With 3D printers and other digital fabrication tools granting end-users increasing freedom to create personalized designs (cf. Gershenfeld 2021), we imagine Makers creating new things and engaging in self-determined creative exploration of their own ideas. Theoretically expected to forward diversity in practice and production (cf. Pye 2010), Hunsinger and Schrock instead note the tendency of the Maker Movement to form “centers of reproduction” as Makers “reproduce things that are built upon ideas that already exist from parts that are closer to advanced LEGOs or Erector sets” (2019, p. ix). Turning into a practice of reproduction, Making predominantly relies on guiding materials such as instructions, toolkits, templates and design files. Our intersectional feminist alarm bells ring as we see a problematic socio-technological development gaining momentum: the risk of materialized cultural reproduction. To illustrate it, we turn to online 3D-model databases: websites that operate like search engines, storing user-generated content and making it available for others to reproduce. Allowing people to use 3D-printers even without modeling skills, these databases hold the potential to democratize resources (Buehler et al 2015). However, searching them, the authors have made troubling experiences: Wanting to print dolls for their toddlers, Naemi and Janis were overwhelmed by masses of hyper-sexualized figurines unsuited to be what they as mothers considered safe and empowering toys for their daughters to play with. Ekat and Kay, looking for 3D-models of trans and inter* genitals for an arts installation, found only binary representation of body parts in the search results and ended up remixing models themselves to include more diverse embodiments of sex and gender. Our unease is rooted in our feminist standpoints (cf. Haraway 1988) and we trouble over our observations of shared user-generated content reinforcing pre-existent structures of oppression. Despite its promise of democratizing technology, there is significant evidence that the Maker Movement lacks diversity (e.g. Maker Market Study 2012, Lachney and Foster 2020, Lindtner 2020) – a lack reflected not only in its institutions, but also in its practices of co-creating, sharing and infrastructuring. We propose a provocation based on show-and-tell presentations of 3D-printed objects. As authors and audience members hold the objects in their hands, they share stories, articulate concerns and raise critical questions about the risk(s) of materialized cultural reproduction. In this way, we seek to start a discussion around the problematic socio-technological dynamics of reproduced gender norms through the design of technologies and our practices with these tools.