Using Actual Killers As A Theme: Going Too Far

Nope. It's more like, it's our choice to be offended by something. It's not a pleasant feeling and we have a few choices for how to proceed. We can consider the offensive material and ask ourselves why it upsets us or simply walk away from it. If no one is getting hurt or breaking any laws it's better to walk away then reach for the censorship stick. The internet must be one of the easiest mediums to walk away from.

For the people mentioning very personal tragedies like Columbine etc...well I personally don't mind if you are offended. If someone made a doll of Klebold it could have several meanings aside from glorifying murder. Lots of people cope with tragedies in their lives that never make it to the front page news and dolls dealing with very heavy topics could touch anyone negatively. Even with all I have said I can think of some dolls that would irk me, but the point is that I don't believe people should be censored so that I can remain comfortable. If I want happy time entertainment it's easy enough to find without messing up other people's work.

 

I don't agree that being offended is a choice-- if it was a choice, I would never choose to be offended, at least not over something that didn't offend a clear majority of people-- but I do agree that how one responds to offense is absolutely a matter of choice.

I certainly understand being sick of violent media. Sometimes it can be disheartening and sickening when it feels like you can't get away from it, and realistic portrayals of violence can have a very powerful effect on those who see them. However, I also believe there can be merit to them-- yes, there will always be some things that just seem to wallow in the mire of violence, but there are also many books/films/etc. that take violence and do something with it. Some works try to teach, showing violence for the terrible thing that it is, not to titillate, but to illustrate, to warn people away from letting animal instincts and hurt lead to more suffering. Other works are reflective, aiming to explain why violence happens-- not excuse it, not say that it is all right, but to understand, because without understanding, how can we effectively guard ourselves against anything?

That doesn't mean I think everyone needs to go out and expose themselves to these works-- they can be immensely uncomfortable and even triggering for some, and not everyone needs a book or a film to explain or to teach them about violence. Not everyone would enjoy taking that trip on any level. People are free to like or to dislike based on how they are moved. But, I do ask that the same respect be granted to me in return, to explore these themes in a way that I find enlightening or enjoyable.

I do have a true crime fascination, and have since my youth. I don't know why-- I am a staunch pacifist, I find it very difficult to justify violence of any type. It's something that is alien and horrifying to me on many levels, but maybe that is why I enjoy reading about serial killers and the like. This is a thing in the world, and I can only hope to understand it by study. I do not always immerse myself in violent media because of it-- sometimes I don't have the emotional strength to read about this stuff, either. But sometimes it helps me to cope with the sometimes senseless and violent world that we live in.

It may not entirely be true to say that what someone else likes can't hurt you, but provided that the people involved try to be mature and understanding, we can at least hope to minimize the potential hurt.

=^__^=
Anneko

 

Initial feelings are NOT a choice. Being offended by something is NOT a choice. Reacting to it IS, and rationalizing it for future handling as well.

 

I don't think initial feelings are a choice, either. If I find something offensive to my culture, my race, or something I consider very personal to me, I'm going to get annoyed.

However, once that initial shock sinks in, you can choose to do something about it. Do you let your initial reaction take over you, or do you become proactive, like asking the artist what their intent was? For all you know, you and the artist are on two very different pages.

 

Ah yes, the killers. I mean, isnt it funny that no one ever remembers victims name? Not saying that killers get all those glorifying names - "The Brooklyn Vampire", "The red demon", "The angel of death", "The sex beast", "The wolf", "the monster of the andes", and what victims get? oh, let me think... nothing?
There's always gonna be stories and poems and songs, because killers and murders n torture n deviant sexual fantasies are the part of our nature. It is good to recognize it and understand, that every single of us has some twist part in a deep corner of a soul. Some like to collect pictures of tortured bodies, others finds joy in playing with "The Milwaukee Cannibal" doll.
But. Recognizing that this takes part in our lives and count is as a "normal" part - not same things. Learning about serial killers and promoting what they've done through the art (or not so much of art) images - quite different also. I don't see how it related at all. What you gonna do with this doll? recreate the scenes of killings? take bloody pictures? Enjoy the fantasies of tortured victims or raped children in ur mind? If I know someone who owns "the killer" doll and happy to play with it, I would suggest to that person to visit a doctor. Just to be sure, you know, that one day this person will not mix the fantasies and reality. And don't tell me that's this impossible to be - oh yes, it is possible. It is what goes in the killers heads - fantasies, which they bring to reality.

 

Your doll, your choice. Why should it matter what other people think? If you're offended, just ignore it. It's not your doll after all.

 

But when someone includes something unhappy in an art form that does not mean that they necessarily agree with that act. Art can have many different meanings -- you need to stop taking everything at face value because it leads to statements like this...

If someone has in interest in something you think is icky you immediately jump to the conclusion that they must have some kind of mental issue. Nice. That is exactly the kind of thought police-y thinking that is so freaking scary. By that logic, people can have all kinds of mental illness, be considered a threat, or even an out and out criminal because someone jumped to a conclusion because of a figurine or piece of artwork that they chose to own. I find it mind bogglingly hard to fathom how you can't see the inherent danger in that.

I'm not bothered that certain things offend you, because we all have things that offend us. But you react in a way that is out of step with the actual issue at hand which by the way is not whether or not it's ok to actually harm a real person (just in case it wasn't painfully obvious by now). Actually, many folks in this thread have given examples of why they like, watch, read various things that has nothing to do with self image issues or any other kind of personal issue either -- something you seem to be conveniently ignoring.

 

I almost totally agree with you. I don't want to get all granular but I think that giving in and getting upset about stuff people do with their dolls does have an element of choice. But with that said I understand your point. Emotions occur sometimes that no one is expecting! I was thinking more along the lines of getting upset and going into reaction mode over someone's photo story.

