Yeah that's the way I see it as well. But I actually saw this first hand on a relationships forum a while back.SynthetikReality95 wrote:Oh, then I guess sites should stop allowing pictures of real women. Because you know, someone could stick a dick in her.Stewie studmuffin wrote: Even if a doll is fully clothed and just sitting there minding her own business; she is considered indecent just because she is a sex doll and someone could theoretically stick his dick in her.
The people blocking dolls from being shown would not hesitate to call that a sexist remark, but to me, there's no difference. What is the difference? One is meat one is plastic, big deal. A photo or video of a doll is nothing different than one of a human. Block nudity if your site is family-friendly, whatever, but dressed? really?
A guy started a thread about how he was tired of women treating him like crap and that he was giving up and getting a $3,000 sex doll.
He even posted a few pictures of some really nice looking silicone ladies to show the type of doll that he had in mind. There was absolutely NO nudity and the dolls weren't even wearing anything "revealing."
Although they were very pretty, they were dressed like they were going to an office job or to teach sunday school.
Well the thread got locked in just a few hours because it was deemed "indecent."
And gone completely by the next day.
Apparently that thread had gotten a lot of attention during its brief lifespan since another guy started a thread titled "What happened to the thread about the $3,000 sex doll?" (Dude must have wanted one himself!)
This guy's thread didn't show any pictures at all but was still shut down in short order with the poster getting a lecture from the mods telling him not to start threads asking what happened to other threads.
I have to say that I was shocked by their reaction.
But then again I shouldn't have been since that site is run by a bunch of radical feminists along with a few white knights and manginas.
I guess they thought that these conservatively dressed dolls were "objectifying women" in some way.
Which is pretty dumb considering they have allowed pictures of real women dressed in ways that left little to the imagination.
Perhaps objectification of women is just fine as long as it's the women who are objectifying themselves?