Poppy Troll Doll

This is to open the door to more dodgy stuff being put into the public domain that as time passes gets harder to challenge
Yup, I'm pretty sure the grand plan is exactly what you say.
The advent of the internet made it easier in lots of ways.

Either that or no one is being educated in safeguarding and actually listening and taking it in. Apparently teachers are involved in this fuck safeguarding thing.

Having read the Audi thread and the posts there trying to convince people that their concerns about dodgy sexualised subtexts mean they're paranoid or they're the actual paedophiles, I'm coming to the view that some people are deliberately putting dodgy products, adverts, memes etc into the public domain that have enough deniability about them so that when people cry "foul", they can be made to look foolish or unbalanced with the aim of making it more difficult to cry "foul" in the future. This is to open the door to more dodgy stuff being put into the public domain that as time passes gets harder to challenge.

I wonder what's the cross-over with queering of the public domain?

A Daily Mail article always brings a bit more sunlight...

www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-8603781/Trolls-doll-pulled-shelves-mother-shares-video-making-sexual-sounds.html

datun
Fluttershy is a bit worrying, very big and a lot younger than Rarity.

So have Hasbro pulled it and recalled or just pulled it and offering an exchange? Personally I think they should all be recalled.

Hasbro has pulled the toy after public complaints:
nypost.com/2020/08/06/hasbro-pulls-trolls-doll-after-complaints-it-grooms-children-for-abuse/

Regarding members of grooming gangs, hundreds out of the population of the average town doesn't seem to stretch the 5% figure. However, I'm more than willing to read any literature you can provide that describes higher numbers

Nah, in this you are wrong, it's not hundreds in the population of the average town, its thousands. And for the last part I'm sure you could Google if you actually cared to.

Just remember when you Google, for every girl who came forward and stated 10/20/30 men in a gang, there are literally thousands of girls who didnt come forward, there are grooming gangs still today. But the only people who want to do something about it are the sex class formerly known as women.

This doll anyway is nothing about grooming gangs, but it's all about grooming.

Jeez. I didn't know that. Girls just wanna have fun, and giggles when you touch their genitals? Ffs.

You can hear it for yourself after the 6 minute mark of this unboxing video.

The song this Troll Doll sings is "girls just wanna have fun".

Jeez. I didn't know that. Girls just wanna have fun, and giggles when you touch their genitals? Ffs.

but I just don't imagine that they would risk exposure in order to make a perverse toy.

It's not just a perverse toy tho. And within these companies you can always pull out plausible deniability.

It's a toy that one could gift to a child with the intention of desensitising them.

The song this Troll Doll sings is "girls just wanna have fun".

The whole thing is more than creepy.

If anyone gifted this to any child it would raise massive red flags.

Sleepy and rural doesn't mean it doesn't happen, even if you haven't noticed it. I live in a very rural county, but I used to play football with women who worked in child protection (both social services and the police) and have a close friend in public health - all said all of the local small-ish towns had issues with grooming gangs and trafficking. We often think of trafficking as involving women being brought from other countries, but round here it's more likely to be some 14 to 18 year old girl moved 10 miles up the road to the next town and kept in a brothel, too ashamed to get back in touch with her family.

I have friends in the far north of Scotland - there's problems with paedophilia there too, even on some of the very sparsely populated islands (to my horror it turned out I knew one personally; the first I knew about it was a phone call from his offender management team).

Gurufloof, I'm very sorry that you had to have any interactions with grooming gangs at all. I should say that I'm not terribly sociable and rather socially oblivious (I'm even generally surprised when I learn that people I've met are homosexual, for example; not that homosexuals should 'act' a particular way, more that I didn't notice their partners). I also grew up in a rather sleepy part of England where the biggest local scandals were a fairly amicable divorce and a child born out of wedlock. For these reasons, I'm relying upon published figures since I'm not aware of anyone I've had more than a passing meeting with turning out to be a paedophile.

Regarding members of grooming gangs, hundreds out of the population of the average town doesn't seem to stretch the 5% figure. However, I'm more than willing to read any literature you can provide that describes higher numbers. I really regret having contemplated this but I can also imagine the incredibly horrible notion of certain members who aren't necessarily attracted to children participating as a form of social bonding.

Please do forgive me but that last thought has turned my stomach and, while I'll read anything you link to at a later date, I can't really continue discussing this in the near future. Sorry.

means any attempt to form a conspiring group would be risky, essentially a 19/20 (at minimum) chance of losing their job at each interaction
with a new individual

How do you think the very many grooming gangs manage? The ones I know about had literally hundreds of men in any given gang, these then branched out to swap children within different gangs. My best estimate is much more than 5% of men are paedophiles. Just from my own interactions in grooming gangs.

As for chances of losing jobs, lots dont officially work, lots work together in the same building/company/type of employment, they are best mates with the boss who is also a paedophile, no chance of losing your job when you and your boss are into the same illegal stuff.

right before suggesting people who see how totally fucked up this doll are operating from "confirmation bias".

