The Doll Forum

I'm actually curious as to why this question is being brought up now. The term iDollator has been around for most of TDF's lifespan and nobody has really questioned it cause it just seemed to make sense. I'm of the opinion that, though Davecat didn't coin the term, he did popularize it. I hope the purpose of this poll isn't to change something just for the sake of change OR because Davecat has been the most widely known face of the community there is the idea to discredit/misconstrue what he has done. The word has always meant to encompass everything doll related in one word. Ownership, variety, pride, kinship with others, not just simple idolization bordering worship.

I looked up the ending 'ator'. Aside from the title character of a cheesy 80's movie, the best definition was 'a human agent' as in mediator, agitator, or dominator.

Yes, it's a different sounding word. But didn't iPod, eBay, or god knows how many other electronic gizmos or internet sites that we use everyday sound odd way back when?

So there you have it...

i = internet
doll = self explanatory
ator = human agent.

An internet using doll person... what's so wrong with that?

I'm Euchre and I'm an iDollator

I have both love dolls and sex dolls - so I am a specialised doll owner
and I voted on option 1, but could have taken others of the first 8.

And I am not an idollator (option 9), as I have never seen American Idol
(The word idollator sounds wrong in my ears - Sexsimuloidist sounds better)

MrGrey



.

I voted the most simple term that best describes me within this community. Doll Owner. Although I dress her up,admire her through photography and have sex with her I am still just a doll owner. Those are just the activities that I do with her.
So at times you could call me a doll lover or you could call me a doll admirer but at the end of the day I am still just a doll owner. I own a home so therefore I am a home owner and not a dweller. I don't need any special titles to describe who I am because I am many things other than a doll owner.

Euch is right though. Each individual is entitled to be who they want to be and what they want to call themselves. It keeps us in touch with our identity. So with that being said I hang sheetrock for a living and I am one of the best in the trade so I am going to call myself a Rock Star.

Words like iDollator simply confuse the masses. (About half the population of Britain is 'semi literate and/or inumerate' according to a BBC Radio 4 program a couple of years ago.) That is why I was a bit miffed when the narrator of the recent National Geographic short documentary said that I describe myself as an iDollator. (I too assumed it was a Davecat invention.)

Similarly with onomatopoeia, implied or explicit, and pygmalionism (a fixation with inflatable pigs)...

I guess I never thought of labeling what I do. I guess I would be either a collector, or owner. I have made models for years before I started collecting PVC figures. It just seemed natural to get a full scale figure. I also thought it would be great to take pictures of a model that could be posed. The small models that I made were fixed in their pose. I can custom paint and make a couple modifications. I was going to say nothing beats the real thing, but a doll has many advantages over a human when it comes to modeling.

A couple years ago I thought of D.O.G. Doll Owners Group after a doll meet, but it didn't fly Hey, it works for Harley Davidson.

Euchre wrote:I'm actually curious as to why this question is being brought up now. The term iDollator has been around for most of TDF's lifespan and nobody has really questioned it cause it just seemed to make sense. ...

I looked up the ending 'ator'. Aside from the title character of a cheesy 80's movie, the best definition was 'a human agent' as in mediator, agitator, or dominator.

Yes, it's a different sounding word. But didn't iPod, eBay, or god knows how many other electronic gizmos or internet sites that we use everyday sound odd way back when?

So there you have it...

i = internet
doll = self explanatory
ator = human agent.

An internet using doll person... what's so wrong with that?

I'm Euchre and I'm an iDollator

Now that is funny. Like everyone with a hobby differentiates themselves based on whether or not they use the internet

It is ludicrous to think after the way our language works and the way words are created and put together that you won't be continually correcting and explaining to people what iDollator means (An internet using doll person and not someone that is "idolizing dolls").

And in answer to your question? I brought the question up now, becasue I realized that many people perceive Davecat to be typical of iDollators and when Davecat himself told me in conversation that he felt he did represent the majority of iDollators I thought...dang, I do not want to be perceived in that light, because I DO care what people think about me and I would rather they think of me as I am and NOT as someone else is. Most every article and interview Davecat has done, he comes across as extreme and not like most I have met AND if he indeed is considered to represent the majority of iDollators then the term iDollator cannot possibly represent the majority of Doll owners.

