Research seeking to address media myths about doll owners

[Pron]

Isn't this the same topic like this one which caused a lot of trouble on different forums were we were called "doll users" to give information to a professor for child abuse and sexual crime?
For me it looks like someone wants to find arguments to relate doll ownership with sexual crime.


viewtopic.php?f=141&t=97835&start=28
With the professor for sexual crime Craig Harper:

Craig’s research is linked to the ongoing activities taking place within the Sexual Offences, Crime & Misconduct Research Unit (SOCAMRU) at NTU.

Weren't you the guy who was also told to leave the CRD forum already a year ago because of this shit you want to put us into?

a list of Dr. Craig Harper's listed publications:


HARPER, C.A. and PERKINS, C., 2018. Reporting child sexual abuse within religious settings: challenges and future directions. Child Abuse Review, 27 (1), pp. 30-41. ISSN 0952-9136

HARPER, C.A., HOGUE, T.E. and BARTELS, R.M., 2017. Attitudes towards sexual offenders: what do we know, and why are they important? Aggression and Violent Behavior, 34, pp. 201-213. ISSN 1359-1789

HARPER, C.A. and HARRIS, A.J., 2017. Applying moral foundations theory to understanding public views of sexual offending. Journal of Sexual Aggression, 23 (2), pp. 111-123. ISSN 1355-2600

HARPER, C.A. and HOGUE, T.E., 2017. Press coverage as a heuristic guide for social decision-making about sexual offenders. Psychology, Crime & Law, 23 (2), pp. 118-134. ISSN 1068-316X

HARPER, C.A. and BARTELS, R.M., 2016. Implicit theories and offender representativeness in judgments about sexual crime. Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment. ISSN 1079-0632

HARPER, C.A., BARTELS, R.M. and HOGUE, T.E., 2016. Reducing stigma and punitive attitudes toward pedophiles through narrative humanization. Sexual Abuse. ISSN 1079-0632 (Forthcoming)

HARPER, C.A. and BARTELS, R.M., 2016. The influence of implicit theories and offender characteristics on judgements of sexual offenders: a moderated mediation analysis. Journal of Sexual Aggression. ISSN 1355-2600 (Forthcoming)

HARPER, C.A. and HOGUE, T.E., 2015. The emotional representation of sexual crime in the national British press. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 34 (1), pp. 3-24. ISSN 0261-927X

HARPER, C.A. and HOGUE, T.E., 2015. Measuring public perceptions of sex offenders: reimagining the Community Attitudes Toward Sex Offenders (CATSO) scale. Psychology, Crime & Law, 21 (5), pp. 452-470. ISSN 1068-316X

HARPER, C.A. and HOGUE, T.E., 2014. A prototype-willingness model of sexual crime discourse in England and Wales. The Howard Journal of Criminal Justice, 53 (5), pp. 511-524. ISSN 2059-1098

HARPER, C. and TREADWELL, J., 2013. Counterblast: punitive Payne, justice campaigns, and popular punitivism - where next for 'public criminology'? The Howard Journal of Criminal Justice, 52 (2), pp. 216-222. ISSN 2059-1098

HARPER, C.A., 2012. In pursuit of the beast: undergraduate attitudes towards sex offenders and implications for society, rehabilitation and British psychology education. Internet Journal of Criminology. ISSN 2045-6743

[Justforfun2]

Hum sounds like Dr. Craig Harper's may have a sick obsession himself, and is looking for answer to his infliction.

Isn't this the same topic like this one which caused a lot of trouble on different forums were we were called "doll users" to give information to a professor for child abuse and sexual crime?
For me it looks like someone wants to find arguments to relate doll ownership with sexual crime.


viewtopic.php?f=141&t=97835&start=28
With the professor for sexual crime Craig Harper:

Craig’s research is linked to the ongoing activities taking place within the Sexual Offences, Crime & Misconduct Research Unit (SOCAMRU) at NTU.

Weren't you the guy who was also told to leave the CRD forum already a year ago because of this shit you want to put us into?

a list of Dr. Craig Harper's listed publications:


HARPER, C.A. and PERKINS, C., 2018. Reporting child sexual abuse within religious settings: challenges and future directions. Child Abuse Review, 27 (1), pp. 30-41. ISSN 0952-9136

HARPER, C.A., HOGUE, T.E. and BARTELS, R.M., 2017. Attitudes towards sexual offenders: what do we know, and why are they important? Aggression and Violent Behavior, 34, pp. 201-213. ISSN 1359-1789

HARPER, C.A. and HARRIS, A.J., 2017. Applying moral foundations theory to understanding public views of sexual offending. Journal of Sexual Aggression, 23 (2), pp. 111-123. ISSN 1355-2600

