What dolls?? You don’t have any.
I say “our” as in our community. Not every individual in that community has dolls (such as myself), I’m using the term “our” to refer to people like us in general.
1 Like
Not from what I’ve seen/heard. And even if what you say is true, I am poor. I could not afford even a “good musical instrument”.
2 Likes
Well, that’s good news.
I’d like to point out for anybody reading who doesn’t realize this:
National Socialist ≠ Socialism.
They CALLED themselves “socialists”, but it’s just like how North Korea’s official name is the “Democratic People’s Republic of Korea”. The name itself is propaganda meant to trick people. The Nazis used their own name to manipulate the working class into supporting their Aryan supremacist cause.
Even at the time, actual socialists saw right through Hitler’s bullshit:
3 Likes
As far as I am aware some people are considering charges against Vanessa Behrendt for public slender. The postings by the AfD where made after technical attacks and insults against the same website made by so called “pedo hunters”.
2 Likes
The AfD is now officially and legally confirmed to be a nazi party:
5 Likes
They are now checking gov. and public sector employees with a membership in the AfD to consider firing them. Everyone who wants to work in the gov. / public and is part of the AfD now also has to tick “Yes” to the question if they support, or are part of a extremist organization.
A leading AfD politician also said publicly:
“I recommend every employee of the intelligence service to quickly find a new job. As history teached us: captured together, hanged together”
How is this not a death threat. It is clear that they see it is totally fine to give in to the extremism, because they spread this image of “corrupt state” for so long that any non-AfD message is considered untrustworthy.
America has the benefit of currently experiencing the utter incompetency of far-right politics.
3 Likes
Fascists deserve to be shot, burned, and hanged.
Gemini explains this.
This method of using a single issue to characterize an entire group of people as morally corrupt or “degenerate” is a psychological and rhetorical tactic often referred to as synecdoche-based moral framing or moral outgroup derogation.
Basically, they’re saying that anyone who doesn’t advocate this one issue is a degenerate.
It’s simply not evil to think that what happens to a doll doesn’t matter. It’s simply not evil to think that if there’s no harm, there’s no problem. Evil doesn’t encompass how someone handles a doll.
Anyway, Moral Essentializing is used to get cartoon laws and doll laws passed. In this case, the group seeks to advance an entire agenda with this tactic.
2 Likes
I am happy that the scientific community is much more reasonable towards non-offending MAPs. At least from the german studies I gathered. There is currently not a single one that is negative towards Dolls. They are positive and supportive with some neutral ones. You only hear the negativity in interviews and personal opinions and this is what the media tends to use. People who tend to be around in the public space are less likely to have a positive attitude as they WILL get targeted for smear campaigns.
Quotes from: Reported Consequences of the Ban on Sex Dolls with a Childlike
Appearance, 2024:
We would like to emphasize that the data from this study and the cited studies examining pedo-hebephile doll owners (Desbuleux and Fuss 2023b; Harper and Lievesley 2022), currently provide no evidence that doll owners pose an increased risk. In this respect, the introduction of Section § 184l of the German Criminal Code (StGB) and the associated hope of better protection for children remains scientifically questionable. It also remains questionable whether it should really be the task of criminal law to regulate the sex lives of people who, with the help of dolls, are trying to come to terms with their sexual orientation in such a way that they do not harm other individuals.
The way they define pedophilia in that study:
According to current knowledge, pedophilia can be understood as a sexual orientation that is immutable after its formation (Cantor 2018; Seto 2012, 2017). This is particularly important for those affected who strive to deal with it responsibly and exclude sexual contact with children, is associated with considerable psychological suffering (Seto 2012). The term sexual orientation can encompass more than mere orientation towards a gender (a comprehensive explanation is provided by Seto 2017).
Another study that came out a month ago making clear that every individual has a right to sexual self-determination including pedophiles.
Quotes from: Prof. Dr. Christine Graebsch, Sexual rights and health in prison, 21th November 2025:
Even an indirect harmful effect, as in the use of such dolls would encourage acts against real children, does not exist, according to research findings. On the contrary, there is even evidence of a reverse effect, whereby masturbation using such dolls can replace acts against real children and thus prevent them (Desbuleux/Fuss 2024).
[…]
According to the case law of the Federal Constitutional Court, a fundamental right to sexual self-determination is enshrined in Article 2(1) in conjunction with Article 1(1) of the Basic Law, which was first mentioned there in 2008 (BVerfGE 120, 224 (239); for the whole, see Valentiner 2021). Sexual self-determination is an expression of the free development of personality (Article 2(1) GG). The fundamental right to sexuality represents, among other things, a defensive right against the state, which may no longer threaten consensual sexuality with punishment. In addition to its function as a defensive right, it also gives rise to a mandate for legislation, for example to protect against discrimination (for the whole, see Valentiner 2021, p. 196 ff.).
2 Likes
Yay for science! Those researchers have balls of steel. Respect.
2 Likes
The doll laws are hate based laws. The method of getting them passed entails a narrative that states only a pervert would object to such a law. One problem is that no one points out that hate doesn’t justify punishment. How one handles a doll cannot reveal how protective one feels of people when it’s no more normal to ascribe human rights to a doll than it is to ascribe human rights to a broom. It’s not evil to think that what happens to a doll doesn’t matter. Hate doesn’t justify punishment and there is no evil to punish for. These doll laws need to be considered with the idea that hate doesn’t justify punishment. Also, dismissing Occam’s razor is dishonest. To uphold these laws is to ignore Occam’s razor and punish for disgust when there’s no disregard for genuine human rights. No one’s freedom should depend on ascribing human rights to a doll.
There are mentions of crossovers. Punishing for something merely because a criminal does it, one could punish for wearing socks.
Sorry for being wordy.
We cannot agree that it’s not evil to think that what happens to a doll doesn’t matter and that it’s not evil to think that shape cannot make a lifeless object precious and coherently disagree that how someone handles a doll within the confines of solitude has no moral relevance. We cannot agree that hate doesn’t justify punishment and disagree that punishing for doll ownership cannot be justified.
Once you strip away the ‘ad hominem’ narrative—that only a deviant would oppose these laws—the legal justification collapses entirely. Without that emotional blackmail, there is no objective harm left to prosecute.
4 Likes
It just dawned on me. What would they sue you for?? Because you advocate for right to let people have their own thoughts and fetishes? What would be the charge? Would you now suddenly become a criminal for advocating freedom of expression?
It’s the “us vs. them” argument again. Advocating for them makes you one of those pdfs! Pdfs are criminals! I’ve yet to hear anyone say what crime they’ve committed? It’s simply that they exist and could be anyone that fuels the “stranger danger”.
3 Likes
There’s no one to apologize to or anything to apologize for. Imagine someone asking for forgiveness for thinking that what happens to a doll doesn’t matter or for thinking that shape cannot make a lifeless object precious.
The narrative of moral deviancy isn’t just a part of the doll laws; it is their only foundation. If you remove the character assassination of the dissenter, the legal argument for these laws vanishes.
These laws rely on a circular moral trap. If you remove the premise that opposition equals perversion, you are left with a legal vacuum. There is no victim, no damage, and—crucially—no remaining reason for the law to exist.
There are many ways to state this fact.
3 Likes
It’s genuinely refreshing to read this.
3 Likes