![[DD] Boards & Chat](https://www.dailydiapers.com/board/uploads/monthly_2021_11/DDweb-02.png.0c06f38ea7c6e581d61ce22dffdea106.png)
Sissy Room
645 topics in this forum
-
- 0 replies
- 12.2k views
-
- 16 replies
- 1.5k views
-
- 9 replies
- 336 views
-
- 64 replies
- 18.3k views
-
- 9 replies
- 396 views
-
- 28 replies
- 5.5k views
-
- 28 replies
- 3.6k views
-
- 47 replies
- 11.5k views
-
- 23 replies
- 13.5k views
-
- 11 replies
- 1.5k views
-
- 2 replies
- 475 views
-
- 8 replies
- 971 views
-
- 21 replies
- 2.4k views
-
- 8 replies
- 667 views
-
- 6 replies
- 1k views
-
- 38 replies
- 4.6k views
-
- 73 replies
- 21.6k views
-
- 12 replies
- 8.2k views
-
- 14 replies
- 3.3k views
-
- 1 reply
- 1.4k views
-
- 4 replies
- 381 views
-
- 8 replies
- 943 views
-
- 8 replies
- 925 views
-
- 8 replies
- 657 views
-
- 219 replies
- 47.8k views
-
-
.png.9a51a96e25e3e77d1da09587b011169d.png)
-
Posts
-
I've thought for a really long time that neuroatypicality and kink go hand in hand. While I have developed a working hypothesis (well, several actually) for why, I have seen almost no research actually looking into the nature of it. It's unclear whether that's a good thing or a bad thing. On the one hand, the field of psychiatry is replete with biases and prejudices that stigmatize neuroatypicality (and any form of sex other than heterosexual missionary, which itself must be relegated to the a bedroom and may only be displayed in advertisements for Calvin Klein underwear) in incredibly toxic and anti-scientific ways. That's nothing new, though. The entire field exists to define normalcy (as if "normalcy" had a unidimensional standard that could be monolithically defined) for the purpose of identifying all that deviates from it. "Who" gets to write that definition is an issue of systemic/institutional abuse of power that wasn't even identified until the mid to late 1970s. Turns out it's only those who have accumulated "status" within the system/institution itself. And "how" those definitions are written is an even more precarious issue. On the other hand, the actual stigmas about neuroatypicality and kink are, themselves, the cultural reflection of the biases and prejudice of the field of psychiatry. That is not to say that psychiatry alone is the cause; it is not. Nonsensical ideas of those who lead and influenced other institutions (e.g., organized religion) have played a very significant role too. That's also nothing new. Turns out the catholic church, for example, has amassed untold levels of wealth and power by defining what counts as "sin" and selling the idea of salvation from it; it's no coincidence their "tradition" has equal weight to a series of texts they would not even ALLOW the "masses" to read in their own language for more than a millennia. Translate the vulgate into low German? There's a burning at the stake in order for you, so sayeth the Pope in Rome! Question his alleged "holiness" at your peril, too. The field of psychiatry works the same way the Catholic church does. Same humiliation rituals of confession. Same "intercessor" structure. Same institutional refusal to look outside of itself. Same top-down subject/object relationship between those in power (whether wearing a frock or holding a terminal degree in the field of "psychiatry") and those subject to that power (whether partitioners or patients). Same hierarchal, centralized power structure that is wholly unaccountable to it's "subjects." It's no wonder they both have so much influence on each other. Both (a) the 19th century theological view of homosexuality's influence on the field of psychiatry in the 20th, and (b) the 20th century DSM view on "trans" and gender non-conformity's influence on 21st century theological views of gays, lesbians, trans people and the gender-nonconforming. To even question "the experts" openly or challenge the "institutions" is treated as an act of heresy and punished similarly, now. Maybe that's why eugenics, which was an idea of American psychiatrists, and the resulting political consequences (e.g., the third reich) didn't translate into cultural resistance to, or even skepticism of, the field from which that idea arose. And maybe that's also why mass child exploitation, which is an institutionalized idea of the Catholic church, and its continuity didn't translate into cultural resistance to, or even questioning of, the institution that has normalized it for at least the last 250 years. One might wonder how much longer "the people" will act as if the power of "institutions" worthy of axiomatic deference. I'd almost rather not have psychiatrists looking into the convergence between kink and neuroatypicality. Sidebar: Freud was a rapist that used the fields of psychology/psychiatry to gaslight entire populations into believing that the normalized and institutionalized abuse of children, by men in power, who held status within institutions, simply "could not" have happened. Freud also gaslit entire cultures into believing that any such victim, who had the audacity to name their abusers out loud, could not be believed. He laid the cultural foundation to discredit even the sworn testimony of rape victims and victims of child abuse. There's real talk in Washington about reopening "mental health" institutions; probably because Trump's cabinet wants to chemically lobotomize left-wing protesters (e.g., people who show up to protest ICE), but it's not like that species of abuse of power is limited to Trump. Purported psychiatric ethicists, all of whom that hold the title in Canada espouse doctrinally pure left-wing mainstream views, are already trying to "medically" justify the medically-sanctioned murder of high support needs autistic and mentally disabled people in Canada; and institutionalize that norm as a standard practice to "conserve scarce resources" that might be better "allocated" elsewhere. I'm not on the right or the left, btw. I'm just against abusing people and perpetuating self destructive cycles, especially those we re-enact because of our collective unconsciousness. So weird that Carl Jung was (arguably) the first person to notice the pattern, right? Kind of makes you wonder if that had something to do with WHY he refused to have the Red Books published until so many years after his death. Personally, I'd rather not become the subject of any psychiatrist's inquiry; belonging to the field, while participating in its institutional practices (knowingly or ignorantly) is competent evidence that each such "practitioner" should not be trusted, whatever their purported intentions. The most dangerous risk is one with good, or at least not actively malicious, intentions; who is subsequently followed by others who will use their positions to do harm. As they historically have. And inevitably may, again. Some things get better. Institutions almost never do. They just change how they behave, based on the composition of who populates their ranks over time. -
-
By abdlmarisa · Posted
I was so tempted to say Inuyasha! eheh, I grew up with that, and I absolutely love anything that Rumiko Takahashi does~ Hamtaro I watched a tiny bit of too! I grew up with all sorts of early 2000's shounen and slice-of-lifes so a lot of that is what I have nostalgia and littlespace feels over~ -
By cute little kokiri girl · Posted
This was too good to be true for Camilla, she didn't even have to give the girl a spanking to get her to admit it, she just blurted it out as she started to cry. But even though this was something Camilla wanted, she still felt bad for Madison. Camilla just gently shushed the girl letting her cry as she rubbed her back, she even bounced her a tiny bit like a toddler saying things like it was going to be okay and she's not naughty for having an accident, letting Madison cry out her frustrations, till her loud sobbing turned into quiet sniffling. -
By little_madd · Posted
Maddison felt the world crumble when she was so easily lifted up; she felt so angry at herself, it was a crazy defeat, when she felt Camilla tug a little at her pull-up to see if she had messed it up. She lost her train of thought a little and said without thinking, just wanting to grumble: "I'm a naughty child, I deserve another pull-up, not unpotty training." Maddison is speaking without thinking, "I'm just a kid," which was checkmate for Maddison waking up wet.
-