HARPER, C.A. and HOGUE, T.E., 2017. Press coverage as a heuristic guide for social decision-making about sexual offenders. Psychology, Crime & Law, 23 (2), pp. 118-134. ISSN 1068-316X

HARPER, C.A. and BARTELS, R.M., 2016. Implicit theories and offender representativeness in judgments about sexual crime. Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment. ISSN 1079-0632

HARPER, C.A., BARTELS, R.M. and HOGUE, T.E., 2016. Reducing stigma and punitive attitudes toward pedophiles through narrative humanization. Sexual Abuse. ISSN 1079-0632 (Forthcoming)

HARPER, C.A. and BARTELS, R.M., 2016. The influence of implicit theories and offender characteristics on judgements of sexual offenders: a moderated mediation analysis. Journal of Sexual Aggression. ISSN 1355-2600 (Forthcoming)

HARPER, C.A. and HOGUE, T.E., 2015. The emotional representation of sexual crime in the national British press. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 34 (1), pp. 3-24. ISSN 0261-927X

HARPER, C.A. and HOGUE, T.E., 2015. Measuring public perceptions of sex offenders: reimagining the Community Attitudes Toward Sex Offenders (CATSO) scale. Psychology, Crime & Law, 21 (5), pp. 452-470. ISSN 1068-316X

HARPER, C.A. and HOGUE, T.E., 2014. A prototype-willingness model of sexual crime discourse in England and Wales. The Howard Journal of Criminal Justice, 53 (5), pp. 511-524. ISSN 2059-1098

HARPER, C. and TREADWELL, J., 2013. Counterblast: punitive Payne, justice campaigns, and popular punitivism - where next for 'public criminology'? The Howard Journal of Criminal Justice, 52 (2), pp. 216-222. ISSN 2059-1098

HARPER, C.A., 2012. In pursuit of the beast: undergraduate attitudes towards sex offenders and implications for society, rehabilitation and British psychology education. Internet Journal of Criminology. ISSN 2045-6743

[SgtScottles]

Took the survey, it appears to be geared toward finding results that indicate that doll owners are 1. Pedophiles, 2. Rapists, 3. Violent and Degrading to Women.
The survey is a complete load of ********, don't bother taking it, anything but perfect answers just gives them the rope they need to hang us.

[Sian_E]

As a previous Bachelor of Science student of a Swedish university I highly recommend that you start off with an exploratory qualitative study such as interviews and then employ content analysis to discover possible categories that you could then hypothesize and then test with more quantitative studies such as your survey.

The categorization test has tons of semantic assumptions. For example, why would "Power" necessarily need to be categorized as "Violence"? Also, I don't think the media will ever really accept sub-cultures, it just not their thing, whether it being bronies, furries, doll ownership, hypnosis porn, and whatnot. One reason for this is that it would remove their possibility to report "sensational news" if they suddenly started to accept these "underground sub-cultures".

All this said, thank you very much though for your interest in taking the first baby-steps in giving the doll ownership community a more fair and balanced perspective. At the same time, you are probably very aware of the Confirmation Bias and Beliefs in general so many people outside of this community have already made up their minds what to think of all of this and even research, I do not think, wouldn't change their minds about it.

This kind of "underground" community is something you need to get engaged with on a personal level (which is why I recommend interviews) to really get a less biased perspective of it.

Yes - I completely agree. We actually are running qualitative interviews alongside this survey. Our long-term aim is to be able to present the stories of doll owners, but we are interested in this initial quantitative survey in order to very quickly address some of the media myths that are prevalent about this community, hence the focus here on risk/sex (it is only by asking these questions that we can present data that directly challenge these myths, before building on this with our qualitative data to begin to build a more accurate picture.

If you would be interested in taking part in an interview, please do get in touch, either via the forum or via email (craig.harper@ntu.ac.uk).

[Sian_E]

Took the survey, it appears to be geared toward finding results that indicate that doll owners are 1. Pedophiles, 2. Rapists, 3. Violent and Degrading to Women.
The survey is a complete load of ********, don't bother taking it, anything but perfect answers just gives them the rope they need to hang us.

I completely understand this concern. However, these are not the aims. Yes, the survey does ask questions about sexual risk (and age/sex of attraction, because we are comparing those who are sexually attracted to both adults and children, and those who own both adult and child dolls). This, as stated previously, is to identity whether (or, more accurately, under what circumstances) doll ownership is associated with sexual risk. Like pornography, my starting point is that doll ownership will not be associated with risk as a general rule. However, there will be some psychological characteristics that interact with doll ownership that do predict this. We are actively fighting against the 'pedophile' / 'rapist' myth that surrounds doll ownership, and wish to present data that directly contradicts this myth.