KiraKat. If you want to defend "feeling" offended by all means go for it. I personally think it's in our best interest to try not to give in and become too upset about doll stories on DOA. It just seems strange to me, but maybe I haven't really experienced something that touches a nerve yet. Oh yes, I am sure I have my limits too!

 

If we lost artists like Todd McFarlane & John Waters-- or art like Guernica, the Rape of Lucretia, & even the Living Dead Dolls-- this world would turn into a place where you can't show anything but Mary Poppins (the only movie ever to be 100% approved by the Christian Analysis of American Culture project). And that, in the words of Dr. Thompson, would be "what the whole hep world would be doing on a Saturday night if the Nazis had won the war".

And it's just not sinking in, either. A great many people here have already explained the difference between "portraying something" and "glorifying something", which are completely different things... And a great many people here have already explained how it's possible to enjoy something without condoning the thing it portrays. But it's not sinking in, and it's not going to sink in. Truth cannot sink into Teflon brains. Which is why, on the eighth day, God created Ignore Lists.

But I still commend you for trying so many times, and with such clarity and patience, to get anything to stick to that Teflon layer of solipsism and incomprehension. If Taco's light can't break through the fog, then nobody can!

 

To add to this, even most people with diagnosed mental disorders are sane enough to know that killing is morally and legally wrong to do. Having a mental disorder does not instantly make you incapable of decision-making; unless someone's doctor says the individual has a diminished mental capacity, most people with mental disorders are just fine. Depression, paranoia, and OCD are all examples of 'mental disorders'. Just because someone is told they have a mental disorder, it doesn't mean that individual is going to start on a killing spree.

My professor worked with the criminally insane for a time, and the stories he told... those are the people who you would worry about. Chances are, though, that the people buying LDD's (for example) aren't those people.

 

It just seems that the manufacturer tries to get more attention by using a name of a "popular" serial killer... I don't like such things. It doesn't offend me; death themes are ok, but I just cannot put these things together - the doll itself, in its appearance, has nothing in common with this Lizzie Borden. If they are counting so much on this certain serial killer theme, at least they could try to dress the doll properly because right now it just seems like another doll in gothic/steampunk costume.

 

I agree that it is important not to get overemotional over something that is ultimately insignificant. I just thought it was strange to treat feelings as if they can be chosen. I think the only voluntary part is in prolonging that negative emotion/ "ruminating" on it.

 

I wish I could find the words, but I wouldn't say that I'm "offended." For me, I would say that I would be very "creeped/weirded out" by seeing such a thing.

About it being Yo sized? Well, maybe it's just me, but I think that is is just overly bizarre. But... to each his own.

 

I think that's true. We all have our own triggers and limits. And choosing to react is certainly true too. For example, I hate clowns. They creep me out and/or piss me off. But I can't say that because they bother me, EVERYONE should be bothered. (In fact, I even have exceptions to my own limit: I like rodeo clowns. They're out there doing a job to keep the cowboys safe; the costumes and attempts at humor are just extras.)

The local Shakespearian Festival is doing "Titus Andronicus" this year. In a religious, ultra-conservative red state, this festival is going to present something that I think most of the local community would be offended by. But good for them, because they wouldn't perform it if it would lose the festival money. Some locals will see it and some people will visit the area just to see it. They'll get something valuable out of it. And good for the community for not throwing a fit, because they'll benefit from the money brought in by the festival. Those few who would complain and try to make it into a fight? They're choosing to be ignorant and bigoted, rather than simply say "I won't go."

Censoring something just because one person is upset deprives the hundreds who may get something out of it. Knee-jerk reactions do more harm than good. Debating the issue, like we're all doing? There's value in that.

And regarding being sick of violence in the media? I think everyone gets that way, even people who normally like it. After I read the bigraphy about Richard Ramirez, I swore off true-crime novels for about two months. It depressed me in a way that none of the others had, even "Helter Skelter" or "The Stranger Beside Me." I just finished reading "The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich," and now I'm reading books from "The Cat Who" series and "The No. 1 Ladies Detective Agency." I just can't handle any more hard-thinking, depressing books right now. But in a few months, I'll be right back at it, because I *enjoy* difficult things.

You mean they approved it, even with the women's suffrage? And magic?

 

I really think is an Overraction,yes the topic is delicate but they're just using the names for the dolls,they're not workshiping satan and I would care more about the doll than its name, I think they're worse things to get offended.

 

Oh god! Talk about something that inspires violence!

 

To me, if they were anything under an MSD-sized doll, I think I'd find it goofy.

 

So... you have a major in art and you think that the point of art is to be pretty? Where did you get your BA? A cracker jack box? Sure, art can be beautiful. I'm not saying that beautiful art has no value... but being pretty isn't all that art is about, and you pretty much said that art should just be rainbows and butterflies and soft, cuddly puppies.

Honestly, if the male doll community can't handle dark/violent art, they're really just a bunch of pussies.

Side note: how did you manage to graduate from ANY college without learning basic grammar?

 

Not all art has to be 'pretty' ~ but it violence for the sake of shock value with the preconceived idea that it automatically IS ART is rediculous. Art is not defined by simply its shock value. If it is offensive, it is offensive ~ whether it is violent or it is simply BAD ART.
Just don't delude ourselves into thinking that 'violent' representations are ART just because they are controversial!
Although beauty is in the eye of the beholder, not ALL art is ART. Some really is just loud, obnoxious, in-your-face ugliness devoid of creativity. (and some folks just jump on the bandwagon to defend it ~ THAT is non-sense)

 

I think it's a bit cheezy and tacky, but I'm not offended.