Academic Survey - Help us to address myths about doll owners

[Nescio50]

Please guys, your points have been made. Please stop this.

The OP was vetted by TDF Management. This is no trolling, no bad intentions. TDF Management have been in touch with both the student and the lecturer. We know who they are and we know about their intentions. We allowed them to post on TDF. The contents of the survey is theirs -we don't interfere with their research.

Discussion is allowed, but please don't derail this thread. Thank you!

[haremlover]

It's appropriate to mention that on another thread viewtopic.php?f=206&t=123406&p=1662660#p1662660 the leader of the research has given more details.

Best wishes

Harem

[PDutus]

It's appropriate to mention that on another thread viewtopic.php?f=206&t=123406&p=1662660#p1662660 the leader of the research has given more details.

Best wishes

Harem

Thank you Harem, that link was very helpful

[Serene-Art-Fan-283]

"Which age category are you sexually attracted to?
adults, children, both"

I do have to say I was surprised to see that on the survey

I'm still a newbie here, so forgive me, please, if I'm "bumping an old thread" and if that's bad - but I simply had to comment on what I read, in that quote above. Holy bleep, that's offensive - that and the other blatant misandry shown in some of the other questions on that supposedly unbiased survey. No wonder some people questioned the agenda, the lack of self-awareness, and so on, of that study?! I am glad I participated in Ken Hanson's Doll Community Survey, but I'm also glad I gave this one a miss!

Suggested alternate questions (sarcasm intended) for any follow-up studies by the team who thought that questions in regards to doll lovers being deviants or monsters, were appropriate:

= = = = =

"Were you, as a child, long before you became a doll owner or a prospective buyer, subjected to mind-boggling amounts of over-the-top religious zealotry? Did you otherwise suffer from other forms of narcissistic abuse which all too often masquerades as common parenting skills?"

- or -

"Were you, as a child before you became a doll owner or prospective buyer, shamed for simply being born male? Were you constantly accused, as a member of that group, of awful things that had no actual basis in fact, such as but not limited to the idiotic / insane idea that all males are rapists? Were you constantly told that no matter what you did, you had to 'please others'? That other people mattered, and you did not - and that to be considered human, you had to do better or do more, or just hand over everything you ever made or earned, to some blithering ingrates who were born miserable, and were determined to remain that way?"

- or -

"Were you, at any point in your life, as a doll owner or prospective buyer, repeatedly told that you were considered to be a member of group considered to be Sexually Entitled, because you were born male? Did this type of accusation occur precisely because you were the exact opposite: in other words, that you chose NOT to let Sexually Entitled people (such as but not limited to Gold Diggers) have unquestioned and immediate and repeated access to your body, your mind, your home, your belongings, or sundry types of 'cash and prizes' - all while said people projected their various sickening faults onto a person who only wanted to be left alone, in peace and quiet?"

- or -

"Do you have a drawer full of disembodied penis-like items in various shapes, sizes, colors, and degrees of Shore Hardness certification, which you totally disassociate from thinking of as being clearly symbolic of male castration, or of representing cold-blooded sexual violence directed, albeit symbolically, towards all men?"

= = = = =

Apologies to group members if this kind of sarcasm offends. Just wanted to get it off of my chest, after reading through this thread, and trying to wrap my head around the misandry I'm seeing, in the survey. (Special apologies on that last question - I'm actually a fan of Betty Dodson's work, as a Feminist author who was long associated with liberating women's sexuality, and making women not be dependent on men. But come on ... how is men liberating themselves, somehow a crime?!)

It boggles my mind what passes for science, these days. ("Piled Higher and Deeper," indeed!)

I wish I could easily find the web link I once had, which talked about the huge amount of survey results and/or study results, which were NOT able to be reproduced, when independent researchers made the attempt to separate the "wheat from the chaff". Oh well. Sigh. Whatever.

[NormalHuman]

I wanted to help.. and I went to this survey with every intention of taking it, but I couldn't make it past the 3rd date rape scenario question in a row up front. it was just too distasteful to read and respond to more. I am sure there are people who managed to get through this.. but wow. I am curious if you are tracking how many people started and did not complete the survey and are considering a followup with some changes in the scenarios and questions? or maybe this is exactly what you intended? How incomplete is your data gathered because of this?

[haremlover]

and you'll see the scene and miss it if you blink

[Serene-Art-Fan-283]

I wanted to help.. and I went to this survey with every intention of taking it, but I couldn't make it past the 3rd date rape scenario question in a row up front. it was just too distasteful to read and respond to more. I am sure there are people who managed to get through this.. but wow. I am curious if you are tracking how many people started and did not complete the survey and are considering a followup with some changes in the scenarios and questions? or maybe this is exactly what you intended? How incomplete is your data gathered because of this?