[Sian_E]

Isn't this the same topic like this one which caused a lot of trouble on different forums were we were called "doll users" to give information to a professor for child abuse and sexual crime?
For me it looks like someone wants to find arguments to relate doll ownership with sexual crime.


viewtopic.php?f=141&t=97835&start=28
With the professor for sexual crime Craig Harper:

Craig’s research is linked to the ongoing activities taking place within the Sexual Offences, Crime & Misconduct Research Unit (SOCAMRU) at NTU.

Weren't you the guy who was also told to leave the CRD forum already a year ago because of this shit you want to put us into?

a list of Dr. Craig Harper's listed publications:


HARPER, C.A. and PERKINS, C., 2018. Reporting child sexual abuse within religious settings: challenges and future directions. Child Abuse Review, 27 (1), pp. 30-41. ISSN 0952-9136

HARPER, C.A., HOGUE, T.E. and BARTELS, R.M., 2017. Attitudes towards sexual offenders: what do we know, and why are they important? Aggression and Violent Behavior, 34, pp. 201-213. ISSN 1359-1789

HARPER, C.A. and HARRIS, A.J., 2017. Applying moral foundations theory to understanding public views of sexual offending. Journal of Sexual Aggression, 23 (2), pp. 111-123. ISSN 1355-2600

HARPER, C.A. and HOGUE, T.E., 2017. Press coverage as a heuristic guide for social decision-making about sexual offenders. Psychology, Crime & Law, 23 (2), pp. 118-134. ISSN 1068-316X

HARPER, C.A. and BARTELS, R.M., 2016. Implicit theories and offender representativeness in judgments about sexual crime. Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment. ISSN 1079-0632

HARPER, C.A., BARTELS, R.M. and HOGUE, T.E., 2016. Reducing stigma and punitive attitudes toward pedophiles through narrative humanization. Sexual Abuse. ISSN 1079-0632 (Forthcoming)

HARPER, C.A. and BARTELS, R.M., 2016. The influence of implicit theories and offender characteristics on judgements of sexual offenders: a moderated mediation analysis. Journal of Sexual Aggression. ISSN 1355-2600 (Forthcoming)

HARPER, C.A. and HOGUE, T.E., 2015. The emotional representation of sexual crime in the national British press. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 34 (1), pp. 3-24. ISSN 0261-927X

HARPER, C.A. and HOGUE, T.E., 2015. Measuring public perceptions of sex offenders: reimagining the Community Attitudes Toward Sex Offenders (CATSO) scale. Psychology, Crime & Law, 21 (5), pp. 452-470. ISSN 1068-316X

HARPER, C.A. and HOGUE, T.E., 2014. A prototype-willingness model of sexual crime discourse in England and Wales. The Howard Journal of Criminal Justice, 53 (5), pp. 511-524. ISSN 2059-1098

HARPER, C. and TREADWELL, J., 2013. Counterblast: punitive Payne, justice campaigns, and popular punitivism - where next for 'public criminology'? The Howard Journal of Criminal Justice, 52 (2), pp. 216-222. ISSN 2059-1098

HARPER, C.A., 2012. In pursuit of the beast: undergraduate attitudes towards sex offenders and implications for society, rehabilitation and British psychology education. Internet Journal of Criminology. ISSN 2045-6743

I am the same researcher, yes. However, if you access the survey (and all of the materials associated with it), you will find mentions of 'user' are no longer present (with 'owner' used instead). This is directly in line with the feedback received by members of this forum. The survey last year was a learning curve, and we continue to learn from the community. I have no diea what the CRD forum is though, so maybe that's somebody else?

As for the research link, my work has been associated with SOCAMRU. This is because my work has historically looked at attitudes towards sexual offenders (again looking at media myths, and how to improve reporting practices). This work, however, is not associated with SOCAMRU, as there is no focus on an offending population. Thank you for linking to my prior publications - those who read these will recognize that they are focused around a rational approach to discussing these controversial issues. Sex doll ownership is another topic that I am interested in studying more rationally, and once again, the only way to do this is to as difficult questions and actually present data about common myths. I would encourage you to complete the survey, rather than rely on historical posts that, admittedly, were naive. Thank you.

[Sian_E]

I took the survey and it seems to me the questions are too focused on emotional/sexual relationships.

The survey does not address in-depth the subject of doll ownership for non-sexual purposes.
There are many doll owners who collect dolls because they like dolls, action figures, statues, figurines, etc.
One question asks how many sex dolls you own, but does not ask if you own others, such as action figures, etc.
It does not ask (if you have more than one), if you prefer one over the other. Are you exclusive with that one?

