So, you would prefer these guys were out in the dating pool? :)

Two minutes. I couldn't make it past two minutes of this thing. I may try again later once I've scrubbed my brain off a bit.

“So, you would prefer these guys were out in the dating pool? :)�

That's not a joke, it's a good point. These guys are harmless. What's scary to us is that we suspect they are reflecting the attitudes of men who are in relationships with real women.

But some of these Real Doll loving men could also just be extreme outliers—not reflecting cultural sexism, but simple their own social pathology.

It seems to me to be a waste of time and concern to pay any attention to these very few men, much less posting about them multiple times here. They are so few, the behavior is so extreme, it's a shaky contention that they represent some sort of distillation of our cultural sexism or the male perception of women. They reminds us of this, and this causes us to suspect this, but that doesn't make it true and, anyway, these men just aren't important to anyone. It's a freakshow and being outraged at freaks is a diversion from being outraged at the freakish yet ubiquitous male behavior that is nevertheless acceptable to most people in our sexist culture.

“not reflecting cultural sexism, but simple their own social pathology.�
and
“it's a shaky contention that they represent some sort of distillation of our cultural sexism or the male perception of women.�

But, don’t you wonder why there aren’t any women out there who have doll boyfriends, if this is completely independent of social attitudes?

I'm fairly certain there are male versions of the doll or maybe made by another company. I'm pretty sure that i've seen one in a documentary I watched about sex toys and technology recently.

at any rate, I kinda feel bad for these guys. I bet they have a lot of self-esteem issues and poor social skills.

actually soujourner, i just saw an HBO Real Sex episode about the male dolls. the creator said he was getting tons of calls for them and they did a little focus group with some women and one of the dolls. very weird...

i just felt really sad for these men. i don't think it was a matter of wanting women who are like dolls in that they can't move, talk etc, but much, much more about having someone who won't reject them. they obviously have trouble interacting with real people. it didn't seem from this that any of them had any real friends or relationships of any kind. they made comments about being ugly, etc. while i think it's creepy, it also shows that women are not the only ones affected by society's standards of beauty. they feel unworthy and terrified of rejection (which they've probably experienced time and again) and so they've decided to form a "relationship" with something that can't reject them or leave.

it's creepy. it's sad. but i don't get the impression that it's about wanting ACTUAL woman to be mute and lifeless. they all seemed to want actual companionship, they just don't know how to get it.

To each their own I guess.

But it does make me wonder about whether or not women have doll boyfriends...

I wonder if having a doll makes it progressively harder and harder to try dating real women. At least two of those men seemed very particular about their houses and lives, repeating "and so everything's my way" or something similar. If you're with a doll for a year, then meet a woman, you're going to notice that she's not always wearing clothes you like, doesn't always do her make-up the way you want, leaves things around the house, all the other very small issues that are part of being with a person rather than a doll. I feel like if a man goes that route, there's really no going back for him, no matter what he says.

And I think most of these men could've benefitted more by putting the money they spent on the dolls towards social counseling or sessions with a psychiatrist. Human interaction is important.

I think I agree somewhat with Keith, this seems to be something that is being made into a freak show. Its not like its something just any guy could get into. Personally I couldnt care less if someone decides to blow their brains out, or live with a doll. As long as they keep themselves to themselves I have no problem. Its their own life really.

I couldnt watch much of the clip though. Not just because its so *different*, but because these guys are clearly putting their lives (however damaged some might say they are) on display for others to see, and Im not comfortable with that. And that is in regards to everyone, not just people whose lives that are being made into a freak show for audiences watching TV.

I sympathized immensely with the men for what veex pointed out, the seeming strong sensitivity to rejection.

Keith Ellis said: It seems to me to be a waste of time and concern to pay any attention to these very few men...it's a shaky contention that they represent some sort of distillation of our cultural sexism or the male perception of women.
To the contrary Keith, the men's relationships with the dolls, to me, represent the flipside of culture's excessive objectification of real women — anthropomorphizing sex toys that are designed to merely look a whole lot like women.

That has a lot to do with what I find disquieting about the dolls, besides the issue that was called out in the video by the doll repairman and his girlfriend — that they are unrealistically gorgeous and flawless, ever-available sex objects.

"That's not a joke, it's a good point."

I see no reason it can't be both. I'm a socially inept loser with no real chance of ever getting laid and even I find this to be extreme. But, given that these guys aren't hurting anyone, why not let them be? When it comes to bizarre sex practices, this is about the most benign.

I only had time to watch 10 minutes of this, but from what I've seen, the guys don't appear to be particularly creepy... it's just horrible and spooky when the dolls look a bit like... well, corpses.

"very sad" seems applicable. "a little creepy" maybe. However, I don't see anything in this documentary (so far) that indicates any of these men want real women to be like dolls...rather that they want these dolls to be like real women. The photo the second man took of him casually "reading in the garden" with his dolls indicates that, and made me very sad.
I can honestly say I don't see how this is an issue this or any other feminist group or site should focus on. Looking at the cultural factors that make this type of thing happen may be relevant, but pointing and staring at some desperately lonely, unusual group just seems nasty.

I was also saddened and dismayed by the "purity" issue a couple of the men expressed. That is a real issue for women. (You know — the whole prescriptive norm that we be sexually be perpetually sexually stimulating, sexually available, and sexually "pure.") It is a real issue for men who want to relate meaningfully to women.

There is something so profoundly disturbing about this. It just screams of borderline necrophilia in a way. The way they lie there with death like expressions.

I agree with Peepers. And to me, it's this viewpoint--exemplified by the VA man who thinks that thong underwear makes a woman seem like she's had sex with 100 men, making her undesirable to him, and then comparing such a woman to a piece of meat that's been spit out--very much reflects cultural sexism.

Think about what a Real Doll represents to these men. A Real Doll is a girlfriend that never talks back, never asserts independence, and is always available for sex. In a patriarchal society, isn't this the perfect prototype for a woman?

Paraphilias like these are what happens when you have a society that combines social alienation, patriarchy, and an aversion to sex.

BethM, I don’t think you should judge this by appearances alone, because its different than that. After all, judging a dildo by appearances doesn’t look very healthy either does it? The difference is of course, how these objects are being treated. I admit they look expressionless and dead, but thats becuase they are dolls. The guys using them don’t treat them like corpses do they?

I think we need to separate out the two types of pathology here as this seems like a single symptom that have multiple causes.

I would imagine most of these men suffer from low self-esteem brought about by consistent rejection. Additionally many of them seem to show signs of OCD which probably brought about a lot of the rejection and the comments about needing to have things their way.

Often people who feel they have little control over their lives will focus on one element causing a mental disorder (e.g. controlling food through eatin/purging, cleanliness through constant cleaning, body image through surgery, etc.). And some of them seem to show signs of that kind of behavior. It is horrible for them and they should get help.

While some of them may have a mysogonist viewpoint, I do not believe that those viewpoints are necessarily linked to their need to be with a doll and more likely that given any selection of the male population you will find a subset of them who are also mysogonist.

Each of these men therefore are using dolls as a form of control over their lives which appears to be exterme mysogony because society says that men should be in control of women. It just happens that this is what they choose. Some choose food or cleaning or locking doors. This is theirs.

The men do not express misogyny, Orion. They express benevolent sexism (the compatible beliefs that traditional women are special, precious beings who ought to be cherished/protected, whereas non-traditional women deserve derision, scorn and abuse).

Your diagnoses seem odd to me. Are you trained to give psychological diagnoses?

Peepers, I can understand combating mens sexism against women perfectly, but what are we getting at here? From what I could glean, these guys have very little contact with anyone. They seem very isolated and lonely. So are you saying they cant act out their wishes on a doll they themselves bought, regardless of if its sexist?

Like I said, personally I couldnt care less what these guys are doing with those dolls, as long as they keep it to themselves. Just like my opinion on religion.

This video is really, really sad and disturbing.

Dear Mom and Dad,
I know you're not thrilled that I'm gay, but look on the bright side...at least my girlfriend is alive.

these guys have dolls, and girls have cats (and occasionally dogs). is one better than the other?

I see a few feminist issues in this video:

1. This is an old story. Artist sculpts a beautiful statue in the likeness of a woman and falls in love with the statue. Mannequin the movie... Stepford Wives... The idea that love and relationships can exist with inanimate objects is scary and anti-human.

2. Some of the comments made by the men in this documentary reveal sexist and anti-women ideas. For example, the third guy said he doesn't like things that make him think a woman has had former relationships or is sexually experienced. It makes him think of chewed up meat. He wants virginal, fresh women. It's OK for men to be sexually experienced but not for women. The second guy said he has an insatiable drive for beautiful women and he collects them. The doll repairman says he runs out of vaginas because they get destroyed. He says, "sex itself is a violent act." He continues, "the dolls are intimidating to women" because real women can't maintain that standard of beauty. The fourth doll lover says, "You can't do that with a person. She has a mind. You have to ask. And she has a right to say no." He gets it. But he still wants the fantasy of not having to ask.

3. How "real" can these dolls be if they weigh less than 100 pounds. These are "real" children. Where are the wrinkles? They don't blink, they don't moan, they don't have opinions. Real women aren't for sale. (Sure, some sell services, but none are available for purchase.)

4. The fact that these men feel like they can't talk to real women says we've got a social problem. Men shouldn't HAVE to be the initiators. Some men just aren't. Women shouldn't HAVE to be the gatekeepers... Gender roles stifle people.

5. Our obsession with appearance is insane. These men think they're not attractive enough to find a real human mate. They also overlook "unattractive" real women as potential partners and justify dolls because the dolls are prettier than the real women who would interact with them.

However, after having said all that, I agree that these iDollators are a very small section of society and shouldn't be too harshly criticized because most of their behaviors are a) relatively harmless and b) their own pathology and not representative of society.

Real Dolls are clearly yet another example of a beauty standard unattainable by real women. ;)

Peter, most single women I know who own cats or dogs aren't using them as a sexual replacement for another human being. They keep them for the company and affection, sure, but they don't have sex with them.

I think both (single men with their houses full of dolls and single women with houses full of cats) could be outgrowths of social anxiety disorders, but the sexual aspect to the former is what sets it apart.

these guys have dolls, and girls have cats (and occasionally dogs). is one better than the other?Wha?!?! My cat and I do not have a relationship like these poor guys do with their "dolls."

these guys have dolls, and girls have cats (and occasionally dogs). is one better than the other?Wha?!?! My cat and I do not have a relationship like these poor guys do with their "dolls."

