon Toadstool. It's a split-second expression frozen in resin. On a human being these expressions happen and then they pass and we don't think anything of them. Dolls can't change these expressions so we're stuck having to ponder on these faces when we'd never usually have to do that. I prefer dolls with a neutral expression that can be changed or enhanced through lighting and camera angles and even my most emotional doll, Souldoll Hye, doesn't look grumpy 100% of the time.

Since Bleu Citron is on a 45cm scale, though, I think if her eyes were modded a little more open and her head was on a more mature body, she could look very striking and interesting in the right setting - how about a vamp Bleu with little fangs? I have also seen pictures of Bleu without a face-up and the expression seems less prominent, less overt without make-up. At the moment though, everything about her screams 'wrong' to me.

 

She does bear quite a resemblance to Madeline Kahn. Apparently the Notdoll team were trying to find something to top Spirit Doll's boys with their amazing capability to pitch a tent, and they decided young girl + lascivious tongue = $$$
Then someone said "You know who I think is hot? Madeline Kahn."
She does look a bit demented or nor quite right in the head-maybe a little blood running down her chin would make the tongue palatable
I suppose we have to remember she is the product of a different culture. Can't imagine anything like Bleu from an American company.
Bleu would certainly make for some interesting photos but I wonder if even the most innocuous would not cause some people to see sexual content.

 

I don't know, because people will see different things in dolls. I admit that when I first saw her I thought she was rather sexual. However, I read through the thread on DoA and people had lots of cute ideas of nonsexual things to do with her. After reading those, I don't immediately equate her tongueless pics as being sexual. I actually think of her as being quite versatile. Of course it's also possible to change a doll's expression with a different faceup, or if you wanted to keep it more sexual but wanted her to look older you could always put the head on a more mature body and with the right faceup and wig, she'd look much older.

 

for the records, no matter how young a doll may look, it's still an object, so no reason to have troubles about the sexual part.

 

Is it wrong that my first reaction on seeing that open-mouthed little girl doll with the tongue was that it was adorable? And that she looked like a vampire. Yes, the facial expression is pretty odd-- just like I wouldn't buy a doll with a grin on its face without a second head to swap out for it, because can you imagine a doll that was grinning all the freaking time? (Actually, wait, I can. Say hi, kids..) But though it's coquettish, I think it would depend on context exactly *what* was being offered. Permanently coquettish just seems... weird to me. She looks hungry, or with the tongue she looks a bit vampiric in my eyes-- but it could easily be made sexual. Still, think of how people got their knickers in a knot over the Bratz dolls, where the most sexual thing about them is clothing about as revealing as what most girls I know might wear to the mall or for basically playing dress-up (yes, we still do that at fifteen) and their indifferent, 'pouty' facial expressions. I'd feel a bit self conscious taking that doll out in public. (It helps that I don't like the colour the inside of her mouth is...)

 

I don't know... Yes, I suppose with a little effort, we can imagine her in a non- sexual situation, but when I first saw her... eww!!! And, of course it is a shame, because she would be so cute in a more neutral face expression!!!

 

That's what seems odd to me-- that there's no 'default' to that, that's just how she'll always look. The dolls with different faceplates might get by with having a facial expression like that, but it just seems odd that a doll that cute is stuck with a facial expression that does admittedly summon to most minds something weirdly sexual. (Or vampiric.)

 

After looking at her on the site a few times and seeing the DoA thread, I have to admit the sexualized aspect is rather diminished and I mostly agree with what you have written. In one sense she would be versatile I think but with the tongue she becomes rather limited to pics involving food, or flag poles on freezing days( assuming one is not going to use her in sex-oriented photos). Her eyes are really growing on me but I am not a fan of open mouthed dolls generally. I could actually take her with the open mouth because she is becoming more quirky in a sinister way than wrong in my mind. It is her tongue, and only her tongue,that seemed a bit inappropriate-open mouths on dolls always struck me as just happy faces.
Tongue and all I can now totally see her as the weird one in anyone's doll family.
I think it would be amusing if the people at Notdoll designed her with the purest intentions, and are now saying: "They think what?! Oh my GOD! Those filthy freaks!"



.

 

Yeah, I thought she was pretty cute too. I can honestly say that the idea of thinking of her in any kind of a sexual way never occurred to me until I read this thread. But I've never associated sexuality with my BJD's at all or made sexual identity part of their personas so that might have something to do with it.

 

Some people's narrative styles are very explicit, so showing the full monty is necessary; other people's narrative styles rely more on implicit events, so showing the full monty is not necessary to them. quote from JennyNemisis

Anyway, don't forget there is no full monty when it comes to dolls. They're dolls. You can't exploit them, you can't hurt them or put them into therapy. Personally, that's why I find Controversial Doll rather adorable and silly. It's like teddy bear porn. But I have no problem with it at all, as long as no one needs to look who doesn't want to, or isn't old enough to make the decision. It's the least dangerous sex out there.

 

I dont see why so much fuss over poor Citron, its really cute doll. Fact that many people see it as sexual object, doesnt mean its bad, or something like that. I would like to have it, if I had a story for her. Unfortunately I do not.
But just as many people said - it is just a doll.