Just because an idea or a practice is followed for a period of time, does not make it right. If that were the case, the world would still be flat If a community is to be defined by a specific name and labeled with it, then it should be at the approval of the entire (or at least majority of the vocal) community and not just a select self appointed few.

I believe your logic behind the definition of iDollator is flawed because it does allow for the OBVIOUS which is the fact that most people interpret words they do not know by breaking them down, following standard rules of English. There is no question the vast majority of people seeing the term will first pick out "idol" and then "ator" assuming it to be a misspelling of idolator. or they may see the double L and interpret it to mean "idol" and "doll" and "ator" hence, one that idolizes dolls. Also most people will not remember to put the capital D in the word which further confuses the interpretation. I constantly get orders from people on my TB Store where they do not use ANY capitals in their name an address a (negative) influence of the internet..

I can understand why you may have such an aversion to our community wanting to officially define the term iDollator and how it relates to the community in general. Many people tend to resist change. As I recall, almost a year ago, you were one of the earlier TDF members to pick up stakes and move to another forum when TDF was changing from financial failure and governed by a small oligarchy to a financially self sustaining forum catering to public input and criticism from its member base and run by a staff of memebrs three times the size. Odd, mind you, because, the 'i' for internet in front of your "iDollator" name would imply that you indeed embrace technology and technology is continually changing
.
Just because something has been done for years, does not necessarily make it right and eventually someone along the way may question that and awaken that silent majority who will then lend their voices to the discussion. This is how women's rights, and gay rights came to be.

There is nothing wrong with the word itself. It is in it's usage and interpretation where we seem to have a problem. As long as the word is used in the context of what most people (especially authorities on English) would deem it to mean based on academic interpretation there IS no problem.

"iPod", "iPhone", "iPad" are coined and copyrightable terms for product and are in fact very descriptive of the product.
Firstly excluding the botany and zoology definitions pod is defined as:

• A casing or housing forming part of a vehicle, as:
  A streamlined external housing that encloses engines, machine guns, or fuel.
  Aerospace A detachable compartment on a spacecraft for carrying personnel or instrumentation.
  Something resembling a pod, as in compactness.

So using an academic interpretation iPod could represent a compact container that houses internet

Of course using your breakdown you could state the same, except that it sounds like idol and looks like idol and therefore becomes a constant battle to educate people as to it's meaning. What is the closest word you can find to iPod that one might misconstrue it to be? Also Apple has spent millions of dollars to put that name and the product in front of the public eye until it became an international "iCon" We do not have that kind of exposure. Also WE are not a product but a group of people using a product and to that extent would normally be defined in the same manner of ANY group using any specific product. ie.. noun - garden verb-to garden - noun - gardener - one who gardens and most words in our language have an etymology (origin) as language is in a continual state of evolution as is happening right now in this thread

If the majority in our community do not wish to be labeled by a 'coined' term they feel might lend people to misinterpretation of who they really are then they have every right to as you have every right to contribute to the discussion regardless of the strength of your argument. Societies have leftists and rightists and so does our doll community.

So here we have it. A candid discussion thread available to ALL doll owners who wish to input as to how they view themselves and what terms they feel accurately describe them to the outside communities.

Oh and you missed terminator, which I gather is who you would like to see deal with this thread

respectfully,
Midiman

P.S. I was wondering where the other iDollator vote came from. Now we have two And it looks like we may still have two goons in our midst as they were the only ones that ever called us DollFuckers Then again it IS descriptive of the primary function of a sex doll

Everhard wrote:Words like iDollator simply confuse the masses.

Exactly. Never mind that most will first see it as a misspelling of "idolator", and when they notice the "doll" in there will thus assume that our dolls are venerated, regarded as something more than they really are. Don't get me wrong; I absolutely adore Caley and Ana, and I'm much happier with them in my life than I would be without. But they're toys, not artificial people, and even when I plunge into the fantasy world and imagine them interacting with me, I still pretend that they're living dolls and not actual human women. Maybe it'd be different if I had more realistic-looking dolls than Teddy Babes, but I doubt it.