Questions address the existence of various fetishes, but do not delve into the experience of sex with a doll:
How does it make you feel?
How does it compare to other sexual experiences you have had?
Do you enjoy cuddling/snuggling, or just having someone in your bed?

The same is true regarding having the doll for companionship.
Does the doll stay in your bed, or is it with you while you work (at home) or watching TV?
Do you take the doll with you for recreational activities, (fishing, boating, picnics, etc.)?

Maybe your doll is displayed as a work of art, such as for photography, modeling, or just as a life-like statue/decoration, (no different from a nude oil painting).
Questions ask if you stare or leer at other people, but do not ask why.
Do you enjoy viewing the human body for its beauty (i.e. non-sexually)?

In my opinion, lumping all doll owners into the same group with results focused upon sexual/emotional results, will not give accurate findings reflecting issues of doll ownership.

As a hypnotherapist, (certified in the US and the UK), I found the word association section problematic.

If a survey is asking what you think, it should not program your responses by telling you that your answer is incorrect.
For example, you MUST accept that "breasts" is categorized as "Arousing", while "eyes" is "Non-Arousing". What if I am "aroused" by beautiful eyes? What if I am not attracted to breasts? (I am, but that is not my point).
"Power" cannot be accepted as "Non-Violent". I do not think of power as being violent and can give many examples of non-violent power.
By repeatedly forcing a certain term into a certain category, you are not accepting the participant's association, but programming them and training them to respond in a certain way.

Although I applaud the authors of the study for their research, I think the scope of the study is too narrow and the results will be misleading.

Thank you for this.

Yes - this survey is limited in scope as it seeks to address some very specific media myths. However, we are running anonymous interviews, too, where we explore some of the deeper and broader issues around doll ownership - themes similar to those you mention in your comment. These will then be used to explore other topics in more depth in subsequent surveys. If you would be interested in taking part in an anonymous interview, please do get in touch via the forum, or by email (craig.harper@ntu.ac.uk).

[Sian_E]

Many thanks to those who have completed the survey so far, and I hope those who have taken part in interviews have had a positive experience (please share these below if this is the case!).

There is still time to take part, so please consider doing so.

[Mcupplease]

If the researcher does work in the area of sexual offenders and re offenders I have a comment to pass on.

I have often pondered, would a small sex doll of the right description lead to an escalation or a significant reduction in pedophilia?

I believe there are two opposing opinion camps on this subject

It seems to me the only way to be sure is a large-scale study randomizing convicted offenders soon-to-be-released into two groups. One group gets a doll and the other group doesn't. Over time then we will find out reoffending rates and be able to draw some real conclusions.

Any study short of this is just conversation. The group of individuals who are sexual offenders I would assume to be very heterogeneous, so a subgroup analysis could be the next level of Investigation once the results are in.

Disclaimer:
I am no expert and with no experience in this area. I'm just offering some thoughts.

[Daydream21]

If a survey is asking what you think, it should not program your responses by telling you that your answer is incorrect.

Right, it's not a survey, it's a test. I find this thing a bit bizarre.

To the OP, could you specifically explain what this word/category recall stuff has to do with your stated research goal?

[Stewie studmuffin]

I have often pondered, would a small sex doll of the right description lead to an escalation or a significant reduction in pedophilia?

This is a good question as doll opponents are always citing the potential of an escalation effect as a justification for banning dolls.
Is escalation a possibility? I suppose the possibility exists. But in my opinion, it's very unlikely. I say this because I see having a doll as the result of certain desires rather than those desires resulting from having a doll.
To put it another way, and using myself as an example, I have my dolls as a result of my desire for real women. So without that desire, I would have never gotten a doll in the first place.
My desire for real women has been with me for as long as I can remember. It didn't just appear when I got my first doll. So if there were any merit to the escalation effect, my desire for real women would have increased to unbearable levels since getting my dolls. But in actuality, the reverse has taken place. I'm less obsessed with real women than I have ever been at any point in my life. In fact. I haven't been affectionate with a real woman since 2011 and I'm perfectly fine with it. Because my dolls have been able to satiate my itch for female love and affection.
Now if I didn't have my dolls, I wouldn't be fine with it at all as I would be itching like a crazy person!
Of course comparing my desire for mature females to people bent toward pedophilia could very well be comparing apples to oranges. But if we are looking at it from a viewpoint of simple desire, then the same logic could still apply.
While my speculation is based upon logical conclusions, it's still speculation and more research needs to be conducted for a definite answer.

