The Doll Forum

To be perfectly honest I have a hard time distinguishing between the body-to-head ratio of the 12 vs 25 in the example given. And, I think it would be near impossible at closer age range of say 16 vs 18. Personally I find it more objectionable (not quite really the right word since I do not object to it myself) the conversions on the My Size Barbies being shown here than to any of the DS 132cm photos I have seen. Clearly one is meant to be a "childs" toy and the other is not. (I do agree that the 100 cm doll is meant to represent child, and maybe the manufacturer has stated as much about the 132 cm dolls as well.) I don't really see it with the 132 cm doll. Especially when clothed I think that would remove any legal issues but maybe not satisfy some social mores. I get that this is an "adults" only forum and as such there is a need to error on the side of caution and respect TDF managements right to make a decision on this matter. However, it seems to be that one doll is being singled out and the 132 cm model had some very nice artistic photos that I hardly believe anyone could object to. (mainly 100 cm model should not be allowed to be shown in any state of undress, along with some other Japanese dolls). As many have pointed out there are many dolls still allowed that could be considered border line and which can go either way. I myself have 136 cm Candygirl (only 4 cm taller then DS) and Candy8teens which are shorter (the Lolly doll especially had a big head relative to body height, but also big boobs ). I think some of the Orient Doll models are already forbidden (Nano and Lalas) and would hate to be forced out should someone decide one day that the Candygirl or C8T is "too young". I agree that this should not become a black & white issue (as matter of fact I find most all "zero" tolerance policies asinine), subjectivity matters, as such why ban the dolls outright? Why not say we will not allow "nudes" or "erotic" photos of these doll? While I understand that TDF is founded as a "sex doll" forum, there are many people here with varied interest (mini-dolls, mannequins, etc.). Maybe, its time for a bifurcated forum, with an "adults only" section and an a "non-erotic" section where said dolls would be allowed (fully clothed, art photos, etc). Just MHO, thanks for listening

+1 (as a photographer I has to say that)

Mr-Smith wrote:To be perfectly honest I have a hard time distinguishing between the body-to-head ratio of the 12 vs 25 in the example given. And, I think it would be near impossible at closer age range of say 16 vs 18. Personally I find it more objectionable (not quite really the right word since I do not object to it myself) the conversions on the My Size Barbies being shown here than to any of the DS 132cm photos I have seen. Clearly one is meant to be a "childs" toy and the other is not. (I do agree that the 100 cm doll is meant to represent child, and maybe the manufacturer has stated as much about the 132 cm dolls as well.) I don't really see it with the 132 cm doll. Especially when clothed I think that would remove any legal issues but maybe not satisfy some social mores. I get that this is an "adults" only forum and as such there is a need to error on the side of caution and respect TDF managements right to make a decision on this matter. However, it seems to be that one doll is being singled out and the 132 cm model had some very nice artistic photos that I hardly believe anyone could object to. (mainly 100 cm model should not be allowed to be shown in any state of undress, along with some other Japanese dolls). As many have pointed out there are many dolls still allowed that could be considered border line and which can go either way. I myself have 136 cm Candygirl (only 4 cm taller then DS) and Candy8teens which are shorter (the Lolly doll especially had a big head relative to body height, but also big boobs ). I think some of the Orient Doll models are already forbidden (Nano and Lalas) and would hate to be forced out should someone decide one day that the Candygirl or C8T is "too young". I agree that this should not become a black & white issue (as matter of fact I find most all "zero" tolerance policies asinine), subjectivity matters, as such why ban the dolls outright? Why not say we will not allow "nudes" or "erotic" photos of these doll? While I understand that TDF is founded as a "sex doll" forum, there are many people here with varied interest (mini-dolls, mannequins, etc.). Maybe, its time for a bifurcated forum, with an "adults only" section and an a "non-erotic" section where said dolls would be allowed (fully clothed, art photos, etc). Just MHO, thanks for listening

amen to that.