My blockquoting really jacked up my comment. Basically, I said the same thing Genny said.

Genny - "Most"?

The way I see it is, I would no more question these guys desire to live with a doll (sexist attitudes included) than I would question some women’s desire to separate entirely from men, and concentrate solely on other women, and work entirely with women. There are differences I know, but if its what they want, then its what they want. I could understand if these men were treating REAL LIFE women like dolls. But as far as I can see, they are happy with just themselves and their doll, and since they don’t harm anyone else, I don’t care what they do with their lives.

Oh, and noname. Yeah, wink, wink. As if Real Dolls are anything but analog women. They look like they walked right off the pages of a jerk-off mag, already airbrushed to perfection. No cellulite, no bad breath, no talking back! It's a dickwad's dream.

I don't care what they do with their lives either, Phlegmatic. I don't see anyone suggesting we round them up and throw them in jail or anything. But it's still creepy and sad, and it's probably worth looking into. How many men feel unable to relate to women? And why?

I dont know, do people question some men’s desire to live single and avoid sex altogether?(Im pretty sure there are some around) I know its not exactly the same thing, and this one is perhaps in some ways less than ideal, but I just get the impression some people are really outraged by the idea. I cant help but see the view that these men somehow need more social interaction, and need to interact with the REAL opposite sex. And in not doing so, they are being unnatural, something Im pretty damn sure has been said about homosexual relationships before.

However, Im still indifferent about this anyway, and its not like I imagine these guys will care what others think, or how other will analyse them.

I'm not outraged by the idea that these guys choose to live this way, but I do think that an inability to relate to someone because of their gender is a problem. I think there are a lot of other men out there who similarly shun interaction with women and frequent prostitutes to get their rocks off. I think that sort of antisocial behavior and serial avoidance of interaction with women is the root of what's troubling these guys. And I do think they're troubled.

And to my above post, I just wanted to point out that I do see that the idea that a women might want to remain single, or not have children at all, is something that is seen as abnormal by many people as well.

Has feministing credited this video? (other than embedded in the video itself)--because I looked for a credit and couldn't find one.

I think there are a lot of other men out there who similarly shun interaction with women and frequent prostitutes to get their rocks off.

And I agree that in that situation it is probably going to, or most certainly will, lead to problems. However, these guys are shunning interaction with women, and instead interacting with their own property (whether they admit it or not).

Im not saying its a good thing, or a bad thing, Im saying its a thing. And as long as that thing affects only them, I dont think people should concern themselves over it, or even pity them. Because I see quite a lot of pity in the comments here. Either that, or disgust.

And I think while their inability to interact with women is much more pronounced, I get the impression they can barely interact with anyone. And if they can live like that, I dont mind. Just, like I said, so long as they dont start treating real women badly, or go insane or something. Which I imagine is what could happen if these men were to frequent prostitutes, or something like that.

That’s my whole point really. I don’t think this has caused any problems yet, so most certainly these guys could be doing MUCH worse than they are.

I know this is a bit delayed - but to answer the (way) above question of whether or not male dolls are available...they are. Same company. www.realdoll.com, click "dolls" on the left and the at the top is "Sample 1 'Charlie'".

Also, there's an advertisement at the bottom for a "flat-back" male OR female torso for only $1,299. With erect penis and everything. Now THATS a sophisticated dildo.

Oh, and the site defines their dolls as "love dolls". And, take a gander at the sample dolls to see how sex sells.

I get that these guys want companionship, and feel that they can't get it in in real life. Whatever their reasons may be, I feel a bit bad for them. But, look how sexualized these Sample Dolls are portrayed. ANYONE in the same range of situations portrayed in the video is going to be attracted to these ready and willing dolls (BOTH male or female dolls - Charlie looks ready to please).

And, just to finalize with my two-cents - the 46 minute video sent me into a confusion. I feel bad for some of the guys; the last guy at least just shoved them in a box when he was finished and regarded them as masturbation toys. But...a few of the other men are IN LOVE with their dolls, Davecat anyone? Hm. I don't know.

something i found more disturbing than these men (most of whom i believe are sad outliers) was the comment made by an employee of the RealDoll factory, in quoting the average customer--"these men say i'm forty, i'm losing my hair...i could never get a real woman who looks like this." so it's not that the typical customer is unable to "get a real girlfriend," it's that, though he is an imperfect specimen, he would rather have a perfect-looking dead doll than an equally imperfect real woman. that says something important about what men are conditioned to expect from women.

the other bit i found most upsetting was the Brit who said several times "it's better than no female companionship at all"--implying that a RealDoll provides a partial level of female companionship. which implies in turn that at least part of what men think of as "female companionship" are dead rubber tits, the physical existence/image of a woman. i don't think i know any women who'd consider a latex dick to provide them with "male companionship." that man in particular i found saddest of all of them, but, sad to say, i don't think his attitude would be considered very unusual among "normal" men.

Ha. This is NSFW, you are warned.
http://www.realdolldoctor.com/SilkyCharlie_Album.htm

But, there we go. Two realdolls making reallove.

Sorry, I had to. ;) Thought we could use a laugh.

"the other bit i found most upsetting was the Brit who said several times "it's better than no female companionship at all"--implying that a RealDoll provides a partial level of female companionship."

In this particular case I believe the partial companionship comes from what it allows them to do, not what the doll does for them. In the instace of the first man shown, he's rubbing her feet -- something which can have no value for the actual doll, but seemingly fulfills him (why else would he do it).

Companionship for these men may simply be the ability to "pretend" to be in a relationship.

I have a theory about why you don't hear about women with their doll boyfriends, but before I give it I do want to say that I have only limited experience. Psychology is part of my job, schooling and training, but therapy and diagnosis is not.

The fear here seems to be rejection for some men. The traditional man's role is to be initiator so if a man is unsuccessful at that role, then a woman who is incapable of rejection may seem desirable. However for a woman suffering rejection because no-one will initiate with her, a "boyfriend" doesn't facilitate that unless she also pretends he is actively initiating which is more of a stretch than in the case of the man with the female doll.

This is freaking fascinating.

In the instace of the first man shown, he's rubbing her feet -- something which can have no value for the actual doll, but seemingly fulfills him (why else would he do it).

You're seeking rational explanations for irrational behavior.

Maybe, just maybe, these guys are a little nuts.

Hi, Phlegmatic.

Peepers, I can understand combating mens sexism against women perfectly, but what are we getting at here?...So are you saying they cant act out their wishes on a doll they themselves bought, regardless of if its sexist?

No, absolutely not. It is none of my business how adults choose to get off, as long as it's not hurting real people.

I said that they expressed some benevolent sexist attitudes. This was not to imply censure of their relational or sexual behavior.

I think it could be illuminating to think of the sociocultural factors that support these men's developing their fantastical relationships with their dolls. Their over-the top benevolent sexist beliefs (to me, comparing a sexually experienced woman to pre-chewed meat is over the top) could be contributing to their both alienatation and their desire to bond with the attractive, "pure," and compliant dolls.

I disagree with those who have suggested that this minority of men is not worth thinking about. I think their bonding with sex toys could be incredibly telling of what Thomas recently called on another topic our "broken sexual culture." (Thanks for calling that out, Thomas).

"these guys have dolls, and girls have cats (and occasionally dogs). is one better than the other?"

Key differences:

Pets provide actual companionship, not pretend companionship.

Pets need homes. Dolls do not.

Pets don't come with social stigma. Potential boyfriends aren't freaked out by a cat the way they would be by a silicone male torso in the closet.

Pets are not sex toys.

They don't make documentaries about single women who have pet cats.

I saw another documentary about Asian guys who buy these dolls, and it was actually very sad more than anything else. This one guy completely loved this doll - he would buy "her" clothes, take her for outings, take photographs of her (not overtly sexual) and talk to her about his problems. She had a name, and a personality according to him, and he kissed her goodnight and tucked her in. Perhaps he also had sex with her, but for him she was a real person with whom he had a full and rounded relationship. He admitted that he would rather have that relationship with a real woman, but it was clear he had major psychological issues and this doll was the only thing keeping him from being desperately lonely.

But I do think it is creepy to provide a replica of a woman's body, without all those things that make her a person with agency (such as a brain!), and perhaps might encourage men to act out violent and inappropriate sexual fantasies with "someone" who can't protest. For those who think men can tell the difference between a doll and a woman, I would argue that some of them are so disturbed that they cannot, so there is certainly a danger from that point of view.

But I can't help thinking about this one lonely man who seemed like he just wanted someone to take care of... really depressing. So I'm not sure where I stand.

short video news clip of the same scenario in japan: http://www.reuters.com/news/video/videoStory?videoId=59730&feedType=RSS&rpc=23&sp=true

Definitely unsettling, but then again that's how I would feel about a lot of kinks that I can rationally accept as harmless when I'm past the knee-jerk reaction.

Thinking about the people in this documentary, I almost feel better about the people who are obviously incapable of real human closeness...people like Davecat and the English dude with the model planes seem creepier, in the sense of just being alien and impossible to relate to, right off the bat, but then they don't have any real human relationships, let alone potential romances.

In contrast, the Virginian guy and the dude at the end who was actually dating somebody, at first when they're like "sure, I've had real girlfriends, but sometimes I just need to jack off and I know that's all it is," you can almost relate, but then you see the gun and sword collection, or the casual revelation that the last guy has eight of the things, and apparently all in these ridiculous physical proportions, and it's suddenly a little bit threatening. I don't know, I can't articulate it really well.

Cool documentary though, despite the rather obvious title.

WOW

I'm just glad they aren't having children.

This is some deeply disturbing shit.

"My father's problem with my relationship with Shi Chan is that she's not alive"

W T F???

Ya know, "Davecat" maybe your dad has a point!!!!

And it it just me, or is it extra creepy that his iDoll is Asian? Is that some kind of perved out "mail order bride" fantasy - but with a green card wife who can't file a petition for domestic violence asylum?

"My father's problem with my relationship with Shi Chan is that she's not alive"

W T F???

Ya know, "Davecat" maybe your dad has a point!!!!

And it it just me, or is it extra creepy that his iDoll is Asian? Is that some kind of perved out "mail order bride" fantasy - but with a green card wife who can't file a petition for domestic violence asylum?

If I recall correctly, Davecat dropped by Pandagon (or was it Feministe?) when RealDolls were being discussed there some months back.