In my travels I found a Psychology Today article from Aug 12, 2018 ...

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog ... tay-single

... which was by Bella DePaulo Ph.D. with the article itself being called "The Truth About Why Some Men Stay Single - The recent study of why men stay single is massively flawed".

I'm including a link because I found the discussion of the flawed methodology quite fascinating. I'm shaking my head at both things. Whatever happened to a genuine search for knowledge, that is not being impeded by a search for ways to claim that confirmation bias is actually "scientific"? Just saying. I happen to love science, and I love learning. Truly scientific studies, I love! Not many people wander around on "Google Scholar" for the fun of it, but yeah, I have done that. But learning that some supposedly academically-inclined people cannot let any ideas into their heads, except the few ideas that are already in there, serves no useful purpose that I can see.

Again: I said this elsewhere on these forums, but I took Ken Hanson's doll community survey, and I saw nothing wrong with how he was handling the interviews, the questions, or the methods used. The "initial input" stages of his process, I didn't have any problem with, so it's not "all studies" that I raise an eyebrow about.

That said: it's hard for me to ignore the kinds of questions asked, that others mentioned here: about what age range of human beings a person is attracted to, for instance, or about date rape scenarios, or similar. It seems ludicrous to me, that such questions would even be asked, if no control group of equal size is going to be included in the study. Seems a lot like asking "How long had you actually been practicing witchcraft, prior to your move to Salem?" or "How many times did you actually get away with your various wife-beating activities?" or something equally offensive.

Some questions say more about the person asking them, then about the person who might reply.

For me, any question about being attracted to child-aged human beings would be offensive. I grew up in a very dangerous place, where both females and males feared sexual predators. So even the question, the way it was reportedly asked, would be troubling to me. Why not put it as two totally separate questions, instead of one? Like this: "Are you attracted to human beings above the age of consent?" could be one question. Ditto for "under the age of consent". THEN, if a person had answered "No" to BOTH of those, the computer could say something like, "I noticed that you said you were not attracted to either of those age groups. Did you actually mean that pair of answers, or was it some sort of error in how you answered those two questions?" with appropriate choices to direct a person back, if an error had been made; or to skip a heck of a lot of OTHER questions (to include any and all possible date rape scenarios) if the person actually meant "No" and "No". But there seems to be an assumption of "maybe one, maybe both" with no counter-balancing "maybe none of the above" as an available way to answer.

Or there is this thought: why is it apparently being assumed, in that study some of us question, that "any level of so-called attraction, no matter how slight, always equals action"?

Just because I like seeing a certain make and model of a car I find visually attractive does not mean I'm going to steal it, and take it for a joy ride. Lots of sports cars look great, sitting at the curb, but the moment I think about sitting inside, it hurts my knees to think of actually climbing in to that vehicle. Let alone, getting back out of it. Sometimes, attraction is weak at best, and has no chance of being acted upon. (And I'm referring here to adults -- just so we are clear on that!) Speaking only for myself: I think of all the B.S. associated with dealing with human beings, and the "attraction" goes away, no matter how good the visuals might have looked, for a moment or two.

Personally, I'm attracted to dolls because I am figuring out my attraction to what biology tells me I should want to be attracted to (that is, female homo sapiens of society's approved age range) isn't worth my investment, in the real world. Some visual attraction is there. But just barely. Where is it reflected in that study, that such a possibility is even (horrors!?) "possible"? Seems like the exact opposite is being assumed: that doll owners might be deviants, with no "brake pedals". My "brake pedal" works great. It's my "gas pedal" that may as well not be hooked up to anything?!

Another link: this one leading to Wikipedia's write-up of the "Dunning-Kruger Effect". It's the link I had mentioned on this page, a few comments above. (Make of the inclusion what you will.)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E ... ger_effect

In some cases, the questions being asked are HIGHLY indicative of a "confirmation bias" or other flaws in the testing procedures. Hanson's study wasn't "triggering" in that way, so I volunteered for his study; and I'm glad I did. I learned a lot about myself, by following the "vulnerability" advice of people like Brené Brown in her highly popular Ted Talk series about shame and vulnerability, etc.

[NormalHuman]

I wanted to help.. and I went to this survey with every intention of taking it, but I couldn't make it past the 3rd date rape scenario question in a row up front. it was just too distasteful to read and respond to more. I am sure there are people who managed to get through this.. but wow. I am curious if you are tracking how many people started and did not complete the survey and are considering a followup with some changes in the scenarios and questions? or maybe this is exactly what you intended? How incomplete is your data gathered because of this?

