Kaliborio

Yes. Yes. Thank you. It's fucking impossible to get normal people to understand this part, they always move the goalposts so they can still think of it as something we do to get off. And like, look, does my sexuality involve my diapers? Sure. But also, I was into diapers at the exact same age you were, and I find the idea that my interest in diapers (beyond the obviously practical) is fundamentally sexual to be deeply offensive as a result. Like, implying that something I was into at 6 is fundamentally sexual is implying that I was fundamentally capable of being sexual at 6, and that's some pro-CSA bullshit right there. I know I'm basically restating what you said. Please forgive that. I'm just really mad about it.

A onesie and waterproof pants pretty much all the time. Those two things together occupy what was the Underwear slot on my pre-diapers build. Being without them is the equivalent of going commando. Pre-diapers, at night, I would have slept naked or in underwear. With diapers, I usually wear a onesie or a sleeper. The reason I wear clothes with diapers now is that I'm something of an active sleeper. Onesies and sleepers help in terms of keeping my diaper more or less where it is with respect to my body. I used to wear ordinary adult two-piece pyjamas or fleece-lined outerwear (we call the latter "track suits" here but I don't think it's quite the same meaning that that term has everywhere else). However, I'm very sensory sensitive and the fact that trackies usually have gathers at the wrists and ankles is distracting enough to keep me awake, which is why I wasn't wearing them to bed before. Two-piece pyjamas are generally softer and less noticeable, but by the same token they tend to be slipperier so I woke up with them having slipped considerably down my diaper. In terms of my general daytime wardrobe, hmm. I've never tried to make it intentionally babyish because that feels exhibitionist, which is not what I'm about. I would say that it's a little more babyish than the average adult's, just for reasons of selection pressure. The most obvious and glaring fact in that regard is that I have bib-and-brace overalls (albeit I generally don't wear them outside unless I can throw a jumper over them). I also have a lot of loose, long-hem shirts and jackets, and I have nothing in my wardrobe that's figure-hugging below the waist. Gender transition has actually been a godsend. Like a lot of others, I transitioned around the beginning of 2020. Since I did that, I've been favouring skirts and dresses for non-diaper-related reasons as well as diaper-related reasons. In terms of non-diaper-related reasons, the fact that many skirts and dresses have a higher waistline and flare out takes attention away from my relatively wide waist and narrow hips, which were still pretty evident in my front silhouette when I was wearing disposables. They also have good airflow; I overheat a lot, so have never really liked long pants and jeans, but don't want to wear shorts because they look awful, so skirts and dresses solve a major problem in that regard. In terms of diaper-related reasons, because they have a higher waist, skirts and dresses (at least the ones I pick) can accommodate more diapering (because the clothing item's ability to stay on is not determined by whether the beltline can fit around a diaper), fit the same way with a much wider and more diverse range of diaper types and bulk levels, and also are much less likely to suddenly exhibit a diaper bulge if I move around the wrong way (because a lot of diaper bulge is generated by clothes wrapping or getting stuck under the diaper legs, which skirts are, in my experience, less likely to do). Skirts and dresses have also been really useful lately in particular. My personal preference is and will likely remain using disposable diapers in most situations and cloth diapers in a few, but over the last year or so I've had to switch to cloth diapers effectively full-time. I don't really have many options that are discreet, sufficient for my needs, and within my price bracket, so I ended up sticking to what I know, which is terry flats and prefolds. If you've used them then you will be aware they are, shall we say, not as volume-efficient as disposables. I'm operating on a thin enough margin that the extra expense of replacing part of my wardrobe was deeply unwelcome (one effect of transition is I've gone from "taller and broader than average" to "way taller and broader than average") but having a significant number of skirts and skirted clothing items on hand made things a lot less of a crisis than they would have been.

Also diapers. Incontinence simplifies things in that regard.

Unfortunately, I'm Australian. Parochialism is not an option, lol.

As a fellow subject of the same monarch, it really does seem a whole lot like this is intended to draw attention away from what the King's brother has been up to. "No, the man who actually sexually abused children isn't a paedophile! He's important, he couldn't be a paedophile! You're all the paedophiles!" The fact that Britain is literally pursuing the outrageous and offensive strategy of classifying AB/DL material as a form of CSAM really gives the game away in that regard. Reminds me of Brecht's "The Solution": Would it not in that case / Be simpler for the government / To dissolve the people / And elect another? Yes. I'm pretty sure anything involving diapers is already in the area of stuff which is legally required to be considered "likely to be Refused Classification" by the Australian Classification Board. Doesn't make it illegal for us to possess, but does make it illegal to import, along with basically everything else vaguely linked to sex that's not sex in the missionary position with the lights off for the purposes of procreation. (I'm not kidding; I saw a social media thread recently which pointed out that Australia's "Refused Classification" area includes content containing things like "a headline describing a murder in a newspaper on a table in the background" and "a doctor putting on rubber gloves"). Easy leap from there to a complete ban. I expect we'll see either party at least give it a shot within five years. Stephen Conroy must be laughing his head off. Many people who usually bitch about "free speech" are silent right now because they never meant to defend the kind of free speech required to make things that some people might find icky and some other people might get off to. We had this debate in Australia about 20 years ago. I think everyone gets why child predators might find it easier to get their rocks off to adult porn if the woman who's in the porn (assuming there is one) has very small breasts. But that doesn't mean small breasts are a line that one can legislate along in practice. Plenty of women have them. Trans women are disproportionately likely to have small breasts (not for innate reasons, just a bunch of circumstantial factors that aren't likely to be resolved any time soon). You end up constraining a lot of adults' civil liberties to avoid a harm whose existence can't be proven.