I'm now thinking of changing my vote to simply "doll owner". Not because I'm embarrassed about my affection for them, but because I chose "doll lover" out of sentimentality. I don't think of myself as owning my cat, because she's alive and sentient and so I regard her as a non-human member of my family. But my dolls are property. Whether we regard our dolls as mere sex toys, or photography subjects, or artificial/surrogate companions, they're inert physical objects that we own, and that is the common fact that unites us regardless of our reasons for owning them.

I put down doll owner. I would say that I 'love' my dolls very much but not in the same sense that you would love a human. The love that you would have for your spouse would be unconditional and selfless, whereas the love for the dolls would be conditional based on your situation and the condition of the doll, etc, etc. To say that you are a doll lover to me would be confusing to the general public since it can mean too many things. My two cents

Mark and the Synthetiks

pygmalion2 wrote:I put down doll owner. I would say that I 'love' my dolls very much but not in the same sense that you would love a human. The love that you would have for your spouse would be unconditional and selfless, whereas the love for the dolls would be conditional based on your situation and the condition of the doll, etc, etc. To say that you are a doll lover to me would be confusing to the general public since it can mean too many things. My two cents

Mark and the Synthetiks

Very good reasoning and insight.

One thing that is clear is that the majority here at TDF do not feel iDollator is a good coined term to accurately describe our community as a whole as its derivation leads to confusion, regardless of the fact that some individuals within the community have adopted it and been using it for a few years.

I think we can also agree that it has nothing to do with 'undoing' the work of others, but all to do with community building and evolution.

It is only right that issues that affect the entire community should be discussed and ultimately decided upon by the community as a whole.

To that effect, we can safely surmise that the TDF community does not want to be labeled as iDollator and does not recognize the name as descriptive of the majority of doll owners here.

This thread can now serve as a record for future journalists, media and dictionary companies.

I have had more thoughts about the question and a serious answer to it

Are you an iDollator?
No, I am a dollman

Just like the seaman is the man on the sea,
then the dollman is the man on the doll

I think dollman is much more simple, logical and descriptive
than iDollator

(and yes I know there are female dollmen,
just like there are female seamen, taxmen etc )

I would define a dollman as
"a person who spends time on sexdolls/lovedolls"


MrGrey



.

I'm not even sure what an iDollator is. Midi's introduction suggests that it implies extreme veneration to the point where the doll is an idol. That's surely not me.

I voted for Lover. Now we could do a poll for those of us who love our dolls: How would you describe your love for your doll?
- Romantic
- Sexual
- Familial
- Platonic

My doll love is primarily sexual, with a touch (not a full dose) of romance. I know that I am emotionally attached to her because I love to hug her, and a couple of times I've even hugged her with tears in my eyes: Once when saying goodbye as I sent her off for repair, and once after a difficult photoshoot that we pulled off together. Yes, it felt like we were working together.

I have no problems with the term iDollator. Indeed I really like it. Midiman, what you receive as extreme is for me exaggeration as a typical sign of humor.
I cannot think that someone does not see the irony behind it and spells it all out seriously. But I know I am pretty dense when it comes to understand other people, and experience shows me there are plenty of people who seem to think humor is such a precious thing that they rarely dare to use it, lest it might be used up and fade away.

Aside of that I wonder if coining a new term will help common people understand us. I see there are a few people outstanding in the community like beacons, and no matter what the word is, they will be considered extreme. But for the rest I guess its more kind of a grassroot movement (if movement it is). For me, I talked about it to my relatives, I will talk about it to my friends. There is enough proximity for them to understand me. I don't think I can talk about it to my neighbours of colleagues at work. The gap is too wide, I don't know how to cross it.

So far my rant.


For myself I feel the description iDollator does not fit, however; that somewhat much above my head. As you asked, its plain "Doll Owner" for me yet. If I could have a wish I would like to be called a "Doll Friend", thats the irony which fits me (In German language its "Puppenfreund", this just sounds so cute. Anyone knows a French or Italian translation of that term?)
MrGrey: Dollman sounds fitting, too. Females would be Dollwomen then, no?

NotMyName wrote: In some ways, developing their personalities is like writing fiction, except that I'm still me rather than another fictional character.

