The ethics of photographing 'children' in BJDdom

I totally agree with this. I am constantly seeing the phrase (18+) littered around this thread and I have to say, in my country (the UK), the consent age is 16- so for me, if a doll is sixteen then sexual content is totally fine. Beneath that? I don't like the idea of it, no, and certainly not- for example- 13 and below. The sad truth is however, that we come across things like pregnant fourteen or fifteen year olds and such in real life. For me however, i'd prefer the minimum age for sexual content to be 16- below that? I wouldn't care to look at it unless the story for the dolls has a legit. moral to it, or is interesting. After all, if it's of dolls, and not being made to look human- they are only dolls, and if its for a proper plotline as in the case of Lana Gambino's story, then I might have a look. However if it's just straight out sexual porn "just because" then i'm not interested.

 

· How do you feel about photographing your 'underage' dolls naked? I have no problem with it... IF I have a situation that would call for it.

· Do images of naked underage dolls cause you any disquiet/moral dilemma? Nope.

· Are you concerned by sexualized images of underage dolls? No. I draw a strong, thick line between fantasy and reality, and sexualized photos of dolls (no matter their fictional age or physical body appearance) fall pretty clearly on the 'fantasy' side of the line. No real person is actually being harmed or taken advantage of in the making of these photos, so why should I care?

· Or does the fact that they are, when you get right down to it, 'just dolls' mean that their (admittedly fictional) 'age' has no bearing on how they are/should be portrayed? They are 'just dolls,' no matter how humanlike they may appear. They are inanimate objects, and we project our own personalities onto them. There is no reason to dictate how people should treat their own personal property, so long as no actual persons are being harmed by the way the dolls are treated.

 

How do you feel about photographing your 'underage' dolls naked?
I don't own any, but honestly, I really doubt I would have any feelings torwards it. Seeing as I am, afterall, 13, my mom would probably make me get rid of my dolls (well, if I had any ...), thinking I had adopted some strange fetish (well, if I had any ...)

· Do images of naked underage dolls cause you any disquiet/moral dilemma?
No, really. They aren't humans, as long as you're not "uuh luuk at mah smexii 13 year old doll duuin smexxeh things and luuk at huur smexxeh bodeh", as long as you're doing it to show a cool design, model, tattoo... etc., it's really OK....

· Are you concerned by sexualized images of underage dolls?
If people are doing that, I think it's wrong... but I mean, it's different if you're showing a few people or linking it all over the internet for children to see. I draw the line at a doll Porno.

· Or does the fact that they are, when you get right down to it, 'just dolls' mean that their (admittedly fictional) 'age' has no bearing on how they are/should be portrayed?
Well, I guess that's so...

 

How do you feel about photographing your 'underage' dolls naked?

It depends. I think if people are photographing a "baby" it can be cute. For instance, a Lati Yellow in a tutu with no shirt can be cute. And, these are dolls. However, when people perceive their dolls as people or characters and sexualize the images in some way it makes me uncomfortable. To take a picture of a naked doll is alright. To take a picture of a naked child that could be perceived as sexual is all kinds of WRONG, WRONG, WRONG. So, intent here is important for me.

Do images of naked underage dolls cause you any disquiet/moral dilemma?

If the dolls are photographed for reference pictures, welcome home pictures or for sale posts or even in cutesy situations (the Lati Yellow in a tutu example above when "babies") then I'm not bothered. It's when the dolls are made to appear like children and are photographed in a sexual matter that I am VERY annoyed by it. Again, photographing naked dolls is not an issue. It's when those dolls are made to look like children and the image is sexually provocative that I get annoyed.

Are you concerned by sexualized images of underage dolls?

Not until I read this!

Or does the fact that they are, when you get right down to it, 'just dolls' mean that their (admittedly fictional) 'age' has no bearing on how they are/should be portrayed?

Dolls can be made to appear realistic. So, if it's photographed as a "doll" I have no issue with it. But, if it's photographed as a "child" in a non-child situation then I'm annoyed.

 

I didn't even think of a baby!!! Many people photograph babies naked in non-sexual situations and no one thinks of it...I see fully naked babies on TV in the US all the time but get them to toddler age and it's nooooo.

I only photograph my underage dolls (which are almost all of them) naked for selling purposes. IN THE US IT IS ILLEGAL TO POST A PHOTO, EVEN OF A DOLL, OF ANY CHILDLIKE FORM ON THE NET IN SEXUAL SITUATIONS. Even "consentual" underage sex with our dolls cannot be posted by an American because we'd be in violation of our laws. Even ConDoll has banned it for legal reasons.