In my travels I found a Psychology Today article from Aug 12, 2018 ...

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog ... tay-single

... which was by Bella DePaulo Ph.D. with the article itself being called "The Truth About Why Some Men Stay Single - The recent study of why men stay single is massively flawed".

I'm including a link because I found the discussion of the flawed methodology quite fascinating. I'm shaking my head at both things. Whatever happened to a genuine search for knowledge, that is not being impeded by a search for ways to claim that confirmation bias is actually "scientific"? Just saying. I happen to love science, and I love learning. Truly scientific studies, I love! Not many people wander around on "Google Scholar" for the fun of it, but yeah, I have done that. But learning that some supposedly academically-inclined people cannot let any ideas into their heads, except the few ideas that are already in there, serves no useful purpose that I can see.

Honest academia and true desire for knowledge and learning is hard to come by certainly. It is one of the many reasons I dropped from school, and did not finish higher education. Aside from geology, and math classes, the rest had so much bias built in, with little to no desire to change, grow, challenge ideas.

[Serene-Art-Fan-283]

Honest academia and true desire for knowledge and learning is hard to come by certainly. It is one of the many reasons I dropped from school, and did not finish higher education. Aside from geology, and math classes, the rest had so much bias built in, with little to no desire to change, grow, challenge ideas.

Disgustingly so! Just one tiny example, proving or asserting our points, as found online:

https://phys.org/news/2018-07-beware-sc ... wrong.html

(Article: "Beware those scientific studies—most are wrong, researcher warns" by Ivan Couronne)

Question for the group:

I might regret asking this, but does anyone here have a list of that study's actual questions? My curiosity is getting the better of me, about the amount of possible bias that was introduced.

[NormalHuman]

Honest academia and true desire for knowledge and learning is hard to come by certainly. It is one of the many reasons I dropped from school, and did not finish higher education. Aside from geology, and math classes, the rest had so much bias built in, with little to no desire to change, grow, challenge ideas.

Disgustingly so! Just one tiny example, proving or asserting our points, as found online:

https://phys.org/news/2018-07-beware-sc ... wrong.html

(Article: "Beware those scientific studies—most are wrong, researcher warns" by Ivan Couronne)

Question for the group:

I might regret asking this, but does anyone here have a list of that study's actual questions? My curiosity is getting the better of me, about the amount of possible bias that was introduced.

The first several were basic stuff like age range, gender and sexual orientation. then it started asking if you like adults or children, men or women. then the first 3 "questions" were written date rape scenarios, "this is happening, and you do this, and she says no, and you continue..." and then it asked if it aroused me 0-10, and then it I would ever do such a thing 0-10, and then another question similar to would you do it? 0-10.

I just didn't want to read it anymore.. you remember that scene in Bladerunner where they are doing the test on Leon, and telling him "You reach down and you flip the tortoise over on its back, Leon. The tortoise lays on its back, its belly baking in the hot sun, beating its legs trying to turn itself over, but it can't. Not without your help. But you're not helping."

[Serene-Art-Fan-283]

I just didn't want to read it anymore.. you remember that scene in Bladerunner where they are doing the test on Leon, and telling him "You reach down and you flip the tortoise over on its back, Leon. The tortoise lays on its back, its belly baking in the hot sun, beating its legs trying to turn itself over, but it can't. Not without your help. But you're not helping."

I definitely remember that movie. I still have a copy of it on LaserDisc, as well as other formats.

From memory, the conversation continued more or less thus:

"What do you mean, I'm not helping?"

"I mean you're not helping. Why is that, Leon?"

Great movie!

And if I'm inferring correctly: no, studies that are so full of misandry that it's appalling, are not helping. Unless they're trying to get men like me to shake my head, walk away, and consider becoming a new MGTOW content provider. Then, sure: such man-hate is "helping" in that way.

[Serene-Art-Fan-283]

Please guys, your points have been made. Please stop this.

The OP was vetted by TDF Management. This is no trolling, no bad intentions. TDF Management have been in touch with both the student and the lecturer. We know who they are and we know about their intentions. We allowed them to post on TDF. The contents of the survey is theirs -we don't interfere with their research.

Discussion is allowed, but please don't derail this thread. Thank you!

In case what I'm doing violates the spirit of above, I'm going to chime in, "in advance" of any official complaints, with a follow-up type of a comment.