I like that statement very much, and I hope I can follow that trail through the doll djungle. (I just have to polish up my "writer" skills. Well, we will see ...)
I like the cuddling, dressing, caretaking, and I see forward to have doll sex, yeah. But without the fantasy part this would all be void for me.

Mahtek: thanks for pointing out the origin of the term iDollator, I didnt know that. Dang, I should have known that the answer can be found on this forum and a simple search would have done it, but I still needed that pointer.

Okay, me going on peeps' nerves again, but I can't vote.

Now let's forget for a moment that there's not much doll action going on since months. But say on the peak of me having dolls... like 5-2 years ago... I still can't vote. Then, I'd have to choose all doll admirer, doll owner and doll lover. How can you ever vote in between of those ? Normally, you start with wanting a doll and thus you're a doll admirer. Then there's uncrating day and you become an owner, and once you and dolly have sex, that makes you be a doll lover. But you cannot be a doll owner without being a doll lover (more general meaning), and then you never stop being a doll admirer.

I don't like iDollator, as that's an artificial word. Our hobby is strange enough to the rest of people, so no need to create non-words that noone will understand or that must sound like we want to create our own sub-culture. I never wanted to be that, only was a lonely person with a doll. I refuse the term doll fucker. That's primitive and derogative and puts us in the light of fucking everything and anything. Yikes, why do men always need to be so primitive ? And why call yourself what the trolls call us ?!?

Agalmatophile is technically correct, the psychological way. But while having a doll and having sex with her may technically fullfil being put in that category, I wonder if that's really what a true psychologist would mean with that term. Most are just in some lonely circumstances and have a doll as a substitute, but they know it's a doll and she's not real. A psychologist would mainly mean those few round here who actually *prefer* a doll over a real living woman, because real "agalmatophilia" should be "real-people-phobia", else it's not exactly a differing state of mind discriminating you from all other people. Most will agree that in the end a doll is a masturbation device. Even if I always refused that thought, still it is what it is. So the difference between a "normal man" and a "doll lover knowing it's a substitute" is just the look of the masturbation device. While agalmatophilia will describe to prefer the doll over real women. In my 5 years round here, I've only seen 3 or 4 people say "I prefer the doll" while most say "I can't find Mrs Right", and that makes a huge difference. That difference is easy to see, because while we all "share our hobby", those few who prefer the doll over a girl never found much friends here. While we all admire girls (at least in many aspects) like we admire dolls (at least in many aspects), those few to prefer a doll are somewhere in between of open hatred for women in general and some of those 3-4 I saw sounded like a potential axe-murderer (and got banned pronto). Being such a fanatic no real woman would like see come across at night would justify for a psychologist to define a certain "classification of disorder", but not if my masturbation toy has the shape of a pump, doll, pussy or ass.

A few days ago there was in the news that many adults still sleep with a teddybear. A british hotelcompany noticed that a lot of pluche toys are left behind. According to them over 75.000 were reunited with their owners last year. Many of them were adult businessmen who said that the toy helped them to cope with stress.
For those interested here's a dutch article about it. I'm sure it will have been in the news in the UK as well.

I guess a doll is just a step beyond for quite a few. Although I did get my first doll mostly for sex, that wasn´t the sole use. That was Caroline. And when I got her, I discoverd I liked buying clothes for her, dressing her, or just hanging out with her.
Then I got Erika, and I really can't say that I see her solely as a sex doll. She´s sorta a (albeit silent) companion. We only have sex about once a week, but I kiss, caress and/or cuddle her every day. About half the time she's in my bed while I'm sleeping.

And she does help me cope with stress. So in a way she's like one of the pluch toys mentioned above, but with added benefits. And like a child can love their plush toy, I love my doll.
But none of the categories in the poll really seem to fit.

Vanessa wrote:Most will agree that in the end a doll is a masturbation device.

Yes, in her end. But not the rest of her.

Paula is little more than a masturbation device ... NOT*. That's like saying your whole post was about masturbation, when most of it was a brilliant terminology analysis. What's your day job, Vanessa -- English professor?

-------------
*Lest it seem that I am contradicting myself (see "primarily sexual" in my previous post), "sexual" has a very broad meaning to me, as I stated recently in another thread.
Maybe as one ages the sex drive becomes generalized and is not just about getting inside that hole.