Honestly? Good for them. I think RealDolls might displace reactions to rejection that might otherwise end with something along the lines of "It puts the lotion on its skin."

"You're seeking rational explanations for irrational behavior.

Maybe, just maybe, these guys are a little nuts."

They are nuts and I think they should get help, but irrational people do things that seem rational to them. They've just got something wrong with their logic that's out of whack to the rest of society.

My work is primarily in cognitive models for human-computer interaction. My entire day is trying to sort out the why of seemingly irrational behavior. And what I find is that what seems totally wacky to me makes perfect sense to them. But then again I do things that make no sense to them, but make sense to me, so I try not to judge (but I've been called weird on many an occasion -- you should see the looks I get when I say I'm a feminist as a man).

Wow. I got through about 15 minutes of that and while I respect their wishes to live how ever the fuck they want, I still think it's sad. And even though they have the male doll I would bet that it's a lot of gay men who buy those and not that many women (though I have absolutely no evidence to back this up, it's a guess).

I was creeped out by Davecat rubbing the dolls feet and then pulling her tongue out, the thing about the owner saying he runs out of vaginas made me shudder b/c I couldn't help but wonder just what the hell they were doing that would cause that kind of damage.

But still, as long as they aren't hurting anyone I don't have any right to judge them, and I'm trying hard not to.

I'm all for expression of any sort so long as it's not violent and doesn't affect others. This fits the bill, but theres this very sad element to it. I actually watched the whole thing, and these people seem to use these dolls as a last resort, not really as just an option, but a choice that has been narrowed down for them which makes me think this is more of a psychological/social problem with the individual. That is my main concern with the "real dolls." Also, this isn't someone's hobby, it's apparently their way of life and their lives virtually revolve around it. seems very unhealthy. but then again, who am i to judge? (?)

I dunno, I can say that I'm uber creeped out by it and everything (actually, it more intrigues me) but that doesn't matter, so long as they're not acting violently and/or hurting others in the process of what they're doing, i really shouldn't care.

I saw another documentary about Asian guys who buy these dolls, and it was actually very sad . . . it was clear he had major psychological issues and this doll was the only thing keeping him from being desperately lonely.

Ledlight if youre referring to the Reuters video that claudelemonde posted a link to, I'm wondering how someone with so many deep psychological issues can afford to spend $170,000 on a sex doll collection. Disability doesn't pay that well.

Actually, right now I am slowly saving to buy Real Doll. Being an aspie (person with Asperger Syndrome), I don't want to torture real girls (and, God forbid, potential children) with my inability to provide emotional support etc. But I need some outlet for my unrequited feelings. So, Real Doll is a near prefect substitution. For my kind of aspie. Pets are good, but they are troublesome.

I've got to say that I found everything about this extremely problematic. I don't have problems with sex toys, but these men treat these dolls as sex slaves, which was clearly represented in the video, and this attitude is a problem. There is, in at least Mike, the realization that you can't "wake up in three in the morning with a huge hard-on and force a woman to have sex with you" but you can do that to this doll that represents some sort of "ideal" woman who is always ready, willing, and silently consenting for whatever desires you may have. It's this attitude that I find disturbing along with the multitude of other misogynist ideals represented and stated by all the men in the video.

I also have difficulty finding pity for them. I understand that some type of psychological disorder may be present in some, but they aren't so socially anxious that they are unable to appear on camera and speak clearly and articulately. Each of them at different times throughout the video stated all the sexist reasons that I am against the dolls as reasons for having them, including the fact that a balding older man couldn't get a woman who looked as good as one of the dolls (Mike), that now he was in charge and could do whatever he wanted whenever he wanted (guy from Virginia), and other such statements.

My fiancé made a great point as well when we were watching the video. When it came to the warehouse and the manufacturing of "perfect" "ideal" "women" he commented that what he found most disturbing was the way that these dolls were women who were sectioned up, reduced to body parts that could be disassembled and stored away.

I guess I may be in the minority on this one, but I don't see anything good coming from the whole idea behind these dolls. I think they stand to keep in place a lot of the beliefs that men have rights to women and their bodies and that those bodies should look and act a certain way. It's still a way for these men to own a woman in some way.

A sex toy is one thing. I feel that this goes way beyond simple sexual gratification.

I realise Im likely going to get blasted for saying this, but Ill say it all the same. Quite often I see situations where the suggestion "Oh of course its always about the MEN, isnt it!" comes up. And in those particular situations, I always agree that it right to say that, but in this situation I don’t see how any of this affects real life women. I mean, these dolls are the property of the guys who bought them. Now they can be beating them up, or making the dolls beat them up for all I care. Again, what they do in their own lives as long as if affects themselves, is of no concern to me. And thats regardless of how violent or sexist it may be. If they enjoy being able to fuck that doll at all hours, I dont care, so long as they dont suddenly begin interacting with society and bringing those ideas with them to real women.

I think people are getting carried away when they worry about what practices these guys are performing on their own property. I dont see any reason to make real women victims of anything here, UNLESS these guys, as I have said many times, start treating real women like their dolls. Because there are guys out there who feel entitled to treat REAL WOMEN like these guys treat their dolls, and in this instance, its making a big deal out of the guys who go for the dolls instead?

And for the record, I would be taking exactly the same "none of my concern" view, were the genders switched around in that video. Though Im not sure everyone else would...

I don't think it affects real women. I just think that a few of these men may have attachment disorders. Some of them might have benefited from counseling to discover why they feel they are so unloveable that the only person that would "stay" with them would have to be made of latex.

I don't be grudge them their comfort or think they are evil people...I just think how much better they might feel about themselves if they had spent that $8,000 on psychiatric care.

I know, Im sorry, it isnt my intention to make out anyone here is doing anything wrong. Perhaps its me, and that I might have something of a warped "live and let live" (or die, under the right circumstances) take on life.

You know what was weird? The girlfriend of that dollmaker being jealous of the dolls because she didn't look like them. You're not supposed to look like them. THEY ARE NOT REAL. That sentiment seemed really weird coming from someone who seemed like a well-adjusted member of society. Well, adjusted, anyway.

I can't say that I find this to be "scary and anti human", myself. Possibly it's just my own robot inclination colouring my perception, but it seems a rather harmless, if pricy and unusual kink. For some fans of robots/dolls, it's an aesthetic thing, for others an issue evolved from insecurity and for still others, a bit of both.

Overall, I agree with Phlegmatic's assessment of the situation.

And to Boris Ivanov, good luck. :)

I agree that's it's strange Rock Star, but I think it stems from the fact that, just like women in magazines or other media, these dolls are idealized representations of what women should look like, and we have a lot of experience with women comparing themselves to unattainable (even fake) standards of beauty and finding themselves coming up short.

I'm not sure, but I would hazard a guess that her 'jealousy' was that her boyfriend would become so accustomed to the appearance of the dolls (looking at them all day), that he would compare her to them. That's just my guess though...

"You know what was weird? The girlfriend of that dollmaker being jealous of the dolls because she didn't look like them. You're not supposed to look like them. THEY ARE NOT REAL. That sentiment seemed really weird coming from someone who seemed like a well-adjusted member of society. Well, adjusted, anyway."

I can see someone feeling jealous if their significant other was designing copies of "ideal women" and none of them looked like her. If my boyfriend was always drawing sketches of what women "should" look like, and none of them looked like me, I'd feel like crap. After all, a lot of women feel bad after looking at heavily airbrushed, enhanced, made up models for a long period. Some images in magazines may as well be made out of latex, but they're still the "ideal" for actual people.

I can't say that I find this to be "scary and anti human", myself. Possibly it's just my own robot inclination colouring my perception, but it seems a rather harmless, if pricy and unusual kink. For some fans of robots/dolls, it's an aesthetic thing, for others an issue evolved from insecurity and for still others, a bit of both.

Overall, I agree with Phlegmatic's assessment of the situation.

And to Boris Ivanov, good luck. :)

1. ... The idea that love and relationships can exist with inanimate objects is scary and anti-human.

2. ... the third guy said he doesn't like things that make him think a woman has had former relationships or is sexually experienced. It makes him think of chewed up meat. He wants virginal, fresh women. It's OK for men to be sexually experienced but not for women. The second guy said he has an insatiable drive for beautiful women -- and he collects them. The doll repairman says he runs out of vaginas because they get destroyed. He says, "sex itself is a violent act." ... The fourth doll lover says, "You can't do that with a person. She has a mind. You have to ask. And she has a right to say no." He gets it. But he still wants the fantasy of not having to ask.

3. How "real" can these dolls be if they weigh less than 100 pounds? ... They don't blink, they don't moan, they don't have opinions. Real women aren't for sale. (Sure, some sell services, but none are available for purchase.)

4. The fact that these men feel like they can't talk to real women says we've got a social problem.

5. ... These men think they're not attractive enough to find a real human mate. They also overlook "unattractive" real women as potential partners and justify dolls because the dolls are prettier than the real women who would interact with them.

All of the things listed here are characteristics shared by violent sexual serial killers. I find myself thinking here of Jeffrey Dahmer, a man so lonely that he drilled holes in his victims' skulls and injected chemicals into their brains in an attempt to keep them alive, but in a zombie-like state. This was a man who was literally so afraid of being alone, and yet so incapable of keeping someone around, that he took to physically controlling others' bodies in an attempt to keep his need for companionship (sexual and otherwise) sated.

For Dahmer, killing was not the point, though he did eventually kill his victims; it was his pathological fear of being left alone that drove his early behavior with each victim. See the fact that almost every victim went home with him voluntarily and "hung out" with him, drank with him, watched TV with him, etc., but then, when they felt the need to leave, as normal people sometimes do, *BAM!*

Dahmer is just an extreme example where the companionship element was right at the surface. I could give several examples off the top of my head of serial killers who share all of the characteristics/feelings/desires listed in the comment quoted above.

Yes, better that they act it out on dolls than act it out on humans. But there is an undercurrent of hostility in these feelings, or at the very least the possibility of hostility. I would venture a guess and say that feelings of vulnerability or self-hatred bring a very-much-socialized response out of men, and by and large, only men, in our culture... and that that response is sometimes acted out in violent ways (Dahmer), antisocial ways (iDollators), or both.

EvilPotato, in some ways I think you might be right, but I’m not going to make any judgements on what these guys are capable of, or of their mindset, because I cant know those things. However, I think some people are generally put off immediately by all this because it is so different and unnatural to them. And as I have said, that’s not the first time that has been heard about a group of people’s preferences.

