or Connect
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Mom › Talk Amongst Ourselves › My Fake Baby
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

My Fake Baby - Page 14

post #261 of 282
Quote:
Originally Posted by purple_kangaroo View Post
I understand that you are very attached to your dog and you choose to express that by calling yourself the animal's "mommy". But I hope you don't get offended when other people refuse to call you his mommy. The people we had at the veterinary clinic would literally get offended if we called them an owner instead of a parent.

My opinion (and the same with dolls or anything else) is that if you want to call something that's not a baby your baby, or call yourself a mommy to something other than a child you are parenting, feel free. It's the people who expect everyone else in the world to do the same, and get upset when they don't, that drive me crazy.
No one has to refer to me as Edison's mommy. I have a name and an identity apart from my dog. I do understand though the reservations that your veterinary clients have when they are referred to as the owner of their pets. A living being can never be owned. Only objects, like dolls for instance, can be owned. I would hope, as a society, we can move toward language that is more appropriate, such as the use of the word "guardian" or something similar, when naming the relationship we have with our pets.

Quote:
Originally Posted by thismama View Post
I get weirded out by people calling themselves 'mommy' to animals... I think it is along the same continuum as the doll thing. I hear what you are saying, AsYouWish, but OTOH I know people IRL who do this and who anthropomorphize animals and pretend they are like children, and... they are not children. Lots of complications and issues come up when people are pretending something that is not true. I understand a close loving relationship with an animal, but a person can never truly be the Mommy of a dog. Or a fake baby.
I am not into anthropomorphizing animals either. I have no illusions that Edison is anything other than a dog, a dog with a lot of issues. I have seen firsthand the problems that do arise when people treat their pets as if they are people. Among friends and family, I am often the one going in and undoing the damage. But what else should I call myself when so many actions that fall under the umbrella of "Mothering" have gone into the care and rehabilitation of my dog? Our society does not have a word for that. I'm way more than an owner, a title I am uncomfortable with, as I already stated. And, frankly, when I compare my input to that of my DP's, (whose contribution is admirable and very much needed, but he and I are both aware that if he had been trying to deal with Edison on his own, Edison would not have made it) we can't both be "guardians", because it does not appropriately define my role compared to his. I'm left with "Mommy". And, by extension, DP is "Daddy". And, in our case, this really does fall along the stereotypical gendered norms of those titles in our society. I do all of the worrying, nurturing, teaching, researching, planning. DP does all of the playing, roughhousing, and ineffective disciplining. I don't go around the neighborhood introducing myself as Edison's Mommy. That would be ridiculous! If introductions are necessary, I refer to myself as "AsYouWish" and follow that up with, "And this is Edison". In our home, though, when it even comes up, like when we play games with Ed, we use the terms "Mommy" and "Daddy", you know, "Go find Mommy, Ed" or "Go find Daddy". Same goes when we visit the inlaws, the titles are Grandma, Grandpa, and Uncle R_____. And with very close friends, like Uncle D_____ or Aunt M_____. Just as they will be when we eventually have children. Our thought with this from the beginning was that it would be one less confusion for our dog down the line when kids are on the scene. He wouldn't have to relearn anyone's names/titles, including ours. One less anxiety for an anxiety-prone creature.

To veer back on topic, I am uncomfortable with the fantasy behavior of the two ladies featured in the fake baby documentary. It does strike me as unhealthy. I also realize that the film could seriously have been skewed by the producers for the viewer to see it just that way. I don't know. I did not for an instant think their behavior representative of the doll collecting community, even if that was the intent of the filmmakers. And I don't know whether that's true or not, either, that it was their intent I mean. Mostly because thousands upon thousands of people cannot skate that close to the edge of unbalanced. That's what makes the stories of those two ladies so unique and special....and a little disturbing.

I wish Sue would put her time and money toward some therapy to deal with her perfectionism and obvious obsessive-compulsive tendencies. It is impossible to live a fulfilled life as a perfectionist, because one is constantly striving for something that is unattainable. If she overcame these hurdles, maybe she could really mother a real live child, which is something that I think she might truly desire and feel unable to do right now.

As for the grandma, I think she needs to invest in a little counseling too, to deal with her loss and grief. If she feels the need to nurture a baby, perhaps she could volunteer at orphanages or foster homes. Or maybe she could market herself as a nanny, specializing in infants. And then, with that need met, she can watch Harry grow up and appreciate him for the real, growing boy that he is.

