Real Dolls, Self-Isolation and Static Time
Posted by John Brownlee
In response to the Guys and Dolls real doll documentary we posted yesterday, Taquito commented:
Far more fascinating - and MOVING - than I ever would have expected. I’d anticipated a total “ha, let’s laugh at the freaks!” show but wow, talk about some serious pathos. The British fellow in particular had me more than a little verklempt, people shouldn’t -have- to have their choices limited to either soul crushing loneliness or - eh, soul-crushing loneliness with -dolls-…
No, they shouldn’t, and my deep revulsion for these people aside, it is diluted in the end into a sort of nauseous pity, because I don’t believe that any person is utterly undeserving of companionship.
But let’s make no mistake: these guys aren’t just unlucky in love. They ARE freaks, and the choice of living in either soul-crushing loneliness or soul-crushing loneliness with dolls is one they made themselves by excluding the third choice most of us take for granted.
Eliza and I were discussing this yesterday: each and every one of them is obsessed with the concept of static time. A dead mother’s room preserved for thirty years as a shrine, a framed photograph of a female roommate from ten years ago, and so on. Gordon bitterly complains, “Think of all the friends you had at five or six. Where are they in your lives now?”
It’s not an accident that most of these guys either live with their parents, lived with their parents until they died or are shut-ins. The only woman who can have a place in their lives must be as immobile as their perception of time, and those women only come in latex.
Davekat comments, “I like things steady” and cites as one of the benefits of the Real Doll as being the lack of the very quality that makes actual relationships so exciting: the wild unpredictability, the constant discovery, the ups and downs. For someone like me, the fact that I can never truly know a lover is one of the great raptures of love. The revelation of some previously unknown quirk in a girlfriend can make me tremble in excitement and longing; people are infinitely complex, and their hidden nuances are often what make them so wonderful. For a guy like Davekat, though, the concept of psychological exploration and evolution in a relationship is terrifying. What he requires in a woman is for her to be an immutable philosophical abstract; the only girlfriend he would not suck dry must be defined entirely by his replenishable imagination.
At one point during the documentary, Everard comments that he’s always been an outsider. He mentions that sometimes, he’ll just be sitting somewhere, not saying anything, and people will react to him as if he’s alien.
But it’s all self-fulfilling: his self-definition is based upon being an outsider. He doesn’t seem to understand that the entire world isn’t one massive, incestuous clique bent upon excluding him, but only excludes him because he excludes himself. He talks about how he would expect women to be attracted to him because he loves to hang-glide, even comparing himself to a superhero. But he hang-glides alone, driving up to a secluded hilly area with his real-doll dressed up and left sitting in the car (he pins a note to her breast reading “I Am A Doll: Virginia Real Doll” to prevent passers-by from trying to rescue her). He seems to not understand that women do not smell the pheromones of the supervirile hang-glider on the wind and come rushing to his location from five counties away, disrobed and dripping in desire. And if they did? The unblinking plastic sex doll in the car might preclude a relationship.
These guys are all intoxicated by their excuses for not finding love or companionship. A strange smile curls their lips when they discuss it… they aren’t feeling sadness about their lot, but pleasure. Gordon mentions he could never get a girlfriend because he’s got bad skin, bad teeth and is too skinny, none of which is really true. The comfort of these excuses is the fact that they allow them to validate their own static isolation, their own inability to love a woman. With victimization comes validation.
You need no more proof that these guys are actively isolating themselves from real love than the closing segment. Throughout the documentary, Mike reiterates over and over again that he wants to find someone to spend his life with, that love and romance are important to him.
But when he finds a woman who not only is attracted to him, but is willing to accept his Real Doll obsession as long as he gives them up for her, he invites her over to dinner where eight of the ghastly mannequins are arrayed around the apartment like harlequin Down Syndrome sluts: their faces made up with garish ineptitude, their implausible breasts exposed in pink fishnet tops, their legs spread suggestively. Everything about that dinner is set-up to drive her out of his life, yet right beforehand, Mike says he hopes there will be wedding bells in their future.
And no shocks there: she dumps him a week later. Most women do not want to live their lives with their lovers’ sex dolls.
Categories: Real Dolls, Fetish, Sex, Horror
Posted at 4:46 am on July 11, 2007
13 Comments -
Holy wow.
I saw the first real doll site back in ‘99 or so, and the dolls always have creeped me out. I read in some magazine about a couple who indulges in real doll sex. Freaky ass underbelly asshole of society people. I have to see this documentary for the same reason I find Intervention enticing.
At least they’re not furries.