..>

I don't want to create any problems here,everyone knows my point of view about 132 cm ,I think that they look too young except often on Mexdollover's pictures ... but I found this pictures on TDF today :

... which is a very well done picture ( congrats to the photographer ) but that is a picture which proves that things are not so simple ...


( )

Mr-Smith wrote:While I understand that TDF is founded as a "sex doll" forum, there are many people here with varied interest (mini-dolls, mannequins, etc.). Maybe, its time for a bifurcated forum, with an "adults only" section and an a "non-erotic" section where said dolls would be allowed (fully clothed, art photos, etc). Just MHO, thanks for listening

I whole-heartedly agree with you
it is a sensible suggestion
+1 supporting this proposal

But like you've said, TDF is originally founded as a forum for sex doll owners
So maybe there are those who do not wish to see such transformation of TDF, which is understandable
If that is the case, then perhaps one day we may see another forum elsewhere created for non-erotic dolls/mannequins lovers/hobbyists, those who primarily interested in the artistic presentation of their dolls/mannequins, be they sex dolls or not
Afterall, IMHO there is no law stating that any life-size dolls must be used for sexual-purposes, be they built with or without sexual functions
(fact is, these days sex dolls are created with concerns exceeded pure sexual functionalities - just look at the levels of details the artists has put into their dolls' appearances)

There is nothing to be confused about if you go by the chart AlexKnight provided. He is highly responsible for the content that flows on this site. He, the owners and all of the mods do a decent job of keeping the globally illegal images off of this site. Why not use common sense and make eveybody's day a little bit easier by not posting shit that is questionable. By doing that you will protect the community by respecting the rules that were laid out before you when you signed on. Try posting images of a clearly sexually mature and arousing subject. Do you need an example of what is arousing? Here you go>>>

http://dollforum.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=90&t=30837 22,000 + views
http://dollforum.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=30047 5,000 + views
http://dollforum.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=30752 25,000 + views
http://dollforum.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=19222 18,000 + views
http://dollforum.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=27885 28,000 + views

Nothing really questionable on those threads at all. Those threads are clear cut and those are the type of threads that help built TDF.

You get the idea.

How about if people just post their pix somewhere else and provide a link?

eenie

louislaine31 wrote:..>

I don't want to create any problems here,everyone knows my point of view about 132 cm ,I think that they look too young except often on Mexdollover's pictures ... but I found this pictures on TDF today :

normal_EndlessBeauty.jpg

... which is a very well done picture ( congrats to the photographer ) but that is a picture which proves that things are not so simple ...


( )

Translated by google:

You forgot just one thing the doll shows you a picture of a doll making doll U.S. while DS is an Asian manufacturer ....

Original message:

Tu oublie juste une chose la poupée que tu montre en photo est une poupée de fabrication US alors que DS doll est un fabricant asiatique....

LAF ! ! ... !

Kusanagi wrote:

Mr-Smith wrote:While I understand that TDF is founded as a "sex doll" forum, there are many people here with varied interest (mini-dolls, mannequins, etc.). Maybe, its time for a bifurcated forum, with an "adults only" section and an a "non-erotic" section where said dolls would be allowed (fully clothed, art photos, etc). Just MHO, thanks for listening

I whole-heartedly agree with you
it is a sensible suggestion
+1 supporting this proposal

But like you've said, TDF is originally founded as a forum for sex doll owners
So maybe there are those who do not wish to see such transformation of TDF, which is understandable

We have discussed such a change in management in great detail, but changing TDF to a "doll art forum" which allows every kind of doll, would hurt the forum in more ways than one, and would probably be the end of it.
Most of the visitors come here for the sexual aspect of the dolls, just look at the Doll Album, and especially, which pictures are viewed most. It will never be the fully clothed pictures that receive the most views.

Also, there could never be discussions about the sexual aspects of the dolls in such a forum. Which would be like a car forum, that could only talk about the bodywork, but not the power of the engine.

Not to mention the sales... how many times do buyers ask for shots of the crotch and ass of the dolls, just to see if their sexual function is okay. Again, like a car forum, which wouldn't allow pics of the engine.

