the Human Race(s), standards of beauty, & the BJD hobby

French grandmother, to be nitpicky. And since there's no statement about where the other three-quarters of her family was intended to be from I don't see why we need to assume that she's American at all. And if the argument is for representation, then one could just as easily say "Don't mixed girls deserve representation too?" When Aaron was released they gave him a Korean mother - you'd be harder pressed to roll that into "whitewashing", no?

To be clear, I actually think the whole issue representation is a major one and looking at the roots of colour preference in different cultures is fascinating, but I also think that discussing it from such a specifically American perspective isn't really the way to find the answer (and is the most easily way to be dismissed).

True enough! Still, I think the question of why it's such a common thing when presenting a new realistic-styled doll shouldn't be taken to be suggesting that they ought to be made to do something differently. It has the potential to be an interesging conversation - especially in the way that the assumptions and value judgements in different countries can sometimes come up against each other. Exploring that doesn't need to be an accusation, after all! Or at least I hope so - I know it's delicate territory.

Personally, most of my (human-style) dolls are dark-skinned and light-eyed (and by intent because I like the look, not because of the promo pictures) so I'm not in any way saying that it's a bad thing in general!

 

There have been many, many good points on this topic since I have last signed on to read up on the topic. Every point in this argument is valid, and I respect the opinions represented here from all sides. There is little much here I would like to restate, but I will go to add a few extra notes:

As an example of Western standards of beauty influencing other cultures, please note that the ganguro style is based off of 'California girls'.

There are many other examples of western culture influencing eastern societies, just as there is evidence of Asian culture migrating to North America, and beyond (like our own hobby, here, or the oft associated lolita style). At this point, the doll hobby has also become strong enough that there are now manufacturers all over the world who produce BJD to more than one aesthetic standard.

While I would not go as far as to say that manufacturers of dolls create realistic dolls with exoticized features on purpose, the standard of beauty is strong enough that white (for even 'normal' skinned dolls are much paler than their owners) dolls with caucasian (or cartoonish, manga-styled) features -do- dominate the market. This is universal on almost any given global product market that involves standards of beauty, at this point in history. (Including in the sex industry, I might add, though that of course, is not necessarily discussable here.)

I'm not saying that dolls of darker coloured resins are not valued, and are not positively enforcing a visible image of other skin tones. It is a very good thing to have such diversity, and I am thankful for it. There has also been an increase in more prominent, non-caucasian features in dolls. But what I think starzzz was getting at in this topic was the awareness of such factors that do influence sales. Standards of beauty? Absolutely. Are visible minorities produced as dolls, and are they considered beautiful? Yes, truly. Are visible minorities inaccurately or under represented in those self-same standards of beauty? Definitely.

edit:

In response to Hervoyel, naturally, you bring a good argument to the table. I would not, however, accuse Aaron of being 'whitewashed' because he has no 'white' in him. And while I most definitely see your point on bringing American ideals to a discussion about pre-dominantly asian ball jointed dolls, there is a very, very large influence that the country [The United States] does hold over the world. And, it is also notable that there is a very heavy following of these dolls in North America, as well. So therefore, even from the perspective of North American doll owners, I argue that my position remains relevant, since it is the owners who ultimately change the colour of their dolls' hair, eyes, skin, etc, beyond the fact that beauty has become standardized for many of the developed nations of the world.

editedit:

And just to make it perfectly clear, I am not saying that every owner who has a black doll with blue eyes is a racist. Or has racist intentions. I am very open to the idea that owners simply love the colour combinations, for whatever their values. I can respect any owner who wants to do whatever they want with their little peices of resin, and am not, once again, accusing you, or someone you know, of being a racist for those values.

 

I'm not too up-and-up on my Asian history, but wasn't fair skin popular before Western influence did its thing? Geisha and Maiko painted their skin stark white, Japanese paintings typically depicted fair skin, as do the dolls... It isn't so much a Caucasian thing (It is more so than it used to be, granted) as it is that pale skin denotes wealth because you don't have to be out in the sun. And as was mentioned earlier, Asians, like Hispanics and Africoidians, have dark brown eyes and black hair. They're bored with it. We as humans often want something that isn't what we have, because we see it every time we look in the mirror, and a good chunk of doll hobbyists live out their aesthetic pleasures through their dolls.

