Why do you think BJDs are anatomically correct?

This is a very interesting topic. When I first started reading everyone's replies, I was thinking to myself "They probably made them anatomically correct because of the fact that BJDs are so detailed already, they ought to have genitalia. I also agree with Karol..that while they have genitalia..it isn't proportioned correctly..Not that I'd want Yuki to be walking around with a huge penis. >_< But...I think they should be in proportion to the rest of the dolls body. Also...I find it intriguing that BJD companies are now making dolls such as full operation Ryoma, which is in itself very interesting. Also, the male unoas have interchangable genitalia, do they not? It seems that in the U.S. we might be quite closed minded when it comes to things like that and maybe asian culture isn't quite as closed when it comes to nudity? I also want to mention something about what Emplousos said..I don't think it's that people are obsessed with sex and are making things about it taboo..I think it's that people are obsessed with making certain parts of sex seem dirty/taboo, such as forms of sex, etc. (Sorry if I got graphic. I couldn't find a way to explain myself correctly.) That's what I think though. ^_^

 

I have to admit I was a bit disappointed when I first saw the male dolls genitals. As noted above, they were kinda small and shapeless. I wonder what would be the proportions on them. As I have no idea how big they are. (As I don't have a male bjd... yet!)

The problem is modding the penis to be bigger and more detailed without it getting in the way. As I always thought that half the reason it wasn't bigger is because the BJDs could probably pose better without it.

 

I've always wondered about the lack of genetalia in western (primarily american) dolls as well. I mean, it's not like kids don't have their barbies and kens make out (and sometimes their barbies and barbies or their kens and kens). And when I was little and living in europe my mom got me a boy baby doll who had a little winky. Why can't regular dolls have it? Sheesh. Children are smart. Mom gave me 'the talk' when I was 4. Me and my little neighbor-boy-friend were curious about why we were diffrent when we were little. It's life. Get over it. Sheesh.
I must say that I don't like Barbies inuman proportions for a child's doll though. Made me grow up thinking that's how a real woman was supposed to look. >.<
Also, I don't really think that we americans are all that closed minded. After all, we see nudity in movies and tv and things all the time. We just brainwash ourselves into thinking that children are innocent and naive and that we must keep them so as long as possible, when they really aren't.

 

This is very accurate and historically correct, and a great observation, I think.

I haven't seen this mentioned in the rest of the thread, so I thought I'd bring it up as a bit of irony...

The original inspiration for Barbie was a European doll by the name of "Gigi," an anatomically correct doll that was used as a gag-gift for bachelors and soon-to-be husbands. Gigi had all of her bits, and even had implanted pubic hair - needless to say, the "Mother" of Barbie (and later Mattel) did away with this right quick in Barbie's evolution.

And now you know!

 

I have a tendancy to think that erasing the (barbie) dolls genitals was a way for Puritanistic Americans to aviod uncomfortable questions from their children.
The problem with that is: not having genitals actually creates more questions and added curiosity where there should be none.
I mean, really. A child has one question: "What is this?" I tell them, "Genitals, honey." over. Um, right?

Of course, maybe the originators of the barbie just didn't think a bachelor gag gift (with pubic hair) was appropriate for children. I can see the point there.

Thanks for the history lesson, jemstone XD I did not know that.

 

I've been reading a thread for a while and just came across a comment mentioning circumcised and uncircumcised dolls......I was just wondering, could someone explain this to me? *total n00b* I know what circumcision is and everything....just not about circumcised dolls...... I was stunned enough when I found out they were anatomically correct


Thanks. Sophie.

 

I think it is just a matter of how the sculptor made it look down there o_O

 

That seems like the most logically answer....but which dolls are and which aren't? LOL I sound like such a perv now.....
Love your doll Matt, he's SOOO cute (I don't normally like shiwoo type but yours is utterly irresistable )

Sophie

 

Maybe it is just me but I don't really think that BJD "parts" are hyper realistic or anything, and thus I've never been bothered by the fact that they have them.

Sure, a male doll may have a small penis and somewhat stylized manly bits but he isn't endowed with a massive super detailed phallic object protruding from his nether regions complete with veining and the like.

Just like the females. Female dolls have outer labia and breasts and generally they also have nipples but they don't have a detailed areola area or any indication of the inner folds of their girly parts, even though sometimes those girly parts are shaped differently and the other parts are often visual.

If the intent of adding the gender specific parts was to capture realism I'd think that the sculptors would have approached them a bit differently and actually went ahead and added the aforementioned details.

To me, BJD bits and pieces are akin to those you'd see on a nicely done mannequin. I mean to say that while they are there for realisms sake, it isn't the details that matter, simply getting the correct shape. Really, I'd hate to put my boy in tights and find that he was lacking the appropriate bulge, that would just be weird.

Glad to see other people agee about the detailing.

 

Actually I think it's stranger for a doll not to have genitalia Dolls are based on humans and all humans have one, so I think that it's natural for a realistic looking doll to have genitalia as well.

When I was small I was totally grossed out with my only boydoll since he didn't have anything between his legs. I thought maybe he had been in some kind of accident and lost his...thing.

 

I always thought that it was so that when they came blank and nudie, you'd know that the company sent you the sex that you paid for.

 

I actually get really angry when dolls arent anatomically correct <_<;; Even when I was little. It just isnt normal for a doll to look just like a human and yet have no genitalia. I dont think there is anything perverted about it. The human body is a pure, beautiful thing. Just because a doll has a penis doesnt make it dirty >_> I think its more wrong to ruin this image by giving a doll a ken-like "nub". That just isnt how a body is supposed to look...

 

I am going to use my doll as a drawing model when she arives. I was looking aty dolls on the computer when a friend was over and there was a picture of a naked doll and my friend was like :O *blushes turns away* i was like...?
lol. It's a doll. my mom saw mand shes like they're anotomicly correct? cute! lol

 

I think there's a limit to how big bjd boy bits can be, or there would be issues with pants fitting. Kind of like the breast shape on girl dolls, heh heh. My AR LF boy is small, but really quite detailed (he's uncircumcized). I think not having genitals is strange. It gives dolls a strange shape and is just, well, odd. And the whole thing is silly, anyway. Everyone knows, including little kids, that they have parts. I don't know what parents and doll manufacturers think they're protecting their kids from. The USA is a strange place sometimes.

 

I think it has to do with culture, Japanese, Koreans, Asians, whatever, just arent as "zomg eewww whats that bump...!" as Westerners are. And honestly, I find it odd to hide it, especially when the majority of collectore "should" already know...?

 

I remember when I was little my mom showed me her old barbies... old ken has a penis and I remember being very confused as to why mine didn't, it didn't really bother me at a young age... I think I turned out okay from seeing that xD ?

 

hmpfh! *picks up headless boy 60 cm obitsu mod and hugs him...*

 

That's practically the reason I think why they are, or should be, anatomically correct. With all the details put into the dolls, it just seems wrong not to go all the way.

 

Jeez, I don't know what to say. I've often wondered this myself. I like the answer "It seperates them from other dolls", really.

But you know what, these dolls are so detailed, I think it just fits to go all the way. They've got fingernails, toenails, eyelashes and separate hairs on their eyebrows. Why not give them their "private parts"?