Just creating a section for such dolls will not help, because they would still be shown on an adult-only sex doll forum.
For such a separation to occur, there would need to be a completely new forum, with no age restrictions, and such a forum would simply not be viable, as the amount of visitors would be minimal.
And visitors are the people who pay for the forum in the end, because advertisers don't pay, if there is no public for them to advertise to.

Although some people use their dolls exclusively for art, the majority use them for their intended purpose.

Imagine... if high-end sex doll manufacturers changed their dolls, to permanently remove their sexual function... do you think, they would stay in business much longer?
Abyss for example, started as a posable silicone mannequin manufacturer, but they changed their product, because of the demand for sexual capability.
If they had kept to their original idea, they wouldn't have become the company they are now, and maybe, would have run out of business by now.

Sex sells, it always has, and always will.

Good post ...

laf_ange wrote:You forgot just one thing the doll shows you a picture of a doll making doll U.S. while DS is an Asian manufacturer ....

I sincerely hope that things don't go like this ...

J'espère de tout coeur que les choses ne se passent pas ainsi ...

I saw this coming a mile away, and so I dare not purchase one of those small DS dolls or even posted many pictures of my 80cm elf doll. I am not trying to pedo bash.

In my honest opinion, the face of the Cassi, MLD Head #2, 80cm Elf, 140cm Rose/Judy, candy 18 school girl, Ruby 13 face on a body with a small chest, virgin rose doll, 4woods elf, and nearly all of the Japanese small dolls and faces look too young. The MLD Head #1 looks grown up. The faces maybe young, but the body has to be adult meaning big tits. However, what about guys who like the small chest and body? Are they going to have to pay extra to get a very adult face to offset the young body? Even then, they can get a youthful face from producer x and put it on a body from producer y.

I believe that in eastern culture, most of the men find youth, innocence, and virginity to be sexy instead of attractive. In contrast, western men maybe attracted to youthfulness, naivety, easiness to be the prerequisite for attractiveness, but they find big tits, ass, and tall skinny bodies to be sexy.

I was shocked to find out some people where selling their 100cm and 132cm dolls just so they can get the sex capable ones. One justification I can see is if the owner already has an adult sized companion doll, he could buy a non sex childlike doll as a daughter and he would not be accused of pedophilia. However, the sex holes leave no doubt that if the owner can have sex with it, then what would stop him besides his willingness and his words and how can he prove that he did not have sex with it even if he cleans the hole 100%.

I could not believe there was a high enough demand to convince DS doll to make their 100cm and 132cm model sex capable. I am afraid of a movement where pedophilia becomes so wide spread that it becomes acceptable, like the gay/lesbian rights movement, no offense. The whole gay marriage is about legal benefits made available to same sex couples in my opinion. In my opinion, any movement that tries to compare itself to the civil rights movement is a mockery such as the animal rights activists parodied on the Daily Show with John Steward.
I am just glad that for now, America does not tolerate pedophilia unlike some other countries who are notorious for promoting and having fostered it for decades.

One thing I want to point out though is, 18yo porn stars in the USA. I believe that the ones who look younger than 18yo are the most popular ones. The ones who have a baby face, or flat chest, or small tight body are desired. Once those 18yo stars start to grow, they would often choose breast augmentation to re-ignite their career. So are the people who like 18yo who look younger than 18yo are pedophiles? The law says no, because those models where 18yo at the time of filming. So what if one of them buys a youthful doll? Would that raise an eyebrow? There is no age indication other than what the manufacturer writes and even then that is subjective.

Also, I think that it is often difficult for most men to distinguish between a girl and a lady. That song, "I am not a girl, but I am not yet a women," by Britney Spears, points to that age transition confusion. However, I think it is very clear in the difference between a boy and a man. Adams apple, facial and body hair, muscle tone is barely adequate enough to indicate a boy transitioning into manhood even though the brain may not have matured. For girls its often the breast size, but what about grown women with a-cups?

I thought that registered sex offenders are often checked up on by the law when there is a complaint made against them. The cops would search the sex offender's house and if they find any underage pornography or even that youthful sex doll, they would be put back into jail.