Comment by zerone — July 11, 2007 @ 6:47 am
Why the strong reactions?
Who cares if they fuck latex?
Sure, it’s weird. It probably arises out of some pretty complex psychological issues. But I don’t see why they should be viewed as “revolting” or part of the “asshole of society”.
You make them out to be scum, like politicians.
Comment by t3knomanser — July 11, 2007 @ 8:37 am
these guys arent scum. they just do their own thing. i mean one of my frequent quotes is “why cant i just find a girl that loves old videogmaes, bruce campbell, and basketball as much as i do” well it looks like Davecat found one who loves all the things that he does and never talks back to him except with what he wants her to say. i went to highschool/college with guys like these they always had to be the dungeon master while playing DnD always had to be in control and couldnt handle it if that control was challenged. they make themselves out to be outsiders or loners or whatever for various reasons all of which are self inflicted or self imposed. i do feel a small bit for these guys and those out there like them, however to be part of society you must be social! i appologize for the rant.
i meant to do one when you posted the osaka love theif docu but i didnt have the time.
i have loved all the docus you have posted (gizmo, osaka love thief, this one) post more!
Comment by Maxwell — July 11, 2007 @ 10:47 am
I did not watch the video, so my only comment can be on this article.
I don’t think the point is that they are weird, screw latex not furries, or are revolting. There is a gut reaction of misplaced pity and the overall generalization is that people (all people) insert barriers that prevent the very things they claim to want. This is just one more example, albeit strange to my mind - but WTF.
You fall for the pity, for the victimization, but the reality is that it is this behavior is self-pity, and self-victimization. Yes there may be complex psychological issues here, but there are complex psychological issues involved in all behavior, good, bad. indifferent. That’s really a PC cop-out - we cluck and say “Well, you know, (insert name) has ‘issues’.” Then we go on our way content that we don’t.
We all screw ourselves, be it with a latex doll(s), the continuous selection of the same type of “wrong” person, buying things we can’t afford, or a white sofa that the kids will throw up on.
So yeah, this is a sad tale, but it’s not just about them, it’s about us. And I guess that’s the point that I see. We self deceive, we self pity, we self victimize, and then we wonder why our life isn’t what we thought or wanted it to be.
And I’m just as self-occupied as the rest of the world. If only they would understand and support my love, passion, for Milky Way Dark.
Comment by JMudder — July 11, 2007 @ 11:43 am
Character is driven in part by how much of ourselves isn’t left behind in childhood. Children often resort to inanimate objects; dolls, plush animals for companionship, friendship, or protection. At some stage or other, usually before puberty, we grow out of it, and we no longer anthropomorphise these things; at least not publicly. But somewhere in the back of our minds, it’s still there, occasionally manifesting itself in a car or a ship, or a toy that still remains from those days. Its a last remaining shred of innocence that we try to retain from our youth in spite of our reason.
Some of us go a little further than that, and have sex with them.
Some of us are sufficiently served with disembodied latex likenesses of appendages and or orifices that can be discreetly tucked into a drawer when finished. We don’t attach any feelings to these toys. They serve one purpose; to fire off a quick one.
Apparently, to others, a latex phallic or yonic device isn’t enough. They resort to the full body likeness. They form emotional bonds to their toys that go beyond what most of us would feel comfortable with. Granted, a manikin doesn’t exactly fit discretely in a drawer, but Most people don’t have candle lit dinner for their fleshlight either.
The inescapable conclusion that most of us who call ourselves passively normal are forced to is that this behavior is like a security blanket, allowing someone to reach out to a physical manifestation of his imaginary friend, and filling a need that his psyche prevents him from fulfilling socially. He can remain cloistered away in a place of safety, where he doesn’t have to deal with the larger scarier world of heartbreak, rejection, and unrequited love. Because he has become so comfortable with his dolls, he is unable to break out of that place of innocence into the larger, more fulfilling world of real social interaction.
Forget it. I’m analyzing this way too much. This guy’s wacky, and should probably seek help.
Comment by Peregrine — July 11, 2007 @ 12:27 pm
Wow you have hit it on the spot. This is why i like reading your posts
Comment by Shaan S — July 11, 2007 @ 9:00 pm
I’m still going with underbelly assholes of society. I’ve seen and read about latex fuckers elsewhere. They act alot like the Japanese guy who killed and ate parts of his girlfriend in France. All twitchy with bad social skills.
Sexual devices are a part of nearly everyone’s sex life, from the lonely fapper to the married couple. Except those groups don’t treat the device like a human being. That’s the part that freaks me out. People can do (and will do) anything they want, it doesn’t mean I don’t have to be disturbed by it.
