Had a conversation with a friend of mine, and I'm interested in other people's takes!
My friend recently bought themselves an *antique* doll like I think it's 120 years old or something. And it's jointed. The joints are balls! - held together by elastic! So, a BJD technically (though the range of motion is a lot more limited than modern dolls).
The thing is creepy in the absolute best way! And, in my eyes - definitely a bjd.
But, they themselves don't really consider it a bjd? Since it's not really in-line with the modern version of a ball jointed doll, and doesn't really tick all the boxes in order to be "on topic" and sometimes antique dolls are completely excluded on the basis of being antique!
We left it on a "agree to disagree" basis - we're chill like that lol.
But ya girl has opinions. Not as much about the convo itself - but how a chunk of the community views what a BJD is. I just can't wrap my mind around the fact that the type of doll that is essentially the grandma of modern bjds isn't a bjd herself - especially if she does have the ball joints that the dolls are named after!
~Anonymous
Mod: is this posted anywhere, I need to seeee