Dark brown eyes with dark brown resin and dark brown hair are not the easiest things to make sparkle in promo shots, hence why they use the gold eyes or the pink eyes.
http://img.iplehouse.com/co_img006/iplehouse/etc/cocori_08_dt1.jpg You can see how flat she looks here, and that's with lighter hair and eyes. http://img.iplehouse.com/co_img006/iplehouse/etc/Denzel_dt06.jpg Same with Denzel. He's fairly boring looking in these photos. They are both very beautiful dolls with a lot of care taken to their sculpts, but even with a little unnatural pizazz, they aren't that eye catching. Imagine if they'd gone all-out and basically put dark eyes in? They'd look absolutely lifeless in the photos. These aren't living, breathing models that can add their own life to the photography. They're inanimate objects that are meant to look animate.
Dark resin is a lot more costly to produce for the sake of catering to a niche of an already niche market. They need to make their dolls pop.

 

I may be being a little idealistic when I say this...

I think what companies may be trying to do when they show their dark tan/ebony dolls with light eyes/wigs is to better showcase the resin colors. To emphasize the contrast, as it were. I won't say for certain that the companies are choosing to have Western aesthetics when they do this or not, but I wonder if its not from an artistic or promotional aspect that they do this.

 

ZennoSaji; on your history, that is one hundred percent correct. Paleness was once a quality specifically reserved for noble (or entertaining) castes. But would you not say that could (and now has) worked into the advantage of a caucasian person over even a pale person of another ehtnicity?

I'm not arguing you on your facts, or on what you have said about promotions and making very dark eyes sparkle and pop, because all in all, your post rings very true. But I think this is a very, very complex topic in which there is more than one angle that is an accurate vantage point to view the issue. There are many motives for why people do the things they do, or, in this case, why companies do the things they do.

 

Conversely, to automatically assume that all Asian beauty ideals are ALWAYS linked to looking caucasian/white is narcissistic and egotistic at best. I know it might come as a surprise, but in Asia, white people are generally not considered attractive. Attractive white people, yes, and even then if they're attractive by Asian standards, and USUALLY because they have "foreign"/uncommon features. Yes there are certain features that Asian people consider attractive that are found in caucasians but that does NOT mean it's the origin. Pale skin? That's been around forever, LONG before East Asia had any meaningful contact with Europeans. In fact, when Europeans first showed up in Japan, white skin was the last thing about them they noticed and they actually thought it was ugly. Double-eyelid? Is actually a natural feature to a percentage of the east Asian population - not as common as a single eyelid, which would explain why it's so valued. Odd hair colours? Are a way to express your individuality in a sea of people with black hair. Same with eyes. Attractive features are features that are aesthetically pleasing and are generally rare, unique. That's why they're desirable. There are actually very few direct connections between Asian beauty standards and stereotypical caucasian attributes. The only one I can think of, actually, off the top of my head is the appeal of large breasts - something that clearly changed upon contact with Europeans. Before that, a flat-chested, straight female figure was considered the ideal shape. I'm sure there are probably a few more, because with the advent of internet and instantaneous communication it's really easy for cultures to become influenced by one another. But that doesn't mean one completely swamps another, especially if in real life they're almost completely isolated.

And even then, that's assuming that human beauty standards are ALWAYS applied to dolls. That's not the case at all. If you look, all of my dolls so far have been blond and blue-eyed. In real life? I've yet to meet a blond-haired, blue-eyed person I considered attractive. (Okay, I met one, and she was a really pretty girl). I generally find darker-skinned, darker-haired people attractive. My boyfriend is Asian, he's got brown eyes, dark hair and skin that's a lot darker than mine. I think I may have ONE favourite attractive actor/actress that's got brown hair? The rest have black or near-black hair because that's what I find aesthetically pleasing on humans, but I have not owned a single doll with dark hair and dark eyes. In dolls, I look for something different. Like someone else said, something fantastical and not restricted by DNA recombination.

 

I always just assumed it was because brown-eyed dolls were traditionally considered "less desirable" in every format of doll I'd seen in my childhood-- porcelains, ragdolls, stuffies, Barbie, Dressy Bessy, those funky old antique bakelite things, those big Madame Alexander babydolls-- everybody was just allllll about blue eyes. It was like there was some bizarre equivalency, "Doll = Blue Eyes". I think Raggedy Ann was my only non-blue-eyed doll, and that only because her eyes were black buttons.

Even as a small child I remember this same eye-bias applying to humanity, going back as far as the Little House on the Prairie books: Laura always had a chip on her shoulder because she had brown eyes that nobody ever noticed, and Mary was always considered the pretty one with her blond hair & blue eyes. As a little olive-eyed cavegirl with sallow olive skin and brown hair, I sympathized totally with Teh Laura. ;;

Where this worldwide blue-eye-bias originally *started*, I have no idea, and am reluctant to speculate, on grounds that humanity would probably disgust me even more than it already does.


