Psychiatrist says doll owners are mentally ill

kris8 · Post by **kris8** » Thu Jun 04, 2015 11:11 pm

whats your take on this article?

http://yourhealth.asiaone.com/content/m ... ychiatrist

Orion · Post by **Orion** » Thu Jun 04, 2015 11:18 pm

kris8 wrote:whats your take on this article?

http://yourhealth.asiaone.com/content/m ... ychiatrist

I don't have a problem with a canned shrink thinking I'm mentally ill. Sit me down for the Myers & Briggs assessment 5 times and I will show 5 different results - Psychologists can only brainwash the incompetent. I will be financially and health wise better off with dolls then with the prescriptions psych meds he would try sell me - or going through a second divorce ($28,000 for the 1st one - can buy a lot of dolls for 28G). I will omit the percentage of women on psych meds that are driving men to dolls.

On a similar note. TDF made the top 30 on this moron's list of Most Disturbing Sites. http://www.complex.com/pop-culture/2013 ... doll-forum His justification: "But here's the thing: The users actually maintain seperate posting accounts FOR THEIR DOLLS". Any idiot with a computer can post whatever they want. We like dolls and I don't care if others think I'm crazy or disturbing.

Chronos · Post by **Chronos** » Thu Jun 04, 2015 11:26 pm

Good answer Orion

By his reasoning guys who enjoy porn are mentally ill too...

Btw you can rate the article at the bottom of the page...

samara78 · Post by **samara78** » Thu Jun 04, 2015 11:27 pm

They used to say that bdsm people were ill. They removed from the mental illness list some time ago.

We can only hope they will excersize the same ruling on love doll owners. We keep the company we wish to have.

We share our hobby with who we choose.

And for the most part this is the best group of people anyone could hope for. So a hearty cheer

for doll owners ,doll friends,and doll lovers everywhere.
Personally could not ask for a nicer group of doll friends.

DarkOne · Post by **DarkOne** » Thu Jun 04, 2015 11:28 pm

Orion: Nuff said. I would rather be thought mentally ill, enjoy my life with my dolls and be avoided by every other human on earth then deal with another mentally ill female.

Orion · Post by **Orion** » Thu Jun 04, 2015 11:31 pm

On a similar note. TDF made the top 30 on this moron's list of Most Disturbing Sites. http://www.complex.com/pop-culture/2013 ... doll-forum His justification: "But here's the thing: The users actually maintain seperate posting accounts FOR THEIR DOLLS". Any idiot with a computer can post whatever they want. We like dolls and I don't care if others think we're crazy or disturbing.

Xephyr · Post by **Xephyr** » Thu Jun 04, 2015 11:53 pm

Anyone who goes by the name "Dr Wang" already loses out on a lot of credibility for making statements.

karpos · Post by **karpos** » Fri Jun 05, 2015 12:03 am

As we would expect from any media outlet the article is written in a manner that supports their biased worldview. What the doctor actually says isn't.

If a person can achieve arousal only exclusively through dolls, then it is agalmatophilia, which is considered a psychiatric condition," he said.

He isn't saying that being with a doll is a psychiatric illness. He is saying that only being able to achieve arousal through dolls is a condition, much like only being able to achieve arousal through pain is a condition. Most doll users don't even fall into the category to start with since we can achieve arousal without a doll. The journalist is the one who makes the leap into saying it is an illness which is very different from a condition in the psychiatric world.

The doctor also says this.

But if it's for their own personal use and behind closed doors, then it is okay.

Another doctor quoted in the article says this.

He believes that such artificial form of companionship might not be a bad thing if used as a form of psychiatric treatment, but added that this was only an educated guess.

The way the article reads it seems like an over-enthusiastic editor rewriting a piece to try to portray a possibly neutral or positive article into a negative one. The last quote is actually a fairly forward thinking idea. I am not trying to defend the article just point out that it seems the doctor's words have been altered or quoted out of context to fit a certain world-view.

katiesBoyfriend · Post by **katiesBoyfriend** » Fri Jun 05, 2015 12:18 am

For years, people have said I'm crazy.....

Orion · Post by **Orion** » Fri Jun 05, 2015 12:24 am

karpos wrote:As we would expect from a conservative media outlet the article is written in a negative manner. What the doctor actually says isn't.

Let's not bring political alignment into this, as doll owners my be affiliated with either party. Nothing good can come from making politically biased statements. Let's just keep it to doll owners vs. the doll owner haters. Pretty sure conservatives might be into dolls as well. Just say'n.

IanEvans · Post by **IanEvans** » Fri Jun 05, 2015 12:43 am

karpos wrote:...words have been altered or quoted out of context to fit a certain world-view.

And with that, you've summed up just about every article written about doll owners.

What particularly struck me was that bit towards the end where they claim some people have dolls out of a desire for complete control of their partners and a lack of empathy for their needs. Do they have any evidence to back up this claim? Has anyone on this forum ever known a doll owner who fits that profile? That sounds like something you'd hear from a radical feminist (or anyone else who prefers to assume the worst about whatever they don't care to understand), not a health care professional.

It's also worth noting that they admit they've never actually seen a case of agalmatophila...probably because it's very likely that it doesn't exist.

Arousal from a statue or mannequin (or a doll) is no different than from any other erotic artwork, but just because it's a three dimensional object that once can interact with physically rather just a flat image to view while masturbating, that suddenly makes it a paraphila? Like, stroking yourself with a Fleshlight while looking at a poster of a naked woman is fine, but if you cut a hole in the poster and mount the Fleshlight in it...well, you obviously have an unhealthy fetish for women made of paper.

karpos · Post by **karpos** » Fri Jun 05, 2015 12:46 am

Orion wrote:Let's not bring political alignment into this, as doll owners my be affiliated with either party. Nothing good can come from making politically biased statements. Let's just keep it to doll owners vs. the doll owner haters. Pretty sure conservatives might be into dolls as well. Just say'n.

Sorry was not using conservative in the political sense but in the societal progress sense. Edited to reflect that all news is biased. Thanks for catching me on that. I tend to think of ALL politicians as conservative since they just want to preserve their status quo and line their pockets with my money rather than do anything useful.

Orion · Post by **Orion** » Fri Jun 05, 2015 12:53 am

karpos wrote: Sorry was not using conservative in the political sense but in the societal progress sense. Edited to reflect that all news is biased. Thanks for catching me on that. I tend to think of ALL politicians as conservative since they just want to preserve their status quo and line their pockets with my money rather than do anything useful.

Politicians are just trying to line their own pockets? When did this happen??

himypeace · Post by **himypeace** » Fri Jun 05, 2015 1:13 am

Every single creative in the earth is ill, that's why they keep dying

LovesBlackWomen · Post by **LovesBlackWomen** » Fri Jun 05, 2015 3:13 am

I don't care what people think of me. I have no friends and no family, so I don't have to worry about ruining my relationships. Women don't care about me, so why should I worry about their opinions of me. They already don't like me, think I'm weird, so I can't make things any worse. Doll sex is not a choice for me, it's my only option. Well, I suppose there are other choices, like prostitutes, Playboy Magazines, Adult Theaters.