Overall though, I’m not comfortable with the implication that what these guys do automatically means they are probably psycho-killers waiting to happen. Just as I do not like the implication Feminists are man-haters.

there is an undercurrent of hostility in these feelings, or at the very least the possibility of hostility.

You hit the nail on the head, EvilPotato.

EvilPotato,

That's what I was going for. It fosters unhealthy attitudes. The fact that they are female dolls and not real, live women does not change the fact that they are expressing ownership, sexism, and violence over the idea of women.

For me it seems like a warning sign or at the very least something to be wary of.

The first step in committing violence against someone is to dehumanize them. That's what these dolls are doing for these men of women.

Thanks for your comment.

The fact that they are female dolls and not real, live women does not change the fact that they are expressing ownership, sexism, and violence over the idea of women.

Some men express that attitude towards real life women. And since the companion in this "relationship" is a doll, you can hardly expect equality in it.

And like someone pointed out, sitting in your garden reading with it, or rubbing its feet seem fairly "odd" things to do, but hardly violent. Just because these men no longer interact with real women, and instead their own fantasies, may not entirely mean they automatically have a secret psychological woman hating agenda.

All of the things listed here are characteristics shared by violent sexual serial killers. I find myself thinking here of Jeffrey Dahmer, a man so lonely that he drilled holes in his victims' skulls and injected chemicals into their brains in an attempt to keep them alive, but in a zombie-like state. This was a man who was literally so afraid of being alone, and yet so incapable of keeping someone around, that he took to physically controlling others' bodies in an attempt to keep his need for companionship (sexual and otherwise) sated.

I think you're ignoring the critical distinction. Dahmer was a mentally ill person who did evil things and so we think of him as evil and scary (rightfully so). Had he received appropriate mental health services he might never have killed anyone.

These guys (in particular) are not evil. They haven't hurt anyone. They may or may not have a mental health issue that prevents them from bonding with other people...an issue they share with Dahmer...but they aren't actually hurting anyone but themselves. And having a mental health issue does not make you evil.

I couldn't watch the video (no sound on my computer) but I remember this topic coming up before. I'm sort of undecided on the issue. On the one hand, if every guy who thought he was entitled to sex whenever he wanted it bought one of these dolls, I think we'd have a lot fewer rape survivors walking around today, and the world might be a slightly better place for it. On the other, as others have pointed out, these dolls may treat the symptoms of entitlement and misogyny by directing people with harmful attitudes toward women away from real women, but they certainly don't cure them--they indulge them. I also think that the spectrum of customers probably varies widely. I don't think it's mentioned in this video, but I recall a very terrifying image from a previous article on this topic wherein a doll "repairman" reported one that came back to him so horribly damaged by its previous owner that the vagina and anus had merged into one large hole. *shudder* The idea that there's someone out there walking around who'd do that is not at all comforting to me, even if the "victim" of the abuse was only an inanimate unfeeling representation of a woman. However, I don't think men who want one for reasons like Boris (the commenter above) would do such a thing, and I think the rather sadly lonely men who profess to "love" their dolls would be horrified to think of their doll being treated in such a way, regardless of their other sexist attitudes.

So I don't know. I think I have to say I'm in the camp that says, "fine, as long as they don't try any of this with a real woman."
I do think it's a pretty sad statement about our society and its (as Thomas called it) "very broken sexual culture" that there's a market for these dolls at all, though. I wish I could think of a way that we could re-convince the world that real, consensual sex with real, consenting adults in a healthy and loving emotional relationship was...well, sexy, rather than continuing to propogate (via porn or other media) all the negative sexual attitudes that seem to inspire or encourage so many of these increasingly disturbing sexual fantasies and sexist attitudes.

I’m not going to make any judgements on what these guys are capable of, or of their mindset, because I cant know those things. ... I’m not comfortable with the implication that what these guys do automatically means they are probably psycho-killers waiting to happen.

Like anyone else, these guys have an internal dynamic with a framework of attitudes, beliefs, and feelings, and that dynamic is what drives their choices. I believe that that dynamic is similar, in a sliding-scale kind of way, to the one that drives serial killers.

As far as what they're capable of -- I don't know that any more than you do. I never said that they were serial killers waiting to happen, and I don't believe that to be the case. But the not-so-buried feelings of inferiority, self-hatred, and resentment expressed in the video lead me to believe that the reasons these guys buy female-looking dolls to control and manipulate and "have sex with" is similar to the reason that serial killers (like and unlike Dahmer) go out and pick up victims to control and manipulate and "have sex with."

I think you're ignoring the critical distinction. Dahmer was a mentally ill person who did evil things and so we think of him as evil and scary (rightfully so). Had he received appropriate mental health services he might never have killed anyone.

These guys (in particular) are not evil. They haven't hurt anyone. They may or may not have a mental health issue that prevents them from bonding with other people...an issue they share with Dahmer...but they aren't actually hurting anyone but themselves. And having a mental health issue does not make you evil.

I don't think these guys are evil. I don't think they're serial killers, or potential serial killers. I think they are men who are very sad and very lonely and very scared of women. You're correct, I do think this is a mental health issue. I also agree that having mental health issues does not make anyone evil. I really don't see any reason to bring evil into it, though. I don't think Dahmer was evil. I think he did evil things, things for which there are no excuse, but I know he was driven to do them by forces that he didn't understand and didn't have control over. I think he had no place in a civilized society, and to an extent I think he deserved what he got in prison, but I don't think he was an evil person -- just very sad and very lonely and very scared of (in his case) men, whom he needed things from that he couldn't get, no matter how hard he tried to get those things legitimately. His need drove him to look for those things in a way that was not legitimate.

The case of these guys, I think, is borderline, in between legitimate and illegitimate ways to seek out and have intimacy. It's not real intimacy -- it's with an inanimate object. That makes me (and, I think, others as well) want to say that it's not a legitimate form of intimacy.

But it's not illegal, and it's not hurting anyone (except, perhaps, for these poor lonely men, who will never be pushed by the "women" they "sleep with" to provide more emotional closeness, or make them come during sex, or take them out to dinner, or any of the other endless list of things that make true intimacy between people happen). That makes us want to say it's legitimate.

But there's a difference between legitimate and healthy. I'm not saying anyone should stop them, since, as you rightfully point out, they are not hurting anyone else. I guess what I'm really saying is that these guys scare me. I would never want to date one. Why? Any woman in her right mind knows why. Because this is sad and twisted and a denial of reality. Because it speaks to demons hidden deep within that man that he can't even begin to address. Is he really dangerous? Probably not. But I wouldn't want him in my life. And as long as he's not, hey -- to each his own, right?

One other thing I forgot to mention: I'm also rather disturbed by how young a lot of the dolls appear to be. The very first doll face shown in the video (around the 20-second mark) looks like a child's face to me, and many of the ones that follow don't seem much better. Did anyone else notice this?

Vervain - I noticed that as well. Take a look at claudelemonde's link (above) and the dolls look even younger.

As already stated, these dolls are idealized. What I noticed is how NONE of the dolls (in the video and on the realdoll page) have waists larger than 26". Their hips are teeny, even the "voluptuous ones" - and we know in which area they are so voluptuous. All of the dolls are incredibly thin, and that's an idealized beauty standard forced on women everyday. http://www.realdoll.com/studio.asp

Also, another important thing to think about: Yes, some of the men in the video were in love with their dolls. Yes, some of these men who considered the dolls their girlfriends (especially Davecat) seemed to be seeking companionship, someone to care for, to be around, to talk to. (But like Michael pointed out - these dolls don't talk back, you can't go out to dinner with them. You will ultimately lack that part of a relationship with these dolls.) So a few things stemming from this:

1. I believe the people buying these dolls to be their girlfriends is probably a small percentage. One look at the testimonials on www.realdoll.com tells us that. http://www.realdoll.com/letters.asp

2. A lot of these testimonials explain how amazingly great the dolls are for sex. Sex toys. Sex dolls. Addition to a marriage - a threesome without the jealousy. The site advertises SEX and sells the dolls as LOVE dolls. Not plastic girlfriends, or someone you can have an imaginary relationship with and take to the park. If you want to do that, fine, but the site isn't advertising the dolls in this manner. Just look at how many sexual nude photographs of the dolls grace the site. On the main page, on the testimonial page. These dolls are about sex (BOTH the male and the female dolls!)

3. But, we've watched a video about a small percentage who regard their dolls as girlfriends. Although, Michael kept his in boxes in the garage, limbs sprawled whichever way because these dolls were no substitute for girlfriends; he said that.

I think many of the comments on this page express insightful and interesting interpretations of their situations. I just think we have to remember that what we saw was probably a small percentage of what is going on with these dolls.

Which takes us back to sex. If a majority are using them for sex, and the vagina's get destroyed...well. Then I don't know. There are many interpretations of that. They aren't REAL vagina's. Maybe it's just rough sex. Maybe these men are sticking things inside their dolls, weird things?- we don't know. (Maybe the Virgina guy uses his sword and/or guns. JUST SAYING. He was proud of his "three guns, two girls". That's a terrible assumption, but WE DON'T KNOW!)

OH! What really made me mad was when Michael said "Whew, it's starting to smell like fish"...are you kidding me?!

Okay, this is probably a mile long. So I should stop, but I find this topic incredibly interesting.

And just what would the mechanics of a double suicide entail?

And just what would the mechanics of a double suicide entail?

Wow, this made me really sad actually.

Davecat nearly made me cry - holy shit dude, maybe if you just liked yourself women might like you. Just don't expect ALL women to like you or be

The guy with the planes was such a narcissist. The part with his mother's room being perfectly made up made me sad too.

The Virginian seemed like he might have had potential to be a decent human being at some point, but the part about chewed meat wrote him off for me. For fuck's sake.

I actually kind of liked the Texan. He was very honest and seemed intelligent. I couldn't stop laughing at his bad taste either. He seemed to really respect real women, and if it's a bit weird to "collect" dolls, in his case I don't think it was unhealthy or any more objectifying than jerking off to porn.

And while I think the entire mindset of a lot of these men is sooo unhealthy, the point that they're not out there not-coping with women with personalities really could be a good thing!