'Confirmation bias' refers to the hypothetical engineer. Sorry if it wasn't clear:

I can see how confirmation bias might play a role (an engineer expecting to hear silly, innocuous noises and perceiving them as such).

That’s sick. Children play with dolls by acting out normal things. Putting them to bed, tea parties, clothes off and on.

You get bears that growl when you poke their tummy, kids like to be the bear and do what the bear does.

Dolls are used in therapy. In interviews with children about abuse.

That doll should be recalled.

Yes, some paedophiles are lone wolves, but there are enough documented cases of groups of paedophiles operating together that I don't see why you think it's so implausible, unless you've been living under a rock for the last 20 years.

Perhaps I can't imagine the drives a paedophile might feel. I can understand them conspiring to physically abuse children or exchange abusive material but I just don't imagine that they would risk exposure in order to make a perverse toy.

Don't think for one second readers here don't know what you mean inserting the phrase "assuming a lack of paedophile conspiracies" right before suggesting people who see how totally fucked up this doll are operating from "confirmation bias".

Stop sucking the bone of your word "conspiracy" and its James Bondian secret cabal of evildoers with elaborate plans, men's sexual interest in children is blatant and banal.

Jimmy Savile, Rolf Harris, Stuart Hall - all working for the BBC at the same time (when I was the sort of age that they were interested in... all of them producing the sort of family entertainment kids like me would have been encouraged to work). In Savile's case, so many people knew that it was an "open secret" - Irvine Welsh even based a character in one of his books on him.

Of course they get to know one another - a guarded hint here, a coded reference there, a careful testing of the waters... It all relies on plausible deniability if those initial hints are dropped to someone who isn't a pervert, plus mutually assured destruction once they've formed an alliance with someone. (Plus the routine culture of omerta that goes with patriarchal power structures - cf men who predate on adult women - everyone knew about Weinstein, for instance, they just didn't talk about it). The bastards form groups to abuse girls and boys. Yes, some paedophiles are lone wolves, but there are enough documented cases of groups of paedophiles operating together that I don't see why you think it's so implausible, unless you've been living under a rock for the last 20 years.

And you dismiss the very common, very powerful desire many, many, many men have to sexually abuse children because...?*

My understanding of the word 'conspiracy' is a common (often subversive) plan knowingly undertaken by a group of people in secret. I'm not sure how doubting a paedophile conspiracy as an exclusive explanation requires there to be an almost complete lack of paedophiles in the world.

I was under the impression that the upper bound for the figure, from credible sources, was around 5% of men. Far, far too many but, in my opinion, a number that means any attempt to form a conspiring group would be risky, essentially a 19/20 (at minimum) chance of losing their job at each interaction with a new individual. I can't speak to the corporate culture at Hasbro but, quite apart from not wanting paedophiles in their staff register on the basis of human decency, I imagine they'd be less than thrilled, were it to emerge, simply because of the potential impact on profits.

I remember the bronies taking over the ponies. That is why I think this toy is marketed to MAPs (minor attracted people) and the dog whistle in the color choices was expected to fly under the radar with parents.
Pls excuse the mixed metaphors.

[quote TheChampagneGalop]This reminds me of how the Hasbro toy line My little pony gained an adult male fanbase from 4chan ("bronies") who sexualized the little cartoon ponies. It became unsafe for actual children to search for MLP things online as they could come across porn and disturbing violent content.
Look at this figure, a sexy human version of one of the ponies. Created with Hasbro's permission and promoted to the lucrative "bronies" fans.
en.kotobukiya.co.jp/product/product-0000003471/[/quote]
Fucking A.

This reminds me of how the Hasbro toy line My little pony gained an adult male fanbase from 4chan ("bronies") who sexualized the little cartoon ponies. It became unsafe for actual children to search for MLP things online as they could come across porn and disturbing violent content.
Look at this figure, a sexy human version of one of the ponies. Created with Hasbro's permission and promoted to the lucrative "bronies" fans.
en.kotobukiya.co.jp/product/product-0000003471/

"assuming a lack of paedophile conspiracies"

And you dismiss the very common, very powerful desire many, many, many* men have to sexually abuse children because...?

I was going to stop at two "many"s, one each for Jeffrey Epstein and Jimmy Saville, then added a third for "teen" being the #1 most searched porn category.

I’ve assumed from this that either (a) Hasbro is deliberately trying to normalise sexual abuse of children; or (b) that some of their designers are trying to normalise sexual abuse of children, and that their corporate controls are too lax to stop this.

I don’t see the gasping and giggling can have any legitimate explanation. None at all.

My children are older, but I wouldn’t buy a Hasbro toy for a younger child now. No way. Really dodgy. Wouldn’t give it house room.

Why would the doll need button between it's legs and make gasping sound when it's pressed? Why does it have those flag colours? I can't really see any non-pervy explanation for this.