OP: if your doll's tat is right above her butt then it's perfectly legal and I would be okay with that. Tat on her ass: I don't want to see it and it could even be illegal in my country.

The ONLY exception to my stance is my Puki, Macchiato. She's a coffee bean, but she doesn't have a set age. She goes to school but I think that's so she can be with her friends. She had one pic of her I took mooning the camera but Pukis are very stylized so I'm not sure how that would affect things.

 

This is a very interesting topic!

· How do you feel about photographing your 'underage' dolls naked?
- I don't have any (yet), but I think it depends on what naked situation it is (I would do something cute, like the doll taking a bath and playing with bubbles or something like that).

· Do images of naked underage dolls cause you any disquiet/moral dilemma?
- This depends on the naked situation as well. It would disturb me to see them in sexy lingerie, though.

· Are you concerned by sexualized images of underage dolls?
- Yes, I am really disturbed by that, at least if the doll is designed to look "real".

· Or does the fact that they are, when you get right down to it, 'just dolls' mean that their (admittedly fictional) 'age' has no bearing on how they are/should be portrayed?
- I wouldn't take sexualized images of any of my dolls, but wouldn't be too concerned to see pictures of "adult" BJDs. I just prefer cute or funny images

 

(delete this post; it's the same as my other ones)

 

I never really thought about this... but after reading this thread, I kind of realized.

I would never EVER take a picture of my Tiny nude. I wouldn't even like to take her picture shirtless, despite the fact that some little girls run around on the beach without tops on. It's just something I'm not comfortable with. To me... she is a child. And while maybe she could take her clothes off without me worrying, it doesn't mean I need to capture it on film!

My MSD is a special story... the character he is based on is only about 2 months old, but he was created from the dreams of another character, so he is about in his teen years. Because of this, I wouldn't mind taking pictures of him with his shirt off (and I have) and I probably wouldn't squeam about taking pictures of his behind if he were wearing some sort of thong... but I would have issues about him being nude if he weren't covered. (I have taken images of him nude and covered with a blanket, however.)

 

I know this thread is a little old but this topic is something that's been bothering me lately and am glad it's been brought up here.

How do you feel about photographing your 'underage' dolls naked?

I don't have a problem with it...taking pics of my dolls naked? No. No problem. Taking pics of my under aged dolls in an erotic pose or situation or in fetish gear? Yep, I have a problem with that. I wouldn't do it.

· Do images of naked underage dolls cause you any disquiet/moral dilemma?
No, if they are just naked dolls. Even naked dolls photographed to show their beauty.

· Are you concerned by sexualized images of underage dolls?

Yes. I've run across several on Flickr that have caused me disquiet. Perhaps I have an overactive imagination, but when I see some of these pics (in particular um, bondage pics of tinies???) I get squinky and don't like it and start to wonder what kind of person the photographer is. I know, perhaps from an artsy stand point, that is unfair of me but that's what I feel.
For me, it all hinges on the intent of the photographer.
A naked or scantily clad, under aged doll photographed in an erotic situation or pose is creepy to me. To be honest, it's downright shocking sometimes. I'm no prude and I don't have a problem with sexy pics of adult dolls but I don't go looking for them.

· Or does the fact that they are, when you get right down to it, 'just dolls' mean that their (admittedly fictional) 'age' has no bearing on how they are/should be portrayed?

And there's the rub. No, the fact that they are dolls does not make it okay to me. Again, when I see pics that disturb me (I'm talking about overtly sexually oriented pics here or fetish pics involving child-like dolls), I start to wonder about the photographer. That is not to say that anyone who takes suggestive pics of under aged dolls is a perv. I can't make that judgment but I cannot help wondering.

As for your 15 yr old character? Showing her tattoo on her hiney?...meh...so what? Showing her tattoo on her hiney while her ankles are tied above her head? Yeah, one might be crossing a line there

One more thing. I'm a little confused as to why the feminism issue was even brought up. Boy and girl children are both abused and exploited in this world. I mean no offense, just didn't quite understand how feminism plays any role.

All in all, it's within your rights to play with your dolls as you see fit (at least in the USA, I can't speak for other nations) - and truthfully, I am tired of law-makers and government (and society for that matter) 'socializing' us all and sticking their noses into our private lives. BUT if you are going to post publicly, you should be aware someone might be offended by your pics.