(PS. For dark brown eyes that do sparkle & pop in a photo, I have resorted to Gumdrops' "Java Frost". Works like a charm.)

 

Lelite: Very good to see someone so impassioned by a subject.

Given, I am not as versed in standards of asian beauty as you, but that does not mean that western culture has not influenced standards of beauty at all, even in asian cultures. I am also not aghast to hear from you that asians do not consider very many white people attractive, for I was not speaking of a blanket, 'all America is beautiful' term. Heavens, no, and I myself do not find many white people aesthetically pleasing. And while you are discussing some very, very wonderful good points on asian culture, from your point of view, I am curious to know how you would best explain what asian ideals are of what they consider attractive white people? And have these features not been emulated at all, either by any amount of the asian population, or by their products?

Waif-skinny, straight chicks are not just a purely asian norm. They were made popular when the world experienced the first wave of the eurotrash styles and the skinny supermodel phenomena. I'm not doubting that the asian ideal is as you say, and that it is not influenced by Western culture at all. That would be fairly egotistical. And methods of 'standing out', such a strange hair and eye colours, may not have been employed for racist reasons at all, but simply to stand out, again, as you say.

But that does not make standards of beauty, especially in a global sense, a moot point, either, especially when the money talks, and it says, 'blone hair, white skin', as a majority rule of thumb for selling products. That does not mean all of our precious doll companies are 'in' on some racism conspiracy. But it is a problem the world does need to look at, especially when it can (and has) influenced our hobby, even a bit.

We have already mentioned fantasy dolls and colour combinations, and our respect for them. I do not feel the need to restate this. Or that owners just sometimes, yes, like to look at pretty blue eyes in dark brown skin and not mean a racist thing by it.

And, just to make it clear, because you did seem to take it so personally, I, nor anyone else, in this discussion is targeting you or your dolls specifically. If you did take offense, or felt hurt, I apoligize, for I am in no way 'dissing' what you like. It seems like from what you have written that you might have, and if so, I do extend my apologies.

JennyNemesis: Yes, I remember those things, too. Those are very good and valid examples. I think the perception came around because of genetic selection; since blue eyes take two recessive genes to create, they are more 'rare', and people in general (of whatever race) do tend to like it when they find themselves in possession of things at odds. But the blue eyes thing, once again, even with innocent background, could definitely work in the advantage of a race issue, though it is not always for all individuals.

Also, those are absolutely gorgeous eyes. I love brown eyes; I never used to have much of an appreciation of them for the already discussed reason that they did not make a doll's face pop, or seem as lively, when too dark. But those...those are incredibly lovely. My Lux is supposed to be a brown eyed bloy. I would love a pair of those, I think.

 

Must feel nice on the racially-sensitive soapbox, spouting the (not so) pretty PR-party line. Everything here on Earth looks racist from up there, right? Did your conscience get a good massage?

Obviously I personally think accusations of whitewashing are confused or misaimed. Dolls are conceived of as works of art first--meant to draw attention--and there exist artistic principles that guide their creation. I will point out that there is a more primal, basic aesthetic sense at work here: facial contrast.

Part of the "feminine" look is relatively high facial contrast, where color differences in lips, eyes & (yes) skin are on the high side. This is why eyeshadow, mascara, lipstick, etc. exist and work for their intended purpose. What could be higher contrast than blatantly mixing an unnatural combination of light and dark colors? Furthermore, feminine features are generally considered more attractive, even on males, and especially to people of developed nations (read: most BJD creators & buyers). The majority of dolls reflect this.

I propose a mental exercise: the next time you see a "masculine" doll, see if the eyes clash less with the skin. You will be more likely to find the realistic color combinations you are looking for.

I am not so smart, but I will believe an evolutionary/neurological reason over a racial studies one. I will leave up to the reader to decide whether learned racial bias trumps instinctual human aesthetic sense.

 

That's actually a misconception started in Bio 101 classes to get kids to understand how dominant/recessive genes work since there aren't that many albinos running around. Eye color and hair color and skin color have little to do with On/Off genes, but they are the easiest traits to identify without inciting allergic reactions or indecency claims. Quite frankly, I get offended when people imply that I'm inbred just because I have red hair, green eyes, and pale skin. Evidence that it's not Dominant/recessive: 1) Bio classes don't mention what green eyes are (Dominant or recessive), nor red hair for that matter. 2) My half sister's son is the only other ginger in the family besides myself. Nothin' but blondes and brunettes otherwise, and the red is all on our shared mother's side. 3) My dad's mother has brown eyes but my dad's are green.
So, no, it's not that simple on the genetic scale. There are multiple factors that contribute to our coloration.

