You misread the situation. They actually are saying
MattUK wrote: "hey, these are people with a niche interest, let's take a look at that and find out what's going on"
BECAUSE THEY HAVE BEEN ASSOCIATED WITH ACTIVITY FOR WHICH THERE HAS BEEN NO PROPER RESEARCH AND NO EVIDENCE and
IN THAT CONTEXT
MattUK wrote: "I'm sure these freaks aren't as dangerous as everyone seems to think, let's see if we can quantify exactly how dangerous they are
and here is the right place to draw upon doll owners for them to be able to garner the necessary evidence that doll owners are neither freaks nor dangerous, at all.
So cooperation is important.
I have the impression that there are owners of dolls who have fears of interaction with other people, and that's why they prefer dolls who don't answer back.
Human interaction is rather like the animal world. One has the choice of answering back
- dogs.jpg (128.54 KiB) Viewed 1649 times
or running away.
In the circumstance where
bona fide academics are researching whether there is any evidence at all for commonly held beliefs, running away doesn't help. Those commonly held beliefs have to be squashed and buried, and we are the ones able to provide the evidence to do so.
I have pointed to the statement on the other TDF page:
Again, I understand the apprehension that some may have about surveys such as these. However, please be assured that this survey assumes nothing about those who own sex dolls. In fact, the survey was motivated by a frustration that media outlets represent doll ownership in a way that assumes sexual risk. As I suggest above, the only way to directly address these concerns or representations is to ask about them in a very direct way. For this reason, I would urge you not to give up on the survey after seeing questions that may lead to discomfort, and to answer them in an honest way. It is only by doing this that we can tell your stories, and address these issues for you within the broader literature. Please do not assume that this research makes any judgement of people who own dolls. If anything, we come from a place of support and wish to be able to represent this community in a way that is less emotional and more evidence-led.
We take the view that somebody having 'atypical' sexual interests and attractions is not a direct indicator of risk. Instead, we need to understand how and why these attractions translate into risk. The reason for some questions in this survey that relate to age of attraction and sexual aggression is that we are collecting data on a range of websites and forums, including sites for individuals who are minor-attracted. Again, we are not making any assumptions about doll owners, but these questions simply reflect our range of data collection methods.
One can't have clearer statements than that.
The survey is on
https://ntupsychology.eu.qualtrics.com/ ... aXpJW2ldrf
It's only by enabling these researchers to have the evidence they need that Dr Richardson who clearly has a grudge against something to do with failed relationships, and looking at her it's not difficult to see the reason why, and idiot journalists who encourage the mindless to make prejudicial Twitter feeds
https://www.forbes.com/sites/andreamorr ... e337476e79 can be discredited from their positions.
Best wishes
Harem