[smallcat]

Took the survey, it appears to be geared toward finding results that indicate that doll owners are 1. Pedophiles, 2. Rapists, 3. Violent and Degrading to Women.
The survey is a complete load of ********, don't bother taking it, anything but perfect answers just gives them the rope they need to hang us.

COugh cough, I have all 3 in my bible belt area... They dont have dolls, they just control/abuse their women, and kids...Considering I used work with law enforcement/court systems, the % stats are scary.. I would go into even further but it be a "political issue". Its only reason why dolls are "taboo" in the first place, look at the EU for example, look at the steps they are taking just to ban porn. Sometimes I dont like these silly discussions, since it usually involves around these "politic" grouping. Its that ugly elephant in the room with a pointy hat on it, no one can see it.

Its these sexually repressed rubes, who wants to place blame on people who use sex toys. Its reason why they have 1 2 3 has their highest rates of...

[Maviarab]

Craig, please feel free to PM to me to discuss further if still interested, upon careful consideration of others comments I am prepared to come down to meet you at the university (I'm not all that far away really) but I can't make it for a couple of weeks at least and would like to ask a couple of further questions before committing.

Thanks.

[Davidh]

Mr. Craig Harper

I read your article, "Let’s talk about sex (dolls)" I enjoyed it, for the most part, however, everyone is focused on doll ownership and how it could or could not lead to sexual violence against women or females of all ages. When the focus should be on violence against females in general, and who is the biggest perpetrator. Your answer will be men! Who kills the most, men, who steals, makes wars, etc. “Men?” Therefore, the question should not be whether doll owners are perverts or sexual predators but rather why men are, the way they are, especially the more powerful ones.

You will find most of these crimes here in America, as well as over their in Germany, UK etc. are none whites from diverse cultures, and a large percentage is from legal/illegal immigrants. The arena you are looking for is not here, but at the prisons where they hold sexual predators. Go ask them if they ever have owned a sex-doll, that should be the only question you need to ask. I would bet dollars to doughnuts most, if not nearly all of them, would say no. Furthermore, as an experiment, I think they need to provide dolls to the inmates and watch the rape will go down.

Upon, your research you will also find them from all backgrounds, including ex-cops, judges, politicians, from the upper class to the lower class. You will find that sex trafficking and its customers are mostly the upper class to the wealthy and more than likely none of them owned an artificial partner.

Furthermore, I shall suggest for experimental purpose that you purchase a cheap but a nice or realistic doll, dress it up. Sit it on your dresser, or a chair while you watch TV for about a week and just see how it feels, then let me know what kind of effect it had on you and how it may or may not have affected you in a positive or in a negative fashion. Afterwards, take it and put it into a classroom, and watch to see the effect it has on the class. Then after a month remove it and ask the class how it affected them having it there, versus not having it there.

In conclusion, the answers to your question are elsewhere and should be put to all men and some women. Which I now ask, these question of you.

How many times in any given year where you are teaching a class, you found a student to be attractive and desirable, be it male or female?

How many flirted with you but you never yielded to these emotions or temptation?

Did you lust for some?

Did you have any control of these feelings other than not acting on impulse?

FYI, no I am not a doll owner, but some day I plan to be, I am here doing research myself and for some of your questioned to be answered you will also need to own one as well as befriend a doll owner. I can answer many of your questions, here you will find people in need of something, a little something special in there life, for one reason or another. Just like you and I do, except, they choose dolls or in some cases, dolls have chosen them and they are now apart of their world and blended into ones life.

They are no different from anybody else in the world, with the exception of those diehard sports fans, or those coin and stamp collectors that are willing to spend millions on just one worthless stamp, yet it gives them a million dollars worth of comfort, whereas as a doll gives many priceless amount of happiness and peace in their heart and souls. Yes you will find one or two that may obsess with their dolls, but most have a good heart, and they are good people and not wanting to harm anyone.

What runs rampant in other people heads, that whishes to control dolls, and talk foul about doll owners, it is a sickness in their head and theirs alone. They imagine all kinds of things, convincing themselves and others a lie, until there is hysteria among them and they will only believe what they want and that is their infliction. To me that make them very dangerous, and a danger to our God given rights in the pursuit of Happiness. No one is attacking what makes them happy so why attack dolls and the people that enjoy them. The constitution is suppose to protect peoples freedoms, their liberties, and our God given right in the pursuit of Happiness. It is not for them, me or you to decide what make another person happy and it is not hurting anyone, yet you got these people who want to control others with the crap that runs in their mind and most of it is imagination.

Cheers.

Excellent response! I think Craig needs to take onboard your very detailed and informative response.