 

How do you feel about photographing your 'underage' dolls naked?
Pretty much the way I feel about any kind of nudity. As long as the picture isn't overtly sexual in nature I don't mind. Sensual, erotica is fine but open legs with a shot taken from the ankles point of view... not my thing at all. It also depends on the age that the doll is supposed to be. If the doll apeared to be prepubescent then I'd have to say "no" to it.
Do images of naked underage dolls cause you any disquiet/moral dilemma?
As I said above it really depends on the context. If someone were doing a photoshoot to raise public awareness of paedophiles for instance, or sexual child abuse then using a doll would be a good way to do that. It could make a hard hitting statement while avoiding any child actors or models any discomfort. But taking a photo of an underage subject (even in doll form) just for the sake of it does make me question the state of the photographer's mind.

Are you concerned by sexualized images of underage dolls?
Well I take into account the country that the photographer has come from. As it's been said already different countries have different ideas about when a child becomes a sexually active adult. As someone else has mentioned, you don't just change how you feel coz you had a birthday. Also I don't think that nudity necessarily means "sexual". I believe that bodies of all kinds can be beautiful without the need to characterise it as a sexual thing. I also think that as models are becoming younger and younger we're almost pushing the boundaries of when it's acceptable - or not - to start/stop taking sexual themed photography at what age. After all most photo shoots of human models are sexually based, a pouty lipped look at the camera for instance.
Or does the fact that they are, when you get right down to it, 'just dolls' mean that their (admittedly fictional) 'age' has no bearing on how they are/should be portrayed?
I often find it hard to determine a doll's age, so unless it's specifically stated "she's only 15" I probably wouldn't find it offensive. If you look at Notdoll's Citroen dolls they look as if they are sexually based ideas, but they are small children. Perhaps that's just my perception though, the designer of the dolls may have thought they were children licking their lips for a candy, I don't know. Sometimes it's down to how the picture is percieved, not taken. I think each photo should be looked at on it's own merits.

 

even though they are dolls I sometimes feel uncomfortable seeing dolls such as tinies naked even if it is innocent. I think that if the dolls body is mature looking enough then it's ok

 

Nude photographs are awesome. On everyone, from Mecha Angels to pukipukis, humans to dolls. hey my mom have nude photos of me when I was 2 in the bookshelves, crawling around on blankets.
I could photograph my dollies nude. Actually I would. But not in a sexual way. A sexual way is something that is seen as erotic. Now, diffrent pepole think diffrent things is erotic. Some thinks a pair of shoes is the most erotic thing, some thinks it's a tree. So I bet you that someone can find a fully dressed doll erotic. And a pedophile can feel an erotic attraction to a fully dressed child, just as you and I can feel erotic attraction to a fully dressed human.
But what I mean with sexual is more of a "intentional" thing. Like, a child who plays around, is taking a bath, might run out on the yard naked when she don't want to shower (I did that once), is fully normal. Children are naked. Children will wet their beds and randomly when they're pottytraining. Children will touch each other, damn it. For a child nothing is sexual. And I hope that no child will be exploited to sexual intentions.

My characters have a horrible past, including underage sex (in form of trafficking), but I will never show that on picture, because that is a sensitive part of my dolls life. They wouldn't want me to recreate that moment of their lifes. So I wont.

Nude =//= Porn. If it was, my mom is a vivid childporn collector. ^___^

 

I know I sort of answered this - a few years ago, but I didn't answer it very well. So, I'm going to answer more in-depth now...

How do you feel about photographing your 'underage' dolls naked?
Photographing a tiny, like a Puki, would be like taking pictures of babies, and not intended to be sexual; I wouldn't have any issue with something like that.

But photographing a doll like a Dollmore Kid is different. These dolls are supposed to be around the age of 10-12, and she does have parts. She has a relatively flat chest, and a 'suggestion' of female genitals.

Going into this hobby, I saw so many wonderful photographs of BJDs. I saw clothed dolls and artistic nude photographs. I thought that it would be interesting to use a BJD as an art/photography model, and I thought that I'd want to try that. But things didn't pan out that way. I don't want to take photos of my dolls like that. Part of my reasoning is that I worry that if someone, who didn't care about understanding the doll hobby, saw these photos (like my parents) they would think "OMG!"

So, I don't care that these kinds of dolls are not real people. They're modeled after the human form. Emma is supposed to be modeled like a typical 10-year-old girl. They're representations. They have parts - they're not like Barbies. Many people have photos that look OK to BJD owners and enthusiasts, but they might look out of place or weird outside of the photostory. I don't want to go into a realm of 'possible'. I want to steer clear of it all.

As of now, Emma's kimono is kind of big around her neck, and her camisole can be seen quite easily. But she's still not naked, and I try (though sometimes unsuccessfully) to cover her up so she looks ok. The only way I'd take pics of her naked would be to show the joints, and the body as an item, rather than the beauty of the sculpt.