I’m just saying these people are fucked in the head and will hurt people or themselves one day. Humans are social creatures and social rejection is normally not handled well.
Comment by zerone — July 11, 2007 @ 11:36 pm
WIIIIIILLLLLLLLLSSSSSSSSOOOOOOONNNNNNNNNN!!!!!!!!!!!!!! *sob*
Comment by Epheros Aldor — July 12, 2007 @ 12:30 am
What disturbs be about these people is that they almost all exhibit some symptoms of mental illness. These people aren’t just shut-ins, they aren’t just socially awkward, these are people who have such serious problems with human relations that they choose a thin fantasy over reality. The relationship between a man and his real doll isn’t just strange, its pathological. There are problems with reality testing and social cognition that make me wonder if many of these individuals don’t have a major personality disorder.
I think its a cop out to say that these people are self-pitying or that this behavior is some kind of sign that they’re dangerous. One of the hardest thing to understand about mental illness, particularly delusional thinking, is that they really do believe what they’re saying. The guy who sets up his dolls to meet his girlfriend really does hope that he’ll get married, he really does believe she’ll accept them. To him these are his friends, his lovers, its like taking the girlfriend home to meet his parents. He doesn’t get that she’ll have problems with it because he doesn’t get other people. He doesn’t have a problem with it, he feels like theres nothing wrong at all, and he really doesn’t have much of a frame of reference for how others will respond.
I think John hit the nail on the head when he started talking about “static time.” People with Real Dolls need the kind of consistency that a human relationship cannot provide. They need their immediate surroundings to be safe and predictable so they can hedge out all the anxiety they feel, so they have a haven to go to, so they have somewhere to hide. I would guess that most of these people have had some kind of constant, low-grade trauma throughout the better part of their lives. Constancy provides a kind of protective blanket, it gives them something to hold onto, something that they can rely upon. The fact that what they need to feel safe is so alien to us, the same thing thats getting all of these revolted responses, should be tipping you off that the anxiety they’re fending off is of a magnitude we just aren’t used to. These kinds of defenses don’t pop up overnight. These people are terrified of the world around them, terrified of what they see, terrified of what might happen. That kind of terror takes time to build.
Its easy to brand these guys as freaks, as assholes, as dangerous, but I’m not sure thats right. It lets us get a bit of distance, it allows us to write them off without considering why they are how they are. Most of all it lets us disengage. After all, if this latex fucker is the lowest form of life why should I even worry about him, why should I give him the slightest consideration, why should I feel sorry for him, why should I think about all the little things in him that remind me of parts of me I’d rather not think about?
At the end of the day I’m kind of glad that a company like Real Doll exists. It gives truly isolated people some tiny shred of intimacy. More importantly, it gives them something to focus on, it gives them a proxy for their affections. That tiny portion or marginalized, socially isolated, schizoid personalities that might have become dangerous now have something that they can latch onto. You read the interviews with guys like Dahmer and Gein and you wonder, maybe a doll like this would have been enough, maybe it would have fulfilled whatever need they were trying to fulfill.
Comment by William — July 12, 2007 @ 2:05 am
Good point William.
Touche.
Comment by zerone — July 12, 2007 @ 2:51 am
And I think William does have the doll by the horns here. If Davekat didn’t have his beloved doll he would still live with his parents, still try to capture the Marilyn Manson look, and probably have a less physically satisfying but just as emotionally charged relationship with some other fetish object. Everard is never going to find anyone to replace his mother. Mike would use women instead of dolls.
They are emotionally stunted, but not inhuman. That they need something to fill the gaps in their lives proves that.
BTW:
The Castaway reference made me laugh Epheros Aldor, but the suggestion that there was anything more than a platonic respect ‘tween Tom and his ball changes the whole movie for me…
Comment by Geogzone — July 12, 2007 @ 2:22 pm
HAH!!! Sorry for ruining it, but you know that was the first thing that popped into my head when I read this post. I thought about what would happen if some ass-hat entered Davekat’s house and ruined his dolls in some way, cut them open, ripped the heads off, whatever. I wonder how badly he would grieve for these meat puppets, how much he would blame himself for letting harm come to his ‘friends’.
Comment by Epheros Aldor — July 12, 2007 @ 5:53 pm
My favorite part of this doc was the woman who worked at Real Doll and had a series of stories of the weird requests they got. “You want an old woman, a girl who’s really hairy? Jesus, we only make NORMAL eight thousand dollar fuck dolls you FREAK!”
Comment by Kurt Vile — July 12, 2007 @ 6:55 pm