P.S. Anyone else notice a factory full of white dolls? Hell, they showed green and blue ones, but not black! I mean, one of the Texan's dolls may have been black (might have been over-tanned though), but that's ONE. I thought that was weird

Here is what I find interesting: That alongside the many paeans to sexual freedom and tolerance that have been here expressed, there are at least as many platitudes about therapy and pathology and the "importance" of human interaction (of course human interaction is sometimes important, but this formulation is so vague as to be contextually meaningless), and yet more out-and-out judgments of these people's personal lives as they don't relate to sex. Critically examining sexual practices (assuming that all participants are consenting adults, etc.) seems to be taboo, but not so social practices. Doesn't that strike anyone else as an odd double standard? People love differently and have sex differently, and that's ok. Why can't people socialize differently and relate differently and think differently too? Does it really have to be pathological?

With regard to the claim that these dolls constitute some sort of patriarchy-friendly ideal and contribute to the oppression of women, et cetera: at best, this is a spurious association, and at worst it's intellectual dishonesty. But it doesn't really matter, because it's a practically useless assertion anyway, albeit one of a sort that's unaccountably popular in academic circles. Marilyn Frye said it about gay men. Janice Raymond said it about trannies. If I wanted to, I could claim that UFO enthusiasts, what with their penchant for alien invasion, colonization, penetration and other Dworkinian buzzwords, are really agents of the patriarchy. I think these claims are problematic for at least three big reasons: First, they're stupidly easy to make, since they require essentially zero empirical grounding. Second, they're almost always completely impracticable. Third, and this is really just an impression of mine, an awful lot of them seem to be used to demonize already marginal groups.

My apologies if that last paragraph came across as too harsh. This may also sound harsh: I think the original post is small-minded and mean-spirited. But clearly lots of other people disagree, so I could be completely wrong. I just haven't seen or read anything here to make me think that all the shock-and-horror and car-crash fascination surrounding these dolls and their owners is remotely justified.

Wow, where to even begin with that…

I’ll take, “human interaction is unimportant,� squip.

…there are at least as many platitudes about therapy and pathology…
Those didn’t seem like platitudes to me. I think people expressed a lot of empathy. It’s too bad you didn’t see it that way.

People know rejection hurts. I think that is part of why so many people have expressed sympathy here for the men in the video. They spoke openly about their experiences with rejection. I think that was pretty brave, myself.

…and the "importance" of human interaction (of course human interaction is sometimes important, but this formulation is so vague as to be contextually meaningless)…
Human interaction is deeply important and inextricably entwined with well-being. People need to be with other people. When we are not able to, we hurt. We miss the feeling of belonging.

We are also susceptible to a host of problems ranging from psychological disorders to immune suppression this basic social need is thwarted.

It is a motivation so strong and ubiquitous that many believe it to be genetically based — We probably evolved to socialize with one another.

Why can't people socialize differently and relate differently and think differently too? Does it really have to be pathological?
Interacting with a latex doll is not socializing. Rewarding though it may be, it is not, by any stretch of a rich imagination, socializing or relating. Pretending that you are relating to and socializing with a doll is probably harmless fun. Believing that you are actually socializing and relating is probably not entirely healthy.

I’ll take, “human interaction is unimportant,� squip.

I did not say that. I did not say that. I did not say that. And that's all I have to say about that.

Human interaction is deeply important and inextricably entwined with well-being. People need to be with other people. When we are not able to, we hurt. We miss the feeling of belonging.

Maybe so, but you know what? It is not your place to say to what degree human interaction ought to figure into other people's lives. At various times in my life I've gone for days without speaking to another soul, and I was ok with it. Maybe you wouldn't be, but does that mean that I need therapy? That's not a question that you can answer.

I accept that you mean well, but the pity that people have expressed here looks to me to be seriously misplaced.

Interacting with a latex doll is not socializing.

Granted, but I was speaking generally about human behavior. In any case, it's not really material to my point.

Pretending that you are relating to and socializing with a doll is probably harmless fun. Believing that you are actually socializing and relating is probably not entirely healthy.

What does that even mean?

Is hanging out with dolls correlated with a reduced lifespan? I guess it's possible, but even if it is, heck, even if it's a causal factor, so what? Lots of things reduce people's lifespan that don't elicit this kind of paternalistic, emotionally charged response.

Maybe it decreases your lifetime earning potential, or reduces your reproductive fitness - again, neither of these is exactly a moral issue.

Maybe it makes you a sad, empty shell of a human being. Maybe. But yet again, there's only one person who can decide that, and it's not you.

Or! Or, maybe you just think it's weird. Maybe it's not appealing to you. That's ok. It's certainly not a common behavior. But that doesn't make it unhealthy, any more than the AFA's objection to gay sex makes homosexuality unhealthy.

Lee, I dont think words have ever been more eloquently spoken....... out of someones arse! Thats just fucking insane! Perhaps a repeated experience of rejection (or just general lack of experience with women) is a small contribution to this, but you can in no way blame women for this. Thats just fucking stupid.

Likely because the women they encounter repeatedly reject them. They have had enough.

If they arrived at the decision to no longer interact with real women, and instead interact with their dolls, thats OK with me. However, I fucking hate that kind of entitlement youll find with any NiceGuy™: “Im a nice guy, but women don’t date me! Why can’t I get what I deserve!�

But in this case its: "Ill stop bothering with those bitches, cos they dont give me the pussy Im entitled to! Ill fuck these dolls instead!"

I respect their decision to fuck a doll/lamp post/inanimate object, if thats what they want to do. But not if its because "Teh bitchez wont give it up for me", because that so obviously DOES lead to women hating, and who the fuck knows what else.

They chose it due to the collective behavior of women.

I personally think womens opinions and rejections of these guys only makes up a small factor in this whole (*minority*) doll-attachment thing, so dont try and blame women for not "altering their standards" (forcing them to date guys they dont like?!?!) The onus isnt on women who find these guys unworthy of dating. If they wanted a girlfriend so badly, that would involve changes to themselves. Evidently they don’t want to do that, and would prefer not bothering and living with a doll instead. I don’t begrudge them anymore than I would someone who avoids sexual and emotional relationships altogether.

I have had almost zero success in relationships, but even I know rejections are a universal fucking thing. Men reject women because they don’t meet their “standards� too. Is she then “entitled� to some male attention, no matter how many men wouldn’t want to? Of course not, because this is about mens entitlement to women isnt it Lee? Not a repeatedly rejected persons "entitlement" to attention. Those guys live with their dolls because those stuck up bitches wouldn’t date and fuck them, and not because they have decided they cant/wont form relationships with them, right Lee?

While I imagine that’s true for some fucking idiots, Im not about to link that to every iDollator customer, many of whom are using them as extremely scary sex toys, as mizza pointed out. That’s a whole other problem though…

Squip,

I think you might consider seeing parts of the video again. We're not projecting our values of the importance of human interaction on to them...They (by they I'm limiting the discussion to the first three guys) at various points indicated that they wished they could have female companionship but it just never worked out so this is where they ended up. They said they felt rejected. They said they were too unattractive or unloveabe.

That level of self-hatred and hurt earns my sympathy not because I think they should interact in the world the same way I do...but because they are deeply unhappy with themselves.

Also, to the body image commentators...oddly enough they said in the video that the company also makes pregnant dolls and once made a 80 year old doll. Ugh.

what Phlegmatic said. also, the third guy noted that seeing as he was a forty year-old man, he was unlikely to attract a woman who looked like one of the realdolls.
here's a newsflash, Lee, sometimes men have unrealistic standards for women to live up to especially when it comes to physical appearance.
and some men, like you, just don't seem to like women very much. especially when they're doing things like stating opinions and asserting themselves in an "unladylike" fashion.
i think this is more the case than the "collective behavior of women."
btw, if you're having a problem with rejection, why don't you lower your standards? instead of waiting collectively for women to change, why don't you adjust and adapt your outllook? that would be a lot more reasonable than expecting half the human population to start bending to your will. there are all kinds of people out there, women and men. if you're truly looking, in time you could find someone who shares your values.
or if you prefer instead to blast women on feminist boards for no apparent reason other than your unfortunate misogyny, then have fun with that. maybe you should get a realdoll.

They chose it due to the collective behavior of women.

Give it a rest, Lee. What "collective behavior" are you talking about?

Having and voicing opinions?

Gaining weight?

Expecting to be treated with respect and dignity?

Menstruating?

Men aren't entitled to have sex with women any more than women are entitled to have sex with you. We're supposed to change our standards? Like I bet you've changed your standards, huh?

What's that?
You still want a perfect "10" fuck-whole who never disagrees with you, breathes too heavily or expresses outside interests?

Lee,

I'm not sure what you mean by the "collective behavior of women". The fact that so many different people, of different backgrounds, interests and social skill sets have found companionship with one another should prove to you that women are not a collective. We are individuals and think, act and feel accordingly.

One of the men was bemused that women didn't take an interest in his hangliding, and assumed that the "collective" standard for women was a bloke who drank, smoked and watched soap operas.

But there are many women out there who would and do take an interest(I actually exclaimed "cool!" when I saw him suiting up).

I think these men have trouble accepting rejection as a natural byproduct of romantic pursuit (we've all experienced the agony of rejection, often several times), and do not have the self-confidence or support system to help them recover and try again.

Speaking of ideals, if they are narrowing their own physical standards to those of the Real Dolls, and begin to believe they are entitled to this unrealstic ideal, then these men will be inevitably dismissive of a real woman with cellulite, body hair, pimples, etc.

It's a sad disconnect, but cannot be blamed, in the least, on the imagined "collective behavior of women."

As for your recommendation that women date men without social skills -- I wouldn't dream of asking you to date someone you were not interested in, because I believe we all have the right to mutually fulfulling relationships.

Cheers.

People,

It’s best to ignore Lee. He has “issues� with women. This is his second “Let’s blame it on bitches� comment. The first one had to do with how DV victims are to blame for the abuse because they don’t just get up and leave.

Lee,

I'm not sure what you mean by the "collective behavior of women". The fact that so many different people, of different backgrounds, interests and social skill sets have found companionship with one another should prove to you that women are not a collective. We are individuals and think, act and feel accordingly.

One of the men was bemused that women didn't take an interest in his hangliding, and assumed that the "collective" standard for women was a bloke who drank, smoked and watched soap operas.

But there are many women out there who would and do take an interest(I actually exclaimed "cool!" when I saw him suiting up).

I think these men have trouble accepting rejection as a natural byproduct of romantic pursuit (we've all experienced the agony of rejection, often several times), and do not have the self-confidence or support system to help them recover and try again.

Speaking of ideals, if they are narrowing their own physical standards to those of the Real Dolls, and begin to believe they are entitled to this unrealstic ideal, then these men will be inevitably dismissive of a real woman with cellulite, body hair, pimples, etc.

