Jump to content
LL Medico Diapers and More Bambino Diapers - ABDL Diaper Store

My problem with ADISC.org


Recommended Posts

ADISC is, for all intents and purposes, the kiddie pool. It's controlled by a highly opinionated group of moderators and if you disagree with them or their point of view, watch out. From my experiences they really weren't all that open to discussing, well, anything. Because the site deals so heavily with minors anyone over 21 is better off either on DD or FL.

Link to comment

Do not try to label me as politically correct, that would be incorrect. I hate excessive political correctness

My point is not to apply a label to others.

If a person or group gives themselves a label, then by all means use it, but never try to apply a label to someone else, you'll probably be wrong.

that I will firmly agree with :).

Spargano

  • Like 1
Link to comment

I don't know. Labels serve a purpose in identifying a group of people. We are a group, hence why we are here together on this forum, but we don't fit under JUST the umbrella of "I like diapers" given the many types of interactions with the various lifestyles. My problem wasn't with labels but redaction of labels.

Further, to reduce it down to the relativistic of "I am me" and put no labels at all limits interaction in the sense that most friendships begin with a common element. Here on DD we are given the opportunity to identify ourselves with labels. It is only when labels become negative in aspect that I have a problem."

But this has been the flow of society for centuries, people desiring to not be labeled and becoming outliers until, given time, them become a defined group. The LBGT community would not have made the advances they have made without bonding together within their labels.

Yes, individuality is awesome, something to be celebrated, but we are a group and distinctions within that group as subsets is sometimes neccessary.

Spargano

Two things that are hallmarks of political correctness are "don't be judgemental" and "no labels" and have beeen such for the last 60 years. Up until c1969 they had just been confined to the loopy "intelligentsia". But let us look at them in practice

If it were not for being judgmental then you would not make a distinction between an honest person and a dishoniest one, In the extreme, that is, if you took it as a principle, between a murderer and a good person. Who benefits from that? Of courase you will say "Well I don't mean that", which only shows you to be a hypocrite by virtue of cherry-picking your cases

"No Labels!" Let us do a thought experiment. You are desperately hungry you find a can, you pick it up and shake it and something is inside it. However there is no label saying just what or how old it is. Do you open it and eat the contents. It could be a can of motor oil or something that is past it's edible lifespan or it could be something that was part of a shipment to a store that was discarded because it was tainted with botulism and should have been, but was not openend and emptied. In the less extreme case, imagine grocery shipping and shopping where nothing is labelled. Before you start on me with the usual "I didn't mean THAT". Again you are simply cherry-picking

Aside from being horrifying cliches, these are two examples of another oft-used claim of the "Intelligentsia" which is "There are no absolutes". usually said with the sanctimoniousness of a cleric and as absolutely as granite when one of their ideas is challenged by reasonable persons and they cannot win so they simply try to end debate

The fact is that if you say this kinds of things, you will be judged as either dishonest, loopy or just plain out of touch with the real world and labelled as either dishonest, trying to be intellectually "hip" or a wingnut, and simply dismissed

At one time the smart thing was to withhold judgement until there was sufficient data and not to label until you know what is true. However that changed in 1957 (to my knowledge) I heard a report on either radio or TV about the "post-Existentialism Intelligentsia" that said that "since Existentialism did not provide 'answers', it was falling out of favor and being replaced by Nihilism". This trend led novelist-philosopher Ayn Rand to quip in 1959 or 60 that "...the Intellectuals are trying to put themselves out of business". If there are no absolutes, then thought and knowledge are impossible since there is nothing upon which the mind can get traction. If you do not label, you will not be able to distinguish between the best and the worst (The same non-labellers are constantly agitating for more tightly defined nutrition labels on foods to which nobody pays attention anyway, through government compulsion). If there are no judgements, the distinction between a saint and satan (to use symbols all understand) is not made. Who wins; the honest person or the scammer?

I have no fear of being judged or labelled. the only problem is being MIS-judged or MIS-labelled

But when I hear "don't be judgemental" or "don't label me" that is the first thing I, or anyone with a moiety of their marbles and a modicum of experience will do as a matter of self-defense; it is the automatic and unconscious saying "Been there, done that, got the BS alarm. What are you trying to hide? [in most cases, there is usually nothing there but sloppy mental habits and an empty head to be followed in a couple of decades by the need for long-term psychotherapy for "angst", "alienation", "ennui" or some other existential malaise in the office of an equally clueless shrink at $125 a go]". We here are full of labels "ABDLl", "T-Girl", "LG", "LGBT/Rainbow" or "Mommy/Daddy" to name a few. And to show how much the Politically Correct Establishment believes what they say, look how fractious they have made things, pitting "African-Americans", Senior Citizens", "Hispanics", "Asians", "Transgendered", "Gays", "Straights" and about 20 other labelled designations against each other in the political arena in a massive bloodsport orgy

Holy tiaras: I am beginning to sound like a groan-up

Link to comment

They stopped letting minors on there last year. When they decided to make it 18 plus, all the underage were banned from there. Some have come back because they turned 18.

Link to comment

ADISC is, for all intents and purposes, the kiddie pool. It's controlled by a highly opinionated group of moderators and if you disagree with them or their point of view, watch out. From my experiences they really weren't all that open to discussing, well, anything. Because the site deals so heavily with minors anyone over 21 is better off either on DD or FL.