Do images of naked underage dolls cause you any disquiet/moral dilemma?
It all depends on the scenario. If I can clearly see that something totally platonic is going on (kind of like the bath time pics), then I don't care. But if it's maybe a more intimate scene between an underage-looking doll and a more mature-looking doll - even another underage doll - that creeps me out a little.

Are you concerned by sexualized images of underage dolls?
No, because I know that BJD owners (with the possible exception of those banned from DoA) aren't taking pictures of their underage dolls - in any way - to be used as pornography.

I do find it strange how there are some outfits that fit MSDs that border on the risque - sometimes S&M - and I dislike that. It's silly.

Does the fact that they are, when you get right down to it, 'just dolls' mean that their (admittedly fictional) 'age' has no bearing on how they are/should be portrayed?
I have to agree that the fact that they are dolls shouldn't have any bearing on their portrayal. It shouldn't - and in a perfect world where everyone understood each other's intentions, and didn't read anything but the artist's intent, this would be the case. But the fact that we're all human, who cannot read each other's mind, or understand other's intent from a picture most of the time, makes things sticky.

Like it or not, we have less control than we think we do when we try to portray a message in an image. You may see 'artistic nude dolly', but another person who happens to find your photo (who may not be a BJD person one bit) might think you're portraying kiddie porn with dolls.

 

It would be silly if the MSD was portrayed against SD sizes as being a child- but my MSD's are all full fledged adults, simply because I cannot cater for the larger sizes of dolls. So for me, those outfits wouldn't be silly at all- as Draven's well into his hundreds and appears in his twenties, Haku is... god knows how old being a dragon, and also appears in his twenties- and Nello is 18.

So I think it lingers on the point (with MSD's, I mean) what age you have them at. Not everyone conforms to having SD's be adults and MSD's be the teenagers/young teens/preteens

Though if those outfits were for tinys or yo-sd's (which I obviously have as children) I would cringe at that, most definately.

 

Absolute agree with nude =/= porn. To me, the human body display, including genitalia, has no connotations of any kind. I have been told several times that in Europe this matter is percieved in a very different way than in other parts of the world, and genitals are not intrinsically percieved as strictly sexual unless... erh, they are being used in that specific moment for sexual matters XD. I depict my dolls equally dressed and undressed, and I feel that my very few ''underage'' dolls, in this case my little fee, looks utterly cute and absolutely innocent in naked pictures; myself, when a kind, tend to get rid of the uncomfortable clothes (panties included in this cathegory) and run naked all around with my mom trying to chase me; it was the freedom feeling, and the lack of inhibitions, lack of reject of self's body that we had when kids, and that we are sadly taught to loose later until a heavy blanket of prejudices and social conveniences we are taught later, and I can't help but see dolly child nudity as this; something natural, free of inhibitions and totally innocent.

 

I should've made that point more clear. Dollmore's MSDs clearly look like children, yet there are one or two outfits that would look strange on them. It's true that some places have mature MSDs that represent older people, and aren't kids.

My comment was just towards those that are immature MSDs.

 

Ahhh, my MSD's all have fairly mature builds (Angelheim, Resinsoul and Dollzone) so they dont even look like kids, but when I look at Dollmore's yeah I have to agree

thanks for clearing that up!

 

Hmm. I've never actually thought about this...Let's see here...

How do you feel about photographing your 'underage' dolls naked?
For me, this all comes down to the way the nudity is used. There IS a line between tasteful art and distasteful art. However, distasteful art is still art and often made so intentionally. In this case of extremity, I think it depends on what the pictures themselves are going to be used for. For a website like DoA, "distasteful" nudity would be considered wildly inappropriate, but for, say, a personal portfolio, it would be more appropriate.​

What's in the pictures also contributes to it a lot. I see no problem with a mildly sexual photograph - nudity with strategically placed objects or a less harsh pose. It's when the pictures become more questionable that concerns me, I.E. any sort of seemingly unwilling actions or straight-up, explicit sexual interactions.


Do images of naked underage dolls cause you any disquiet/moral dilemma?
Like I said, in the end, it depends on the picture. A light "tease" sort of picture wouldn't bother me, and neither would something like a bathtime picture or something of that nature.

Are you concerned by sexualized images of underage dolls?
I'll just summarize it, I guess...
Sexy - okay.
Sex - there might be a problem...

Does the fact that they are, when you get right down to it, 'just dolls' mean that their (admittedly fictional) 'age' has no bearing on how they are/should be portrayed?
For me personally, the fact that they're dolls DOES contribute, but it doesn't make just anything okay. I think you can push the limits a tid bit more, however the issue isn't so much the picture of the doll, it's the morality of the entire issue. Therefore, I don't believe you can get away with everything you do with them.​