It's a sad disconnect, but cannot be blamed, in the least, on the imagined "collective behavior of women."

Also, I wouldn't dream of asking you to date someone you were not interested in, because I believe we all have the right to mutually fulfulling relationships.

Cheers.

First, I hope I never hear anyone ever say they're running out of vaginas ever again.

Second, (as I ate my poor grad student meal of ramen noodles watching this documentary) I can sell my pubic hair for money? How about that.

I think for me one of the worst moments was the guys who mentioned women who have had sex before as being spit out pieces of meat; he wants a virginal girl, and one of his real dolls was dressed kind of like a school girl. I think some one else noted the "child like" weight of the dolls.

I'm glad that the woman (Jodi?) left the guy with 8 real dolls behind.

Did someone here in the comments actually say "benevolent sexism"??? And contrast it to misogyny?

Wow.

Even if you postulate that sexism is not always based in hate, how in the world is sexism EVER benevolent?

As to this situation, I don't see why people on the objecting side of the discussion are tiptoeing around this. It's not just "not legitimate intimacy," it is NOT intimacy. The only living thing you can be intimate with when there is no other living thing in the room is yourself. Period. You can't be intimate with a doll. This is not a "relationship," not even really a "kink." Again, most people with kinks practice them with OTHER PEOPLE. This is elaborate masturbation and unhealthy fantasy.

Now, I'm with the folks who say that it's better these guys have the dolls than be out in the dating pool. I certainly do not think they're doing anything illegal, and I would not interfere with them as long as they limit their behavior to dolls and don't carry it on to women. That said, we still needed to discuss this, because it's another facet of the woman-hating culture. Woman-hating. Nothing benevolent here. Someone who really loves women is going to go out of his way to be with one. He's not going to let a little thing like rejection get in his way, he'll just look somewhere else. If these guys are too mentally ill to deal with rejection, then they're too mentally ill to love others as well. Risk is implicit in love.

I think there is a larger social issue here too, as concerns men who feel they cannot be in relationships with women. But I fear this could turn into a discussion of how disgusted men are with "liberated American women" and how it "forces" them to turn to "more submissive" women who aren't even alive. At least, the trolls would try that one, if they could post here. In the end it boils down to a man feeling entitled to have sex. I hear this sentiment voiced even among seemingly "benevolent" Noo Wage and hippie types. No, nobody has the RIGHT to have sex. We only have the right to an orgasm, and we don't need another person to help us get there. In that light this obsession with a doll is better than some other ways men express their so-called "entitlement," but I would feel less creeped out and aggravated if they simply went out and bought a bottle of lube and settled in with Vaselina Palma and her five sisters. There are even masturbation toys for men that bear no resemblance to women whatsoever. Getting the doll is completely not necessary. Getting the doll tells me some other dynamic is going on here. They can't afford a mail-order bride, so this will do.

But I fear this could turn into a discussion of how disgusted men are with "liberated American women" and how it "forces" them to turn to "more submissive" women who aren't even alive.

See Lee's post, for example.

We only have the right to an orgasm, and we don't need another person to help us get there. In that light this obsession with a doll is better than some other ways men express their so-called "entitlement," but I would feel less creeped out and aggravated if they simply went out and bought a bottle of lube and settled in with Vaselina Palma and her five sisters. There are even masturbation toys for men that bear no resemblance to women whatsoever. Getting the doll is completely not necessary. Getting the doll tells me some other dynamic is going on here.

Thank you. I couldn't agree more. That's part of what I was thinking while I was watching this video and commenting on the thread, but you spelled it out brilliantly.

Oh, and P.S.:

It's not real intimacy -- it's with an inanimate object. That makes me (and, I think, others as well) want to say that it's not a legitimate form of intimacy.

We agree on this. It's just a difference in terminology. I was trying to draw a distinction, for the sake of argument, for the people who argue that this RealDoll phenomenon can be called a "legitimate" (or "as fair as any other, even if it creeps me out") form of masturbation/intimacy/fantasy.

I actually don't agree with that at all, because I agree that since the Dolls are silicone, not flesh, there is no intimacy. As you pointed out,

The only living thing you can be intimate with when there is no other living thing in the room is yourself. ... This is not a "relationship," not even really a "kink." ... This is elaborate masturbation and unhealthy fantasy.

Right on.

Oh, and P.S.:

It's not real intimacy -- it's with an inanimate object. That makes me (and, I think, others as well) want to say that it's not a legitimate form of intimacy.

We agree on this. It's just a difference in terminology. I was trying to draw a distinction, for the sake of argument, for the people who argue that this RealDoll phenomenon can be called a "legitimate" (or "as fair as any other, even if it creeps me out") form of masturbation/intimacy/fantasy.

I actually don't agree with that at all, because I agree that since the Dolls are silicone, not flesh, there is no intimacy. As you pointed out,

The only living thing you can be intimate with when there is no other living thing in the room is yourself. ... This is not a "relationship," not even really a "kink." ... This is elaborate masturbation and unhealthy fantasy.

Right on.

Hey, Dana.

Did someone here in the comments actually say "benevolent sexism"??? And contrast it to misogyny?

Wow.

Even if you postulate that sexism is not always based in hate, how in the world is sexism EVER benevolent?

That was me. I did not coin the term and perhaps my description of it was inadequate. I can see how you would infer that it implies sexism can be desirable.

Benevolent sexists hold positive, even reverent, attitudes toward women, but only women who conform to stereotypic femininity and restricted roles. So, whereas sexism is never beneficial, the attitude is subjectively benevolent, from the perspective of the person who holds it. It’s an attitude that is simultaneously favorable and oppressive. It allows people to say, “I cannot be a sexist — I love women because they (fill in the stereotypic blank).�

This is contrasted with hostile sexism, which is out-and-out hating on the women (e.g., “The evil bitches are out to get the menz!�).

That’s why I distinguished between "misogyny" and benevolent sexism in relation to the iDollators’ statements. They expressed some expectations that women be “pure,� unflinchingly loyal and sexually available, but only to them. They seemed to hold in high esteem women who fit that bill, with the dolls being the ultimate reification of these benevolent sexist ideals (with the exception that they cannot provide domestic services).

These guys seem really entitled to me, not piteous. They want perfect women, when they themselves are not perfect. The 'chewed meat' guy wasn't exactly prime filet himself. Why should he get more than he has to offer?

I don't care how pathetic these guys seem. At bottom, they feel entitled to women. And the 'chewed meat' guy was no filet himself. To get a real woman, he'd have to have a nice personality or something to be interesting. He wnats more than he's got to give.

I don't care how pathetic these guys seem. At bottom, they feel entitled to women. And the 'chewed meat' guy was no filet himself. To get a real woman, he'd have to have a nice personality or something to be interesting. He wnats more than he's got to give.

Sorry about that.

I don't care how pathetic these guys seem. At bottom, they feel entitled to women.

I cant speak for them all, because obviously some guy out there will feel that way, but I cant see how that logic fits with those guys who developed "attachments" with their dolls. If they felt entitled to real women, isnt it likely they would have done the same thing most other guys do when they feel that way? You know, rape, sexual assault, stalking that kind of thing?

To me it seems like these guys feel more entitled to their own fantasies. And as I keep saying, as long as those fantasies are affecting only themselves, Im not going to question it.

They couldn't get real women. I don't think some of them even tried. So they knew they'd be rejected and instead of doing what women do---try and meet the standards----they went around them. Women don't feel that level of entitlement.

Kristen,

They did say a few things to that effect, that's true. But didn't Davecat also say that his idea of happiness was being with his doll? And yet, he is by far the one among the men featured in the video for whom posters here have expressed the most pity. Whatever else he may have said about his experience with dating isn't really relevant; either you believe that he's happy with his doll and you save your pity for someone who needs it, or you think he's lying.

Likewise for the other two. Maudlin revelations about one's unsuccessful experiences with dating do not constitute an admission of unhappiness! The Virginian spoke at length about how great it was to live alone, and the closest thing to sadness that I heard the Brit express was a general sense of befuddlement with regard to other people.

I certainly can't state categorically whether these people are happy or unhappy, but neither can you. All we have to go on is their personal testimony, which people posting here have consistently ignored. So yes, I think "projecting [your] values of the importance of human interaction on to them" is exactly what you (collectively) are doing.

So now there is a problem with ignoring standards, and choosing your own path? However deranged it might appear to some others?

Im not trying to say something specifically about these guys, Im just reserving judgement. Im considering avoiding relationships and remaining single, does that mean I feel entitled to women?

I realise this situation involves perhaps what you could easily describe as an artificial woman, but I also in some ways look at it as a choice to avoid relationships. Even if to do so, these guys are using something of a substitute. And is it that though which seems to offend people so?

And since were on the subject of “entitlement�, many religious peoples feelings of entitlement have caused far more harm than these guys with their "attachments". They range from feeling entitled to render judgement on people with different beliefs to them, to outright killing them.

It’s a shame their arent so many questioning that…

At least one of these guys said a real woman was like 'chewed meat' and hence not up to their standards. By humanizing these dolls over women, they're dehumanizing women. If they still related to women as human, then it's just masturbating creepily. They're choosing to humanize objects over real people---they're denying the humanity of real women.

They couldn't get real women. I don't think some of them even tried. So they knew they'd be rejected and instead of doing what women do---try and meet the standards----they went around them. Women don't feel that level of entitlement.

I agree with Phlegmatic. I'm actually having trouble figuring out exactly what you're trying to say here. A man who rapes a woman who rejected him is certainly "going around" a whole lot of standards. But these are dolls -- they don't have standards, and they can't be violated. Does what you're saying apply to pornography too? Should it matter whether the non-human image being relied upon for sexual gratification is in doll or printed form?

And if we accept your contention that seeking sexual fulfillment without first meeting someone else's standards is somehow tantamount to "cheating" -- and that does seem to be to be what you are saying, but please correct me if I'm misunderstanding you -- what does that mean for women? Lots of men have all sorts of stupid, demeaning, soul-destroying standards, too, as I'm sure you're aware. Is a woman with no particular desire to, say, starve herself to please a man not entitled to seek sexual fulfillment? Or is it just that she can't seek said fulfillment with the aid of any sort of man-like instrument, or at least not with instruments that are too man-like? Because if she did, then, God forbid, someone -- somewhere, somehow -- would be violated by that act? I don't get it.