Ironically they banned the Teens who had nowhere to turn which kind left it looking for grown ups except it was minus anything around what such sites usually had although ADISC grew from a teen centred

Link to comment

Mixing minors and adults was the downfall of DPF

Link to comment

Being judgemental or a labeller is wrong in the generally understood meaning of these terms as they are used in this context. I can see, therefore I can tell if the person I see is Black or White and I would use that as one 'label' were I need to describe them to a third party. That does not mean that I judged the person- it only means that I saw a notable difference. And if I speak of that difference because I need to that does not make me a judgemental labeller, just someone who knows words which will convey the concept to others ;) It is when I presume something about the person I saw based on the skin color that I would err <_< It would be similar if I automatically spoke of that person's skin color when asked only "How many people did you see?" Shoot, even noting that you saw someone is judging (how many) and labelling (person) in Christine's hypothesis and none of us are proposing that we don't notice anyone or anything, which would be rather stupid :o

Link to comment

I prefer to look at it objectively-for the most part, we're all here due to wanting to wear diapers. To a non-diaper enthusiest, we're all adult babies. Why try and divide it further? Ive read too many posts where people say that they're dl, but not "into the baby stuff", all while saying they love bambinos, footie pajamas, pacifiers, etc. How many posts in the "diaper lovers" forum talk about regressive objects? I cant help but see it as a way to somehow make themselves feel better by putting one class of diaper lovers below the other. Again, to anyone outside the community, if youre into diapers in any way but dont need them, well, youre an adult... who likes a rather babyish item. Are we not all AB in that regard? Just because one guy/girl does something completely different in terms of what they get from it doesn't mean we have to somehow split hairs over it. Seems rather overly PC, and ya, it divides the community.

One thing I do like DD for over adisc is the fact that you can post your opinion and expect to receive everyone else's, whether you like it or not. Moderated discussion gets rather boring after a while.

Link to comment

Yeah I don't get it either how someone can claim to be DL and say they're not an AB but yet like pacifiers or bottles. Stuffed animals or footie pajamas, that is universal. You can find footie pajamas in any stores in adult sizes so that's not really being an AB there, same as for having stuffed animals. You're never too old to have them or sleep with them and there are people out there that sleep with one who aren't ABs nor DLs. That is like saying "how can anyone claim to not be an AB but like spankings and breastfeeding." Still, people can be into those two and not be an AB nor a DL. But can they all be part of it, of course but it's not always part of it. It's like a spectrum. Put it this way, you can have a hard time with friends and fitting in and not have autism. You can like things organized and neat but not have OCD. You can dislike touch but not have a sensory processing disorder. And of course you can like kid shows and not be an AB. You can like coloring and not be an AB. Some people have childish interests but that doesn't mean they are an adult baby and I wouldn't consider anyone an AB if they still like toys and kid shows but yet are not into diapers or baby things.

  • Like 1
Link to comment

From what I have seen here. There are those DL's who either say they do not care for the accoutrements you mentioned or not said they do. Most DL's fess up to having some AB or AK in them. part of that may be that the items go with diapers. Diapers can also go with AK, especially since, in many cases the taste for them is acquired at about 4 years of age, by which time a person is well out of babyhood. 60 years ago, plenty of 4-7 year odls were in dipaers at some time or other if need be and footsie PJ's were not uncommon at 4 o4 5 years of age

At one time, about 30 years ago, AK was not separate from AB, which included preschooler, grade schooler and Jr. high schooler

Link to comment

I've given up on trying to figure out what category I fit into, since how I identify myself constantly changes. I started as overwhelmingly DL, but over time the sexual aspect diminished and the diapers became more for comfort. However, in the past year I've developed an interest in pacifiers (AB) and playing with baby dolls without dressing up (sort of in the Adult Little Girl category).

  • Like 1
Link to comment

I was told by an AB that all DL's eventually become AB. I tried what he said, thinking maybe I just need to give it a try. But bottles did nothing for me.I agree that if you are using All the baby praphanelia then you might want to reconsider the denial of being AB.

But for a great many of us, we do not want rattles, cribs, high chairs, sippy cups, or mommy/daddy. We just want our diapers, that's it. Some of us for sexual gratification, others for psychological gratification.

I think Spokane girl said it well that we exist on spectrums, and as Bettypooh stated, we can label ourselves and place ourselves on that spectrum for identification without judging anyone else. What we can do, is equip people with knowledge to better understand themselves and their interest so he/she can place him/herself where he/she feels best :)

Spargano

Link to comment

I've given up on trying to figure out what category I fit into, since how I identify myself constantly changes. I started as overwhelmingly DL, but over time the sexual aspect diminished and the diapers became more for comfort. However, in the past year I've developed an interest in pacifiers (AB) and playing with baby dolls without dressing up (sort of in the Adult Little Girl category).

Link to comment

I'll give you this round, Christine, considering my clever retort got eaten...

Giggle :)

Pity: I would have liked to have seen what it was

Link to comment

Well from my exsperience and years searching for others like myself I would have to say that if we are to different AB from DL, it would be that quite a few AB's do not use diapers in their baby side, and that would make them fit the term AB.

The term DL would fit anyone who wears a diaper for enjoyment weather or not they need to wear them for protection.

Just because you happen to consider yourself DL does not exclude you from being AB.

AB's from my stand point is liking to do babyish thing or babyish items and it does not have to include a diaper.

DL's well that to me means liking diapers and nothing to do with any other part of baby afire.

Link to comment

The last time I looked, diapers were an essential part of a real baby's life in most places

Link to comment

I use a different approach to that kind of thing "If you keep pushing me then I will agree just to pacify you, Is that what you want? Will you ever trust me thereafter?"

Link to comment

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...