Just my $0.02.
post #262 of 282
I call myself mommy to my cats but I understand, in their brain, I am not mommy. Adult cats do not have mommies. Adult mammals of most types do not have mommies. They have a mother, but they no longer want or need her. Cats are social animals but do not remain part of a family per se. Dogs are pack animals and believe the person who feeds them, trains them and shelters them to be in their pack (and not necessarily the leader!) I think it's FINE to call ourselves mommy to them, it certainly isn't hurting anyone. It does, however, hurt a dog when you decide it's a baby human, as my stepmother has (incidentally, she never had any children, and got this dog just after I had my human baby). Someone who dresses dogs up in clothing that is uncomfortable for them (not just to keep them warm)- who forces them to be carted around in a designer pocketbook and pee inside on mats instead of allowing them outdoors to run, and who insists "It's EXACTLY life having a (human) baby" is doing neither themselves, nor their animal, any favors.

AsYouWish, I also rescued an animal from dire conditions, woke up at night to bottlefeed him because he was too small and weak to eat, and became very attached. I cried over him and lavished attention upon him. As soon as I got my second cat, it was like night and day, I just felt differently towards him and now prefer my other cat- though I still love him as well. And once I had my real baby, I loved both of the cats differently and less intensely. I think my emotions were supplying something I needed even more than what they needed. I am in no way minimizing the wonderful things you have done. Trust me, I like most animals much more than I like most people! I plan to continue to rescue animals my entire life, but I think it's important to always remember they are an animal. Do they deserve love, attention, effort, and the best life we can give them- yes. But they will never be the same as a human baby, and I think that's what people are bristling at when people like my stepmother suggest that they are. And she really means it, and the dog suffers because it's treated like a human instead of a Chihuahua.

The doll issue is related because it's insulting to real mothers to pretend to be a real mother when you're not, on some level. To parade around with your expensive "pram" and your fake formula (blech!) and your designer baby clothes so that you can get the attention and not have to "deal" with mess or imperfection is, in a word, insane. To do so in one's home is harmless, if somewhat unhealthy. To do so in public is deceitful, potentially harmful if someone like me who is hyper-aware of SIDS is watching your non-breathing, non-moving baby and thinking it's dead, and frankly it's disturbing that a grown woman would need that kind of desperate validation so much that they'd seek it out knowing it's false.
post #263 of 282
Quote:
Originally Posted by majazama View Post
periwinkle, maybe you should start a society against fake babies, that's a way to change it.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Periwinkle View Post
Now hang on.... I'm too busy working on a custom sling for transporting mantel clocks and VCRs. Sheesh.
:


Quote:
Originally Posted by purple_kangaroo View Post
Sue, the lady in the documentary who had a picture taken with her husband and a doll, takes pictures of her husband with his racecars [his hobby], too. Lots of people have photos taken with their cars. I have a picture of myself with my first car when I was 16. I loved that little car--not like I thought it was a person, but like a teenager enjoys a first car. Have you seen the movie, "The Princess Diaries" where Mia calls her car her "baby?" It doesn't mean she actually thinks it's a baby. It just means it's special to her.
I'm stunned that you are making a comparison like this and just. not. realizing. that it's not the same thing as pretending that a doll is a living, breathing baby.

It isn't the same thing. It just isn't.


Quote:
Originally Posted by majazama View Post
I went on this website (google "reborn forum") and there are some pics up on there of "horror reborns"... I found *that* a bit disturbing, as they looked like really dead babies, all purple and green. I don't think that would be the kind that people would bring out in public though

http://images.google.ca/imgres?imgur...icial%26sa%3DN
http://www.rebornaddictshouse.com/mo...nails&album=10
I'm so not looking ... but WHY????????????
And I thought the NICU Reborns were bad enough.