By humanizing these dolls over women, they're dehumanizing women. If they still related to women as human, then it's just masturbating creepily. They're choosing to humanize objects over real people---they're denying the humanity of real women.

I'm sorry. English is my native language, but I just can't find a way to parse these sentences so that they make sense. What does it mean to humanize something "over" something else, and how does doing so dehumanize the latter? I'm not being deliberately obtuse here. I simply do not understand what you are trying to say.

They arent "denying" anybody anything, and even if Im wrong and they are, they are denying them within the confines of their own life. Something which you were all too quick to point out is devoid of any female interaction. And Im referring mostly to the two guys who seem to have developed a “relationship�, not the “chewed meat� guy, because quite frankly, that comment alone is enough for me to skip that part.

Im quite sure throughout the whole clip, not one of those guys denied that they were dolls. They all knew they were dolls, they werent delusional about that. It would seem in my view that you are almost suggesting that someone be forced to interact with other people, or in this case women, even when they don’t want to? Or when they don’t feel they can? If someone would rather bond with a turnip than a human, I say fuck it (not literally) and let them. Its when they start killing people because they cant match up to the turnip that’s the problem.

Someone who really loves women is going to go out of his way to be with one.

I totally disagree. I like cats but I don't have one. Because I can't provide enough space, comfort and medical services for a cat. I love women, I had dates (mostly initiated by girls), I had sex etc, but I know that, as an aspie, I can't provide emotional comfort for long and fullfilling relationship. And I don't want to leave a trail of broken relationships and hurt girls.

Boris,

I agree. In fact:

Someone who really loves women is going to go out of his way to be with one. He's not going to let a little thing like rejection get in his way, he'll just look somewhere else. If these guys are too mentally ill to deal with rejection, then they're too mentally ill to love others as well. Risk is implicit in love.

This whole passage is just bizarre. Dana: rapists are people who do not let "little things like rejection" get in their way. And like Boris said, if you honestly don't think you're capable of maintaining an intimate relationship, then abstaining from one is exactly the responsible thing to do!

Squip, Are you arguing that it is possible to form a fully functional social bond with an inanimate object?

Squip, Are you arguing that it is possible to form a fully functional social bond with an inanimate object?

I dont think squip is saying that. I think if squip is on the same line of thinking as me, then its that these "relationships" are in some ways an acceptable alternative for those who cant/wont form "fully functional social bonds" with others, particularly women. In the very least, people shouldnt judge these guys with the "attachments" just because they think its somehow "dehumanising" them.

Well, as for me, I plan to use Real Doll as a focal point for my fantasies about a girl whom I could emotionally support and fully understand. I don't plan to have sex with a doll. I plan to dress her up, talk to her, buy her things, carry her photo in my cellular etc. I already have fantasies of that kind, but I need some reality based anchor for them.

I think if squip is on the same line of thinking as me, then its that these "relationships" are in some ways an acceptable alternative for those who cant/wont form "fully functional social bonds" with others, particularly women. In the very least, people shouldnt judge these guys with the "attachments" just because they think its somehow "dehumanising" them.

I think that is fair. I would add that I strongly resent the suggestion that because these people do not relate to others in the same way that perhaps you do, Peepers, they are somehow necessarily wrong, sad, sick, creepy, icky, disturbing, pitiful, pathological or contemptible. Maybe the expressions to that effect that litter this thread are really earnest expressions of compassion; I do not know. But that would not make them any less wrong.

Many comments are saying that these guys are harmless, but I have to wonder if that is true? They live in a world full of women. In the same way that violent games may make people violent, couldn't playing a game of total and absolute power over a woman lead to these guys getting even more out of touch with society? One of the men was talking about his guns and said he carried one around with him, and I found that disturbing.

I'm sorry. I can't have any compassion for these men.

It is one thing to have a jelly sleeve or a vibrator, but when you cross the line by making sex toys look so completely human that some people use them as a substitute for an actual relationship with a woman (minus the opinions, high grocery bills, and having to go through the drag of having to ask if she wants to have sex with you before you enter her *shudder as I think about what the Texan guy said*), then you have entered truly misogynist territory. And what about that guy who said he was 50 years old and had no chance of ever dating a woman that was as beautiful as these dolls. First of all, nobody looks like that. I have yet to meet a woman with a small frame who has breasts as large as some of those dolls did. Second of all, even if younger women did look like that, as a Junior in college I can say with some authority that most younger women want to date men around our own age because we will have more in common with them than we will with a 50 year old man.

When that repairman said that the vaginas come back damaged a lot of the time, I cried a little. If my vagina could cry, I think she would have too.

I watched the entire video though it was greatly disturbing. Part of me thought "what does it matter they aren't hurting anyone." Part of me felt pity. But I agree with a few statements posted here. What if their behavior steps over the boundary from dolls to women? I don't care that they want to spend money on a sex toy, or that they fuck it so much it breaks. I'd rather they fuck a doll before raping a real person. Will any of these people cross the line? They are so obviously close to the line. I hope these people figure out the source of their problems. Seems living with parents into adulthood was a common factor. Although the one man seemed to only want to have "willing" (as much as an inanimate object can be) participants ready at all times. And those men do possess a warped sexual and cultural view of women. Are they spreading it? Obviously, these dolls are selling. People must be buying. Its so mind boggling.

I was really glad to see Boris's comments because he confirmed my thoughts when I watched this: These particular men didn't seem hateful freaks to me -- but rather people whose minds work outside of what the majority would consider "normal." In other words, my reaction was that they are mentally handicapped in some way. I don't mean that euphemistically (as in "these guys are SICK!"), but quite literally. Frankly, if my INNER life was rich enough to support that sort of "interaction" with an inanimate object, I'd fork out the money for one myself. (As it is, I regularly speak to every piece of technology in my home. And how many people have heard other folks wax about their iPod's "personality"? Before it's compared again ["People don't have sex with their iPods!" Oh but they WOULD and you know it.] if it was purely about sex, I doubt they would spend the bucks on such an unwieldy device when one has such a cornucopia to choose from at the local adult books.)

You are commenting on two things, Dorion, having a rich imagination and having social deficits. One need not imply the other.

I am glad Boris posted, too. The one point of squip's that got taken up (probably because his post looks a lot like trolling) was the dismissal of the importance of social needs (there are definitely other relevant issues that are squicking people out and that should not be conflated with this).

Boris made it clear that he was planning to get a doll because he is coping with a disorder that results in social deficits. That makes perfect sense. It seems like a perfectly reasonable reason to purchase a doll and a perfectly reasonable reason to resist the dolls' being stigmatized. (Squip seemed to read contempt in my comments and attribute it to social dysfunction. I have no contempt. My admitted distaste for the iDollators in the video is due to their sexism and the reification of the stereotypic "feminine" — different issues.)

However, Boris's comments does underscore the social dysfunctionality that's going on with people who choose to have pretend relationships with latex "women."

You're right that one doesn't imply the other, Peepers, but they certainly can coexist (and balance with each other). If I could get a comfortable version of social interaction without leaving my own head, I probably would, too. It would likely take a different form than "sex dolls" for bunches of reasons, but ultimately probably wouldn't be all that different internally. I don't think a couple of these guys are exactly choosing to dismiss regular social interaction. They just can't handle it, for whatever reason.

I was willing to cut these guys some slack...obviously being hideously socially retarded and all...but the look of the dolls really stuck in my craw--all--by most standards--bordering on underweight, with huge tits, and perfectly symmetrical, modelish faces. In the end I can't help but have a niggling feeling that all men want that...in the end (someone "perfect" and pliable). *sigh*

Howard Stern was talking about the RealDoll documentary this morning. I didn't listen to the entire discussion, but it seemed they all were disturbed by the romantic relationship the men formed with the dolls.

Well BethanyS, you would be wrong. I dont want a woman like that. I currently, and perhaps indefinitely, do not want ANY woman at all. I can handle a life with very little to no social interaction, and without relationships with women. And ALSO without turning into a woman hating psychopath. Evidently because some people here couldnt do the same, its been decided that that is not normal human behaviour.

The dolls don’t look very agreeable I admit, but there is just as much a chance a guy out there who is NOT using one of these dolls is much more volatile than one who is.

Men have sex dolls because men need sex, and real women cant be relied on to provide it. The misandrist posts on this page are an example and reason men have dolls, women blame men for wanting a basic human need, women blame men for everything.Thugs and criminals are popular with women but decent men are rejected. I consider myself to be a decent person but i should not be excluded from having sex because i have a quiet nature. My neighbour advised me to get a sex doll because i have always been rejected by women but instead i went to visit prostitutes.Its wrong that men can only get sex by paying for it or buying a doll. I blame any women who accuses men for wanting sex then goes to bed with a someone herself, and if decent men cant have what they want then why should women.

"women blame men for wanting a basic human need"

If having sex was genuinely a basic human need, I'd be dead now.

"Thugs and criminals are popular with women but decent men are rejected. I consider myself to be a decent person but i should not be excluded from having sex because i have a quiet nature."

No wonder you can't find a woman who would like to have sex with you. Lots of women do prefer decent men and reject thugs and criminals, but you pretend that we don't exist. That's rather indecent of you.

"Its wrong that men can only get sex by paying for it or buying a doll."

The world doesn't owe anyone sex. You have the right to avoid sex with people you don't like, right? Why shouldn't everyone else have that right too?

@me,

...decent men are rejected. I consider myself to be a decent person but i should not be excluded from having sex because i have a quiet nature…I blame any women who accuses men for wanting sex then goes to bed with a someone herself, and if decent men cant have what they want then why should women.
Really?
‘Cause I’m guessing it’s your odious personality,
hostile attitude toward women,
and insulting beliefs about them that are doing the job.

I certainly find them repellent.

Yes, because nothing says "decent guy" like feeling entitled to have sex with women, refusing to admit your own personality flaws, and advocating violence against women. Go you!

And for the record, my brother is probably one of the quietest men alive until you've known him for at least six months. And he's happily married and coming up on his three year anniversary. So don't blame women or your "quite nature" because you can't get the sex you think (for some reason) that you deserve.

Men have sex dolls because men need sex, and real women cant be relied on to provide it.

"Relied on? Is that one of our responsibilities as female humans now? To provide all the men with the on-demand sex they "need?" And to be sure, if you're not sticking your penis into a live being, you're not having sex! "Having sex" with a doll is not actually having sex.

The misandrist posts on this page are an example and reason men have dolls, women blame men for wanting a basic human need, women blame men for everything.

