>We understand that allowing non-childlike realistic dolls to be discussed in a sexual context carries certain risks, so please make sure to strictly guard against any attempts to incrementally push boundaries with edge cases and not-childlike-but-also-not-adultlike realistic dolls. We do not want the kind of posters such things might attract.
That's understandable. It isn't my intention to allow substantial discussion of realistic sex dolls and don't mind erring on the side of restrictive here. Realistic depictions of adults are only board-relevant in terms of being examples of construction techniques etc. and the techniques of the sexualization of a realistic doll differ substantially from those of more board-relevant dolls.
>The doll you post there seems to us (unqualified as we are) to be sufficiently anime-styled that it wouldn't be mistaken for a "credible" simulation of a minor, but where will your board rules draw the line in a way that'd be understandable to your posters?
The relevant rules will probably be something like this:
>The posting of realistic images or realistic simulacra of children in any context is expressly forbidden. This includes realistic child-like dolls or baby-like dolls intended to simulate childcare.
>The sexualization of dolls that could be considered toddlercon, or the sexualization of dolls that could reasonably be construed as simulating or based on real children is forbidden. Product lines such as Mini Dollfie Dreams which are derived from other unrealistic dolls are entirely allowed where they do not contradict the former.
>Realistic representations of adult humans or animals (statues etc.) should be spoilered, and the sexualization thereof should be kept to a minimum.
The doll in OP is of a line (Mini Dollfie Dream) that is a derivative variant of a type of non-realistic non-childlike dolls, which is the situation for the majority of acceptable cases. The more western style of childlike dolls that I intend to forbid are modeled after children rather than being variants of existing lines of dolls (notwithstanding 'realistic sex dolls', which are outside the purview of the board in any case and violate global rules if childlike).
Increasingly neotenic dolls (which are usually lower quality and smaller) obviously converge towards just looking like the low-effort western dolls. At a certain point you're just cumming on a Dam Troll, which I'll ban before it gets out of hand under the toddlercon rule.
I think it's reasonable to conclude that sexualizing something like "The girl and The Bull" would occur, and would probably violate romanian law. There was a single image of this kind of non-sexualized realistic child (the wireframe) which I have unlinked.
Pic related are dolls of the same type as OP next to one of the line they're derived from.