Quote:
Originally Posted by bri276 View Post
it's insulting to real mothers to pretend to be a real mother when you're not, on some level. To parade around with your expensive "pram" and your fake formula (blech!) and your designer baby clothes so that you can get the attention and not have to "deal" with mess or imperfection is, in a word, insane. To do so in one's home is harmless, if somewhat unhealthy. To do so in public is deceitful, potentially harmful if someone like me who is hyper-aware of SIDS is watching your non-breathing, non-moving baby and thinking it's dead, and frankly it's disturbing that a grown woman would need that kind of desperate validation so much that they'd seek it out knowing it's false.
ITA.
post #264 of 282
Quote:
Originally Posted by thismama View Post
I get weirded out by people calling themselves 'mommy' to animals... I think it is along the same continuum as the doll thing. I hear what you are saying, AsYouWish, but OTOH I know people IRL who do this and who anthropomorphize animals and pretend they are like children, and... they are not children. Lots of complications and issues come up when people are pretending something that is not true. I understand a close loving relationship with an animal, but a person can never truly be the Mommy of a dog. Or a fake baby.
Of course dogs (or cats) are not children. I think the previous poster's point was, an animal can love you back. A doll cannot.
post #265 of 282
Quote:
Originally Posted by bri276 View Post
The doll issue is related because it's insulting to real mothers to pretend to be a real mother when you're not, on some level. To parade around with your expensive "pram" and your fake formula (blech!) and your designer baby clothes so that you can get the attention and not have to "deal" with mess or imperfection is, in a word, insane. To do so in one's home is harmless, if somewhat unhealthy. To do so in public is deceitful . . . and frankly it's disturbing that a grown woman would need that kind of desperate validation so much that they'd seek it out knowing it's false.
LOL. If they're doing it in their own homes they're obviously not doing it for attention.

And, honestly, I've collected dolls and participated in online doll communities for years. I participate in an online community with the ladies in the documentary, and that film was the first time I'd heard anyone talking about using dolls to get the "new mom" attention. That DID come across as wierd and kind of disturbing.

I think that the filmmakers may have asked leading questions or made judicious cuts to get that footage. I can certainly say I've never heard doll collectors--even these particular doll collectors featured in the film--talk about it that way before. I have a feeling that they may have been making a comparison or trying to explain it as closely as they could, but that the part where they were saying it wasn't really like that or it was only sort of like that may have been cut out.

I do agree that the way it comes across in the film is disturbing. I'm just not really convinced--primarily because of my other interactions with these ladies--that they really think about it that way. Even the film didn't say that they actually try to make people think the dolls are real babies. The ladies shown in the film were rather extreme examples of doll collectors, but even they didn't really think they were babies or try to make others think so.

The only people I've heard of who actually think these dolls are real babies are Alzheimer's patients or people with dementia, and a lot of these dolls ARE used for that purpose.

I saw today that Sue said she was misrepresented in at least one newspaper article, and that she certainly does NOT rock her babies to sleep at night as was claimed.

The whole thing about dolls being almost the same as real babies except that they don't move was wierd, and I would never say such a thing, but obviously she's never had a child. I can certainly see how people would find that offensive or disturbing. I did get the impression that she uses the dolls as an opportunity to try out the idea of having real children occasionally--especially in the part of the film where she was talking about trying to imagine the doll being a child who was difficult or up all night, and how she would handle that.

FTR, I also found it rather shocking and disturbing that the artist would market her dolls by walking up to people and saying, "Would you like to buy a baby?" That bothered me.

Most doll collectors don't take their dolls out to random public places, and if they do they're usually doing something like shopping for clothes for the doll. The ones who do take them out in public because they want to show them off are wanting to show off the beautiful artistry of their DOLL, not trying to fool people into thinking they have a real baby so they can dupe people into complimenting them as a new mom.

I think it would be fair to say that most people who do take their dolls out to show around in public do it (if not just for their own enjoyment) to raise awareness and appreciation for the art form, or (in the case of the artists) to generate business (PR). If they are trying to make people think they're actually real babies, that would kind of defeat the purpose of getting more people interested in collecting dolls.

Just for the record, Sue said that her reason for taking part in the documentary was to raise awareness of and interest in these dolls, to show people how beautiful and interesting they are and how talented the artists are.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bri276 View Post
. . . potentially harmful if someone like me who is hyper-aware of SIDS is watching your non-breathing, non-moving baby and thinking it's dead . . .
As for the issue of some casual stranger who walks by thinking a doll is a dead baby because it's not moving, the more I think about that the less it makes sense.

Newborns often get very still and breathe shallowly while they sleep. It can be really hard to tell whether they are breathing or not anyway--I was always holding my hand in front of their noses or feeling their chests to see if they were breathing when mine were small. A casual stranger who glances over isn't going to be able to tell whether a REAL sleeping baby is breathing or not in many cases--you'd have to get very close for more than a few seconds to ascertain that. And a baby who really wasn't breathing would be changing color.