 

Whoa, whoa, whoa. I don't think I can believe that there is an "instinctual human aesthetic".. there is no biological basis that women should paint their faces and men not. THroughout world cultures and history, what was aesthetically pleasing has deviated all across the board, from waifish to jiggly, curvy to straight, muscular to not.... unless some of these things are necessary for survival (IE muscles in a situation where one hunts mammoths to survive) there is just no biological basis like this for what's attractive, ESPECIALLY in a fashion sense.

 

Oh no no, I'm not trying to say there's absolutely no connection. I think I tried to clarify that closer to the end, sorry if that got lost. However, when I say this, I'm actually going against the Japanese (and one white) individual that I spoke to on the matter who actually explained to me that there aren't a lot of ties to stereotypical Caucasian physiology from the Asian beauty standards. They claimed that there aren't any ties at all, and I don't really agree with that, but there definitely aren't as many ties as people in the West are led to believe. Up until a few weeks ago I would've been one of the people jumping in here explaining how Asian people idolize caucasian features and that's why it shows up in dolls, but ever since I had that conversation with people actually living in Asia I've started to really reconsider that stance.

As far as "attractive white people go"... I'm going to be honest, I'm white, and I live in North America (albeit in a part of North America with a large Asian population and predominantly Asian/half-asian friends, but, still). So I may not be the best person to ask this because what I have is merely secondary-source and conjecture-based ideas (I was researching Asian attitudes towards white people because I was writing about a European character in Japan). I imagine that "attractive white people" would be one of two things - either some kind of a hybrid of Asian and white ideals of beauty - softer features, more petite build, or someone with features that are REALLY stereotypically white (but at the same time, pleasantly complement each other) that they're almost like symbol. But in the case of the second one, the attractiveness would probably mostly lie in the unusual/unique/uncommon appeal.

Another point of note is that there may be groups of people who DO take their beauty ideals from the West (someone mentioned Ganguro girls, who by the way are treated in Japan like Goths are in America), just how there is a group of people in the west who really idolize Asian features (primarily in the anime fandom, but not only there). However, just because a small portion of the population finds something attractive, doesn't mean that it's a cultural beauty ideal.

I really don't know where the pale-skin/hair/eyes ideal really came from. I'm gonna guess that it's got something to do with, as I stated earlier, rarity. There really aren't all that many blond-haired, blue-eyed people around since genetically they're recessive traits, and don't show up that often, but at the same time they're not rare enough to be "freaky". (which some, uh, radical head-in-sand groups like to play off of to try and convince others that it's superior, but we're not going to get into that). It's quite easy to convince people that they should like something rare, because it's unique and there's some kind of a drive for uniqueness within human nature. And then, once they believe that something rare is something attractive, they're much more likely to buy a product advertised with/on/as that something rare+attractive because then they'll feel like they also in part gain that trait. Think about it - regardless of race, average people never become models. They're either pretty, or they have odd unique features, or SOMETHING that isn't common.

As far as being personally targeted - ah, no, though I'm pretty sure there was at least one person directly replying to me without directing it at me. But I honestly don't really care if people think I'm racist because I have blonde dolls, I was just mainly using it as an example of attractive dolly features =/= attractive people features, which is what this thread is about (ish).

 

Totally. Eye colour is multigenic - you can't work it out in a Punnet Square.

That's why I wanted to point out the narrowness of the term. Because if you're taking the position that the idea is to make a doll with (for example) some African or South Indian or Polynesian features more-fair (or be association less-African/S Indian/Polynesian). So I wasn't trying to say that your idea was wrong (I totally agree about the bias in general - the clearance aisle in the toy section makes the fact that it exsits perfectly obvious) - I just think it's way too limiting/simplistic to frame it in such American terms.

In a general discussion sure, but in a discussion about how the dolls are presented in promotional materials (which was the way it was presented originally), I don't think it's that important (the North American market is fairly small, after all).

 

E.Hadrian: It might not have anything to do with survival, but the human eye is drawn to contrast and bright colors. Women historically have painted their faces so that the dominant sex of the species would find them attractive, much like male animals are colorful and flamboyant so as to attract a female. It's not unheard of for men to wear make up (and not be performers), however, and amongst those that do, they often get eyeliner tattooed for... you guessed it... CONTRAST around the eyes.