Nowhere are women "blaming" men for being sexual creatures. We do blame men for commodifying and objectifying human females, however, and for thinking you're entitled to our bodies despite what WE want.

Thugs and criminals are popular with women but decent men are rejected.

Maybe you believe that because you're only interested in a certain type of woman! 'Bitches and bimbos are popular with men but decent women are rejected' - see how that works?

I consider myself to be a decent person

See, that's where you're wrong.

but i should not be excluded from having sex because i have a quiet nature. My neighbour advised me to get a sex doll because i have always been rejected by women but instead i went to visit prostitutes.Its wrong that men can only get sex by paying for it or buying a doll.

Since when are men unable to get sex with real women? Just because no actual woman will go near your misogynist ass doesn't mean other men have the same luck.

I blame any women who accuses men for wanting sex then goes to bed with a someone herself, and if decent men cant have what they want then why should women.

Women are allowed to CHOOSE who to sleep with! Just because you want to have sex with a particular person doesn't mean she's obligated to fuck you. She can fuck whomever she wants, as long as it's consentual. You're one sick puppy.

I have a hostile attitude towards women because i have always been rejected because of my quiet nature, and i believe in equal treatment for men, which women dont want us to have.

So you think you're entitled to have sex with whomever you want, whether they're interested in you or not. Why aren't you interested in shy, quiet girls? Because they don't look like the supermodels you're after?
You believe in equal treatment for men? Why? Because men have dealt with such awful disenfranchisement in this patriarchal world? Men have been treated as the "default" gender throughtout human history. If you want men to be given equal treatment to women, then you're the one who hates men - because women aren't treated too well.

Also i hate sexist pigs like your self who preach hatered towards men. All feminists are filled with disgusting sexist beliefs and you are an example of a repellent pig who needs a hard smack accros the face.

The irony in this statement is astounding.

"Men have sex dolls because men need sex, and real women cant be relied on to provide it."

If this is true, it's a hell of a strong case for why men should be fucking each other, instead! In fact, next time a guy hits on you, I think you should definitely have sex with him. It's a "basic human need" after all, and it would be wrong of you to refuse to have sex with him--provided he's a decent human being, of course! Not being attracted to him is just an excuse. He's a man, he has needs! How selfish of you not to give him what he wants!

Ooops...forgot the [/sarcasm] tag.

I would hope it was obvious, but you never know.

Men need sex, thats a fact, and there is no good reason why i should be left out when women are happy to screw with thugs and yobs. but women can live without it. You are lucky.
If i had a girl friend i would be happy. If she was shy it would make no difference its better than lonliness. Some people (men and women) have wanted to have sex with me in the past, but even the prostitutes cant get my parts to work. It does not stop me wanting sex The prostitutes i have visited say i am a nice person, my neighbours say i am a nice person evan though they know i hate women. There is no one more quiet and peacefull natured than myself and although i speak of smacking someones face, in reality i don,t like violence.But I blame women for putting responsibilitys on men.
I blame women because women have rights and favourite treatment that i want formyself. I blame women who like violent men.

What on earth are you talking about, me?

What rights do women have that you don't have? What favorite treatment?

my neighbours say i am a nice person evan though they know i hate women.

Maybe women don't want you because YOU HATE WOMEN! You are a misogynist; you're not even apologetic about it. Perhaps, if you need sex so badly, you should seek men as partners.

I was rejected by a woman i met through a dating agency, because i cant drive and i dont have a job. I told her that i like doing
housework (which i do) and i believe that men have a right to look after the home while women go out to work, i told her it was equality but she said "its not what women want". However No one blames women for being house wifes but men do not have that equality, I have joined another dating agency but i am looking
for a man because men do not put demands on me like expecting me to drive, however i have found out since that only men have to pay a subscription to this site, an example of favouritism for women. My sister is also a female chauvinist, she believes in equality for women but not equal treatment for men, she believes she has a right to be treated better than me so i simply dont speak to her anymore as i have no time for misandrists. She does not even apologise for her sexist attitude. As a result of rejection and discrimination and misandry i have a strong hatered of women, my neighbours know excactly what i think because i have told them but it makes no difference. One of my neighbours invites me to visit and i do a lot of work for her because she has a feeble income and i dont charge anything for the work i do. She knows i hate women but she knows i am a good person so although she knows my opinions it does not stop us being friends (she says we are friends but i do not consider her as a friend) Once again i do not blame men for sleeping with dolls. If they dont like real women i dont blame them.

You're a real piece of work. I'm gonna have to go through your post bit by bit:

I was rejected by a woman i met through a dating agency, because i cant drive and i dont have a job. I told her that i like doing
housework (which i do) and i believe that men have a right to look after the home while women go out to work, i told her it was equality but she said "its not what women want". However No one blames women for being house wifes but men do not have that equality,

Newsflash: Feminists believe men SHOULD have the option to be house-husbands! You are directing your frustration to the wrong group of people, buddy. It's conservatives and ANTI-feminists who insist certain work is for men and certain work is for women. You hate women in general because one woman you spoke to had a bad attitude? Ridiculous.

I have joined another dating agency but i am looking
for a man because men do not put demands on me like expecting me to drive, however i have found out since that only men have to pay a subscription to this site, an example of favouritism for women.

I don't believe you. If it's a dating service for men only, and they charge a subscription fee, what's wrong with that?

My sister is also a female chauvinist, she believes in equality for women but not equal treatment for men,

Equality MEANS equal. You can't be "for equality" for only one group. It's contradictory.

she believes she has a right to be treated better than me so i simply dont speak to her anymore as i have no time for misandrists. She does not even apologise for her sexist attitude.

Uh. Neither do you. Hypocrite.

As a result of rejection and discrimination and misandry i have a strong hatered of women, my neighbours know excactly what i think because i have told them but it makes no difference. One of my neighbours invites me to visit and i do a lot of work for her because she has a feeble income and i dont charge anything for the work i do. She knows i hate women but she knows i am a good person so although she knows my opinions it does not stop us being friends (she says we are friends but i do not consider her as a friend)

So you hate this woman but you volunteer to help her. Why?

Once again i do not blame men for sleeping with dolls. If they dont like real women i dont blame them.

no doubt, this stuff is creepy.

thing is, it just happens to be easier to satisfy the desires of these guys with current technology.

once the boffins are able to make rugged, athletic and full-motion-capable man-dolls there will definitely be a female market for them.

i don't think a realdoll is any guy's first option; a lifetime of rejection and failure is probably a requisite. if it makes them happy, and no one else gets hurt, then it should be fine i guess.

These dolls don't need our help... real women, everywhere in the world, do, right now, desperately. And their children, and their sisters, brothers and fathers. What is ironic about all the negative energy on these "dolls" web posts is that they are luxurious, even elite, and ultimately feed back into the patriarchal soul behind so much of the world's real and terrible suffering. There are bad men out there, bad human beings, and these iDollators ain't them. Yes, Jessica, you are right, the dolls are not just sex toys like, say, vibrators; they are also the plastic of make-believe lovers. Why does male iDollatry exist? Because, mostly, these lonely nerdy men -- and that's what they are, lonely nerds -- can't get dates. You and I are morally higher beings though, of course, right? My question to you is, what would you have these human beings _do_ publicly and privately to make _you_ happy?

That's worth thinking about.

Jessica, I know your intentions are good. I know you write for the sake of enlightenment; however I ask you consider the effect of this, what is essentially participation in the marginalization of a small number of disenfranchised men, these "sex doll nerds" or "patriarchal perverts" or whatever particular words may be in your heart. Your intentions are of enlightenment, but the effect may be one of bullying. I find academic stone throwing deceptively immoral. I believe what the world needs is humility. Not just humility of women, but the humility of Aung San Suu Kyi, Martin Luther King, Ghandi or Jesus, or the Mother Goddess, mix and match and take your pick, you get my drift. The world needs the humility of consciousness and conscious action, mine and yours.

Love and Peace,

Betty

I wouldn't post a comment so late except that Betty just posted pretty excellently a few days ago. So here's what I think, after finding this post after seeing a reference to RealDolls in the weekly news roundup.

How much time have the writers and readers of this blog spend discussing the importance of the freedom to do what you want within your bedroom as long as it isn't hurting another person? And no, no matter how messed up or unrealistic about women this small group of men are, they are not hurting "the cause" or doing a big part in propping up the patriarchy-- to suggest that they are is to completely lose sight of violence and violent laws and standards affecting women all around the world (including those who don't have the privilege of sitting around and blogging about $1000 dolls). The hypocrisy of all of this really disgusts me, considering how much time has been dedicated here and elsewhere discussing the right to buy sex toys, have consensual sex with the person/people one wants, and above all, enjoy/feel comfortable with one's sexuality, even if others find it gross, wrong, disturbing, etc. The amount of space devoted to decrying conservatives' disgust with things like masturbation and sex toys comes to mind too. I know you're not responsible for the comments left on your blog, but at times the tone and level of discourse here really resembles that of the anti-feminist blogs you link to, though the ideology is obviously different.

When I discovered this blog last year, I really admired it and found it enlightening, but over the past few months, I've really had an issue with what I see as intolerance here, and throughout the feminist blogosphere. It's funny, though, I'm still just as much (or more) a feminist as ever. I can't tell whether this blog has changed or whether I have.

If someone made a documentary about women who kissed their vibrators goodnight and talked about how much more satisfying than a real guy they were, we would just think they were crazy and ignore them.

Does anyone remember an episode of Futurama where you could choose a celebrity to be the face and body of your robot boy/girlfriend? The episode also featured one of those fifties-style cautionary films showing a guy forgetting to leave his room, go out and work, get a real girlfriend and reproduce and all that, staying in his room making out with his robot girlfriend instead until he is old and wrinkly. Fry reacts to the cautionary film by rushing out to get a robot with Lucy Liu's face and body.
I was very amused and thought I'd choose Raiph (or however it's spelled) Fienes to stay in bed with while life passed me by.
After all, those asocial (NOT antisocial!) guys in the film have a good point: the mating game is cruel and vicious and unjust. After seeing western men frolicking in south east Asia with the young women and children they feel entitled to, I find the decision to stay at home with a doll a socially responsible one.
The vile, sexist things the Virginia guy says are just reiterations of the same attitude and obsession with female "purity" I've heard from countless other people, including my own parents. In fact, the whole doll thing is just the logical extension of porn.
Now if only they made a slightly less hideous male doll (the one they've got looks like Michael Keaton, for heaven's sake!) and I earned more money...