The few times I have had dolls out in public, after the first glance people knew right away that they were dolls. Most people seeing something that looks like a baby but isn't moving or breathing, but isn't turning blue or grey, are going to have the common sense to realize that it's a doll.

It's only the first split second or two that they think it's a baby. After that their reaction turns into awe and enjoyment over the artistry and realism of the doll, not cooing over a baby. It's not the same thing.

Now I'm half-tempted to take a doll out in public and have someone follow me around with a video camera just to show what kinds of reactions it gets.
post #266 of 282
Quote:
Originally Posted by harleyhalfmoon View Post
Of course dogs (or cats) are not children. I think the previous poster's point was, an animal can love you back. A doll cannot.
Very true. And neither a doll nor an animal are a human's baby.
post #267 of 282
Wow that is kind of sad and creepy.
post #268 of 282
Quote:
Originally Posted by purple_kangaroo View Post
Stuffed animals are probably a good comparison.
OK good. Let's do it then...


Sarah is an avid teddy bear collector. In fact, her small living area is now totally devoted to teddy bears and teddy bear paraphrenalia, so much so that she sometimes has a hard time sitting down or finding a place to sleep without having to carefully move some of the bears. Each bear has a special name that she put a lot of effort into choosing. Each bear is dressed carefully in matching outfits, lovingly chosen from boxes full of clothes - clothes Sarah sorts and folds just so, and spends weeks choosing from speciality catalogs and shops. The bears have their own accesories, ranging from tiny backpacks and pocketbooks to twin strollers and little bunk beds. Sarah says that each bear has its own personality - she says Lulabear for example is very shy and quiet, Miss Gloria Altonbear is very fun and likes parties, and Mr. Seamus Brownbear is very grandfatherly and wise. Sarah is bonded to each of her bears. If you were to suggest to Sarah that she give them up, she would not be able to comprehend how or why anyone would ever ask that of her - her bear collection is a very big part of her life. If you were to suggest to Sarah that she go on vacation without any of her bears, she would be horrified and very, very worried. For days leading up to the vacation, she would be fretting about leaving her bears, and in the end would find a way to sneak a few of the ones who really depend on her into her suitcase. If you were to suggest to Sarah that maybe she's spending a little *too* much time with her bears, she would roll her eyes and tell you it's time well spent. Sarah loves her teddy bears very deeply and likes to take at least one of them wherever she goes. She carries them in a specially-designed carrier and always makes sure to buckle them carefully into the car when driving. Everyone knows teddy bears are Sarah's "thing" and most of the gifts she gets are more teddy bears or bear-related accessories. People even go out of their way to find teddy bear-themed tee shirts, socks, and so on for Sarah. Yes, pretty much when you think of Sarah, you think about teddy bears.

Now here's the question... is Sarah 8 years old or is she an adult?
post #269 of 282
Quote:
Originally Posted by spero View Post
I'm stunned that you are making a comparison like this and just. not. realizing. that it's not the same thing as pretending that a doll is a living, breathing baby.

It isn't the same thing. It just isn't.
My point was that just because someone takes a picture of themselves with their doll doesn't automatically mean they're "pretending it's a living, breathing baby."

I don't don't mind anyone being disturbed by someone thinking having a doll is "almost exactly like having a real baby." That IS disturbing. I can see someone being bothered by someone trying to pass a doll off as a real baby if it ever happened. But I don't think that was actually happening, even with the women portrayed in the film.

What I do have a problem with is people assuming that anyone who takes a doll out in public, or anyone who has their picture taken with a doll, or anyone who holds a doll and pats its little bottom, or anyone who changes their dolls' clothes, or anyone who puts a doll in a baby carrier or pram, or any of the other things that were mentioned, automatically has a problem differentiating between fantasy and reality and/or is mentally ill.

See my point? As soon as someone starts talking about how it's crazy for anyone to buy outfits for a doll and change its clothes, and they can't imagine why any sane grown woman would feel a need to (horrors!) PLAY with DOLLS, they're talking about me.

Last time I checked, I was neither crazy nor trying to trick people, replace my children, or fill some vast emotional need.