Aesthetics and beauty tastes do change over time; that's culture at work. But the eye is still drawn to bright colors and contrast. That's biology.

 

I honestly believe the reason why doll companies pair their tan dolls with light eyes is simply to make the colours pop. Contrasting colours catches the eye naturally, outside of the realm of race and stereotyped beauty. That's why sale prices are often shown on yellow and red tickets - the colours contrast and catch the eye, even if you don't need 32 rolls of loo paper for the special low low price of $10.

 

After looking through this thread... I still have no what the issue is? Would the original poster prefer if companies decided to create stereotypical black dolls with, like, dark brown eyes and afros? Wouldn't that be kinda racially offensive?

Personally, as an Asian girl born and bred in an Asian country, I found Iplehouse's Asa kinda offensive when she came out specifically because she was pandering to the stereotype of a pretty Asian girl, complete with straight black hair and dark eyes.

I hate it, because I've been told (by a Caucasian) that my hair colour (at that time blond) was not a 'natural' colour, because all Asians must have black hair. I hate it when I see people with theories about how Asians are aiming to become more Western , about how they're hating on their own race, as if insinuating that we're not Asian enough because our hair is not black and our eyes are not dark brown. I especially hate it, because they don't even realise that it's a form of racism too.

So it feels strange to me that people would actually want stereotypes to be perpetuated. I don't understand it at all.

Edit:

After thinking about it for awhile, I would like to point out that it is important for people to realise that 'blond hair makes that doll look pretty and valuable' should not equal to 'blond hair makes everyone pretty and valuable'. It worries me to think that there are people, even children, who cannot understand the difference, because for me, it's perfectly natural? My dolls have a different standard of beauty than my view of human beings. A very different standard of beauty, because what makes a doll beautiful and valuable to me in terms of looks is completely different from what makes a person attractive to me from a purely aesthetic point of view.

That said, I do like Asa. I think she's really pretty. I just wish she wasn't such a stereotype.

 

Hmmm, I do think that the ebony skin dolls, and darker skin dolls look very strange on dolls that do not have black aesthetics. I'm glad that Iplehouse at least make their black dolls look black. When I see dark tan on other dolls, for example Soom, it can look a bit silly imo; they don't match the black aesthetic. So, I sort of see it in reverse.

It is common for the doll companies to 'tan' a doll who simply has very caucassian or asian looks, say on the Dollshes, but to me it looks strange. I do think the light eyes when placed in the Iplehouse ebony dolls look a bit odd too, but the green on the Erzulie did simply look gorgeous and maybe that is why they went with it?

 

And to automatically assume that the doll choices a company makes are due to whitewashing is making a big assumption at best. I'm not going to say that Western standards of beauty never have any influence at all because that would be untrue, but I do think there is an element of applying issues in this country to countries with a radically different history, culture, and makeup of people that is very problematic. You are assuming that the dolls look the way they do because these countries have adopted our ideals, but do you really know that for a fact? Could there not be many other reasons? Of all the people living in these countries, exactly how many are trying to look more Western? And when it comes to colored contacts and dying hair, that can be for other reasons than just to Western beauty standards. Do not people from all ethnicities in the US change their own appearances for fun and as a means for self expression?

See I don't, because the more stylized dolls are just that -- stylized representations of the human form, and aren't specifically this or that racial group -- they are no more caucasian than they are black. They can be, but they don't have to be. When I was looking to buy a dark skin doll for a character of mine, I didn't want one with realistic features as not only would it not have matched the drawing of the character, but he was also from a fantasy world and not of African decent. As lovely as the Iplehouse dolls are, they absolutely would not have worked. Skin tone with dolls does not always equal what it does with a real life human. On a more realistic doll with a non black aesthetic, as you put it, couldn't they just as easily be bi-racial if the owner chose? And within any group facial features do differ from person to person anyway. If a company does not have a history of making very realistic dolls, then it also doesn't make sense for them to stray away from their own aesthetics just to add a new skin tone.

Yes, that was also true in the West as well (women where supposed to be very pale), but now the trend is to look tan -- go figure. People tend to be fascinated with and want what they don't have -- it's not always because of racism. Humans tend to be grabbed by things that are perceived as being different, and in the US, there are people who are just as interested in other countries as people in other countries might be curious about us. It's a natural back and forth sharing that happens.