Honestly, from what I've seen to date of TDF and how it is managed, I have to wonder how such questions could have snuck by the management? Based on what I'm seeing of the questions that survey's people apparently actually asked, I have to wonder if the people doing the study did a "bait and switch" and showed TDF management "fake questions" that were softball ones? Then, perhaps, they (quite dishonestly) asked the kinds of offensive / man-hating stuff I'm seeing in this message thread, and the one about "Inviting a sidebar conversation about doll owner surveys"

https://www.dollforum.com/forum/viewtop ... 63&start=0

I say these things as a person who was, once upon a time, involved with Data Analysis. Pressure was constantly on people like me to "tell the story that management wanted told" - but I for one refused to do it. So they simply bypassed my desk, and handed the questionable stuff to others.

I have faith in TDF management. But something smells highly fishy, so I can't help wondering why so many people apparently had problems with this one group of supposedly above-board people?

Maybe it's just a "mystery for the ages"? But considering what I saw as a paid analyst, I have a lot of faith in the idea that "figures lie, and liars figure". And very little faith in many human beings - especially in situations where "scientific" studies are asking clearly-man-hating questions. Do I think TDF management would ever knowingly get involved? I do not. That leaves few options.

Apologies if I'm over-stepping. It's my intent to figure out what's going on, not to hurt TDF or any of its management team, or any of the members. My natural curiosity isn't letting me "let go".

[Drain Bammage]

I initiated the survey in good faith, without first reading the thread; and made it to the second or third page before i was like "yeah, no fuck off"

those questions do not pertain to me.
I don't seek children, nor do i seek to take advantage of people that are under the influence.

drunk, or drugged women have always been a major turn off to me.

so yeah, fuck off.

I can't believe this is on the board. This is offensive.

[NormalHuman]

If the researcher is reading these comments. I would strongly advise them to rewrite some of their questions. intersperse them a bit, so it isn't just back to back to back stuff like this. You can write and organize your questions in a way that does not make an implication on the reader, and make the survey possible to get through for the average person. That is my constructive criticism.

[Serene-Art-Fan-283]

I initiated the survey in good faith, without first reading the thread; and made it to the second or third page before i was like "yeah, no fuck off"

those questions do not pertain to me.
I don't seek children, nor do i seek to take advantage of people that are under the influence.

drunk, or drugged women have always been a major turn off to me.

so yeah, fuck off.

I can't believe this is on the board. This is offensive.

Sigh. Every comment that someone adds, makes this whole "study" seem like "witch hunt, by man-hating feminists". I'm not impressed with what I'm hearing, about the questions asked. I am coming to the conclusion, more and more, that TDF management was flat-out lied to, about the actual intent. Questions I would have, about this mess, would include:

(1.) Was TDF management given a list, in writing, up front, of the questions to be asked of TDF members? If not, why not? If yes, was every question numbered, so that any questions about the questions could be discussed, with precision, down the road, by TDF members and/or managers? I'm talking here about general openness; general transparency. Red flags would seem to apply, and heavily so, to any supposedly "above board" and "on the up and up" survey "done totally in secret" -- and that really should be obvious to anyone living in today's highly narcissistic society.

(2.) If the answer to the question above is not, then what about the various manufacturers represented here: did any of them see a written list, in advance of this study being "vouched for" by TDF managers? A written list with numbered questions on it, coming from one specific person or source, to another person: in other words, was a "chain of custody" established re: the questions?

(3.) If no one saw the list of questions, in writing, up front, then why the very public pats on the heads of the people running the "clearly not open and transparent" survey? Isn't that asking for a huge amount of egg on people's face, if the interviewers fail to live up to whatever "impression management" skills they might have had? (Side note: Ken Hanson had no problems whatsoever handing me the entire list of what he asked everyone, in writing, before I even decided if I wanted to be, for sure, interviewed.) Assuming the questions are all "blind" -- that is, done on a "trust us, we're honest, but we will not hand anyone written proof of our actual intent, up front" then why was that not a HUGE red flag? A better question along these lines might be: why isn't that "chain of custody" and "transparency" absolutely standard practice with every survey being done here?

(4.) Don't others see the potential for "divide and conquer" inherent in tricking managers into them vouching for something they have not even seen? The idea of how much trust might be lost, if any such thing (for whatever reason) blew up in someone's face? Am I the only person this paranoid, or has any of this kind of line of questioning actually occurred to anyone else? Seems like a big and un-fix-able nightmare, waiting to happen - on enough simultaneous levels that it hurts my head!?

(5.) To sort of echo what someone else said: how many people here started but did not finish the study? And of the ones that did not finish: was it a common reason for non-finishing that it felt like more of an indictment than an actual, unbiased study?

(6.) Whatever else others might want to chime in with, that I didn't already mention / think of.