I think the dolls are beautiful. I love the artistry. I own several dolls. I decorate my home with them, use them to market my hand-crocheted baby items, pose them and make up stories about them, and dress them up and take pictures of them. I enjoy playing with them that way--usually for a few minutes once every few weeks.

I taught myself how to root hair, because the idea of making realistic dolls is more interesting to me than the idea of buying them, and the skill involved in making them fascinates me. I would love to learn how to sculpt realistic-looking babies out of clay, and I'd really enjoy making sculpts of my kids as babies to have as mementos. I'd be thrilled to be able to sculpt something--anything, baby, animal or something else--as realistic as what some of the doll-makers create. I think making a sculpture that beautiful and realistic would be really satisfying as an artist.

I hardly think that makes me ready for the loony bin.
post #270 of 282
Quote:
Originally Posted by mazajama
I went on this website (google "reborn forum") and there are some pics up on there of "horror reborns"... I found *that* a bit disturbing, as they looked like really dead babies, all purple and green. I don't think that would be the kind that people would bring out in public though
trying. really. hard. not. to. pee. my. pants.

omfg

/takes a moment/

But seriously, if they're just into the artistry and the whole "doll collection" thing, why WOULDN'T their owners bring them out in public, kwim? You know, all the times they have to transport them in a Britax Roundabout, then a custom Baby Hawk mei tai, then a quick jaunt in the Bugaboo just to take the fugly thing in to get some new plugs.
post #271 of 282
You are going to do me in, Periwinkle

I am trying to stay objective and professional here.


post #272 of 282
Quote:
Originally Posted by Periwinkle View Post
OK good. Let's do it then...


Sarah is an avid teddy bear collector. In fact, her small living area is now totally devoted to teddy bears and teddy bear paraphrenalia, so much so that she sometimes has a hard time sitting down or finding a place to sleep without having to carefully move some of the bears. Each bear has a special name that she put a lot of effort into choosing. Each bear is dressed carefully in matching outfits, lovingly chosen from boxes full of clothes - clothes Sarah sorts and folds just so, and spends weeks choosing from speciality catalogs and shops. The bears have their own accesories, ranging from tiny backpacks and pocketbooks to twin strollers and little bunk beds. Sarah says that each bear has its own personality - she says Lulabear for example is very shy and quiet, Miss Gloria Altonbear is very fun and likes parties, and Mr. Seamus Brownbear is very grandfatherly and wise. Sarah is bonded to each of her bears. If you were to suggest to Sarah that she give them up, she would not be able to comprehend how or why anyone would ever ask that of her - her bear collection is a very big part of her life. If you were to suggest to Sarah that she go on vacation without any of her bears, she would be horrified and very, very worried. For days leading up to the vacation, she would be fretting about leaving her bears, and in the end would find a way to sneak a few of the ones who really depend on her into her suitcase. If you were to suggest to Sarah that maybe she's spending a little *too* much time with her bears, she would roll her eyes and tell you it's time well spent. Sarah loves her teddy bears very deeply and likes to take at least one of them wherever she goes. She carries them in a specially-designed carrier and always makes sure to buckle them carefully into the car when driving. Everyone knows teddy bears are Sarah's "thing" and most of the gifts she gets are more teddy bears or bear-related accessories. People even go out of their way to find teddy bear-themed tee shirts, socks, and so on for Sarah. Yes, pretty much when you think of Sarah, you think about teddy bears.

Now here's the question... is Sarah 8 years old or is she an adult?
Could be either. But the parts I bolded would be, to me, indications that there was a problem.

Any time something--anything--is taking up so much time, space and energy that it's interfering with other parts of your life, it's a problem. If a person is unable to step out of an activity or limit the amount of time they spend in an activity, that's a problem.

If someone genuinely thinks an inanimate object "needs" them in some way other than taking adequate care of it (i.e. not leaving a valuable book in a damp place), that's a danger sign.

The classic definition of an addiction is something that requires increasing amounts of time and energy and cannot be limited--something that becomes a NEED or an obsession when it doesn't warrant that type of position in someone's life. That's a concern no matter what the object of the addiction or obsession is.

I'd be a bit concerned about Sarah whether her obsession was teddy bears, dolls, plants, collectible porcelain elephants, video games, the internet, coffee, chocolate, antique butter churns, paper clips, or posting on motheringdotcom.