Contradicting my personal views, I believe that people should still have the right to purchase these 100cm and 132cm dolls and do what ever they want with it. However, we all need to respect TDF's decision to protect itself from legal investigation. So join some other forum and post your pics on some other hosting site if you want to show and tell your 100cm and 132cm doll.

AlexKnight wrote:We have discussed such a change in management in great detail, but changing TDF to a "doll art forum" which allows every kind of doll, would hurt the forum in more ways than one, and would probably be the end of it.
Most of the visitors come here for the sexual aspect of the dolls, just look at the Doll Album, and especially, which pictures are viewed most. It will never be the fully clothed pictures that receive the most views.

Also, there could never be discussions about the sexual aspects of the dolls in such a forum. Which would be like a car forum, that could only talk about the bodywork, but not the power of the engine.

While I do not entirely agree with the car forum metaphor (as I do not find it illogical for a car forum to have sub forums focused on individual aspects of car-related discussions), however after reading your patient explanation I can see now that it is a sensible decision to establish certain rules to protect the existence of this forum that is shared by many doll owners. As you have mentioned, the reality is that people visits this forum expecting to see/read about sex dolls. So I can see the logic behind TDF's decision of denying certain dolls information to be posted. As Spock have said: "Logic clearly dictates that the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few." I think we should appreciate the time and efforts that TDF's mods have spent to govern and maintain this forum, and trying to keep everyone happy at the same time.

Therefore, it is fair enough that for anyone who wish to continue posting in this forum to respect such set rules. However I do not agree with some expressed concerns about DS132 dolls being related to pedophilia.

It may be questionable to some that DS132 can be purchased with vaginal hole, but please also remember that DS132 was originally advertised as a non-sex doll and I myself for one ordered it without sex hole. I enjoy the companionship of such lovely creature, as much as I adore the companionship of my collection of many 1/6 scale manga-figurines. But does that mean I intend to have sex or masturbate to my beautiful figurines? And what evidence would such accusations based on?

I adore my dolls and I project life into them with my imagination, however I do not see any of my dolls as children or substitute to children. Reality is, and as we are all well aware of, is that these dolls are made of silicone and they not real humans. To imply that one adores his DS132 may be a pedophile, or imply one's desire to have sex with such dolls as a childlike substitute because the doll has a childish appearance, IMHO that is a baseless accusation.

Filch wrote:One justification I can see is if the owner already has an adult sized companion doll, he could buy a non sex childlike doll as a daughter and he would not be accused of pedophilia.

I failed to see the logic behind this. How can one justify himself for not being a pedophile by owning an adult-sized doll? Reality is that there are monsters out there who abuse both women and children. If one is a monster or pedophile then he is what he is regardless of what doll he owns.

Also, it seems that this discussion is steering away from the original topic (DS132/100 dolls' acceptability to this forum), and heading towards the discussion of whether one's taste on female distinguish him as a pedophile. While pedophilia is wrong and should be unacceptable to all regardless of cultural background because of the damage that forever scars the victims, this discussion is unfortunately irrelevant to the original topic of this post - which is whether DS132/100's acceptability to this forum

Filch wrote:Contradicting my personal views, I believe that people should still have the right to purchase these 100cm and 132cm dolls and do what ever they want with it. However, we all need to respect TDF's decision to protect itself from legal investigation. So join some other forum and post your pics on some other hosting site if you want to show and tell your 100cm and 132cm doll.

Once again I agree that we should respect respect TDF's decision to protect this forum, and again I do not agree with the assumption or implication on DS100/132 doll owners sexually desiring their dolls, at least not all of us

Petitte is fine, but you need to draw the line somewhere. I support the managements decission. Thank you for showing reason guys.

I agree with the majority of ideas and statements here, I posted my point of view and my reasons to own this creations, i was tempting to reply some of the arguments but i think i am gonna pass, for me the way this post is developing is preposterous. ( a post including my alias and the P adjetive is just not fair.)