If she dressed her bears, named them, collected accessories for them, etc. but was able to limit that to a small portion of her home, life, time and attention, and clearly understood that they were not real living beings and they don't "depend on her", then I would think it was perfectly fine whether she was an 8-year-old or an adult.
post #273 of 282
Quote:
Originally Posted by Periwinkle View Post
trying. really. hard. not. to. pee. my. pants.

omfg

/takes a moment/

But seriously, if they're just into the artistry and the whole "doll collection" thing, why WOULDN'T their owners bring them out in public, kwim? You know, all the times they have to transport them in a Britax Roundabout, then a custom Baby Hawk mei tai, then a quick jaunt in the Bugaboo just to take the fugly thing in to get some new plugs.
Some of them probably do take them to doll shows or display them publicly--especially around Halloween.
post #274 of 282
Quote:
Originally Posted by spero View Post

But, have you watched the documentary yet?
Over and over and OVER again, Sue makes it crystal clear that it is NOT maternal instinct that drives her to collect Reborns, that she DOESN'T LIKE to hold her dolls, that she really just uses them to satisfy her own impossible ideals and to get attention.



Thanks.

Yes, I watched it and I agree that using the dolls to fill a void after a loss wasn't what she was doing. However, she was using them to get attention and I think that they are still really valuable, if they can get some women the attention that they need, instead of an actual human being used in that manner. They are still providing a service. I wish that my mom could have gotten the attention and excuse to shop from these dolls, rather than the children that she used for the same purpose.
post #275 of 282
Quote:
Originally Posted by emcare View Post
I wish that my mom could have gotten the attention and excuse to shop from these dolls, rather than the children that she used for the same purpose.
post #276 of 282
This thread reminds me of that awful diaper commercial - the one where the woman has a brick for a baby.
post #277 of 282
OMG the "horror reborns" made me sick. Who would even think to do something like that? Even DH found them disturbing and NOTHING bothers him.
post #278 of 282
Quote:
Originally Posted by Periwinkle View Post
trying. really. hard. not. to. pee. my. pants.

omfg

/takes a moment/

But seriously, if they're just into the artistry and the whole "doll collection" thing, why WOULDN'T their owners bring them out in public, kwim? You know, all the times they have to transport them in a Britax Roundabout, then a custom Baby Hawk mei tai, then a quick jaunt in the Bugaboo just to take the fugly thing in to get some new plugs.
Maybe we can get some and do a documentary... "My Fake Spawn".
post #279 of 282
Quote:
Originally Posted by purple_kangaroo View Post
My point was that just because someone takes a picture of themselves with their doll doesn't automatically mean they're "pretending it's a living, breathing baby."

I don't don't mind anyone being disturbed by someone thinking having a doll is "almost exactly like having a real baby." That IS disturbing. I can see someone being bothered by someone trying to pass a doll off as a real baby if it ever happened. But I don't think that was actually happening, even with the women portrayed in the film.
Then why even bother with the "breathing apparatus", that makes it appear that the doll is breathing? The grandma had it on her "Harry" doll. Why?????


Quote:
I think the dolls are beautiful. I love the artistry. I own several dolls. I decorate my home with them, use them to market my hand-crocheted baby items,
I don't disagree with you there. As I stated previously, at one time I wanted one for my daughter - just b/c I love the realism (I'm into real-looking dolls for my kids to play with), and she would have adored something like that. I knit clothes for her dolls, and she treats them like babies - and that's OK. She's seven years old. I'm 42 and until recently, was absolutely desperate to have another baby. In fact, I was truly grieving the fact that I wouldn't have any more. But I seriously doubt that - painful as the realization was - I'd ever find the need to cart around a Reborn in order to deal with it.
post #280 of 282
Quote:
Originally Posted by spero View Post
Then why even bother with the "breathing apparatus", that makes it appear that the doll is breathing? The grandma had it on her "Harry" doll. Why?????
Because it's the newest technology and it's kinda neat. It's a novelty.

Most people don't really like it that much, though . . . some of the artists were discussing that they have them on hand just so they can say they're up on the latest innovations, but they're almost always a custom order--they don't put them in most of the dolls they make, and even the people who buy them usually try it once or twice and find that they don't like it all that much.

The grandma was brand new to doll collecting, so she's exactly the type of person more likely to go for the faddish "new" stuff like that.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Talk Amongst Ourselves
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Mom › Talk Amongst Ourselves › My Fake Baby