Yes. I have had continence issues throughout my life, but, funnily enough, I did not have to deal with significant bedwetting between leaving diapers and returning to them as an adult. It started when I was 18, after about a year of being back in diapers by choice, so it was probably the most surprising and confronting part of the whole thing. These days, of course, it's as normal as anything else.

That's still a hierarchy that needs justifying. Mommy isn't Mommy unless she maintains the consent of the governed.

Oh, will the judgement become available after the sentencing hearing? I had assumed the judgement would simply remain unpublished.

I am also aware of this verdict and read up on it last night. I'm not sure how concerned to be; either "not at all" or "extremely". The book does, as I understand it, contain several passages where the female main character (FMC), who is stated to be 18, wears diapers and regresses, including during sex. Clearly the magistrate considered those to be of judicial relevance and they've come up in a lot of coverage. However, as I understand it, the book also contains a passage where the male main character (MMC) is looking at the FMC, when she is actually a 3-year-old, and there is an explicit description of her genitalia, as a 3-year-old, during which he sexually fantasises about her, as a 3-year-old. The italics are because I want to be extremely clear about this. So it depends what was the decisive factor in the verdict. Were the ageplay passages of only auxiliary importance and the decisive factor was the sexualisation of the FMC as a literal infant? If so, then I don't think we have that much to worry about. Were the ageplay passages treated as being of equal or greater importance relative to the sexualisation of the FMC as an infant? Then we have a problem.

Actual AB/DL diaper would have been Bambino Classico back when it was eyebleedingly expensive to get an 8 pack here. Before that, the first diaper I went out of my way to buy, not off a store shelf, was the Abri-Form M3.

I wore disposables with waterproof pants for most of a decade. I've had to switch to almost entirely cloth diapers over the last couple of years, so that decade was good preparation.

It depends on how you define "seen", "expose", or "force". Most people with whom I'm close enough for us to have spent a significant amount of time at each other's houses have found out that I wear diapers. Rarely it's because something has happened which has caused them to figure it out without my intending them to do so. More commonly it's because something came up: either something that made me feel I had to tell them, or a situation where I couldn't do some other necessary thing without either telling them or lying, and I prefer not to lie. In my first year or so back in diapers as an adult I definitely got clocked a few times. Partly it was because I wasn't yet used to wearing and using diapers full-time again, or, eventually, to having to use them, so I got more stuff like crescent leaks on the back of the leg. Partly it was because I was trying to get away with normal clothes and settling for wearing long T-shirts or button-ups to cover my beltline. Ultimately I ended up taking measures to address both of those and it's much more rare these days for me to be in circumstances where e.g. "diaper poking over my waistband" is a realistic possibility. The only really unavoidable issues I have with diaper visibility are basically changes in what diapers I use and how I use them over time. Short version is that, apart from slightly shaky bladder control, I was mostly continent when I went back into diapers, but, for various reasons and over a couple of years, that ceased to be the case. I had to make changes in what diapering I was using to accommodate changes in my continence needs and lifestyle. Bluntly, the changes usually involve getting, or having to get, less discreet. Actual diapers are thicker than pull-ups, and high-performance disposable diapers are thicker than lower-performance ones, although with disposables that difference isn't usually enough to matter. But then there's: a wet diaper swells and is less compressible compared to a dry one. A diaper that might get messy needs more space around the butt than one that doesn't. Waterproof pants hold in smells and can diminish the likelihood of leaks, but are usually noisier than the alternative. The same is true of plastic backing as opposed to cloth backing, but more so on average (i.e., most plastic-backed diapers represent a larger relative noise increase than most waterproof pants, in my experience). I'm thinking about it because over the last couple of years I have had to switch back to cloth diapers for financial reasons. Cloth diapers aren't indiscreet by definition and I know at least one person who feels she isn't noticeably less discreet in cloth diapers. However, my experience has been different. I am having to confront being more obvious in a way I haven't been in years. I still don't know if anyone is noticing — people are famously unobservant, thankfully — but I also feel like I'm just blatantly obvious at this point and am just relying on other people to actively pretend not to notice. It's not a terribly comfortable feeling. I think I'm more at home with it than I would be if I'd had to confront this earlier in my journey in diapers (after all, I no longer have the internalised assumption that people knowing I'm in diapers is going to lead to bad consequences) but it still kind of sucks. It depends on how you define "seen", "expose", or "force". Most people with whom I'm close enough for us to have spent a significant amount of time at each other's houses have found out that I wear diapers. Rarely it's because something has happened which has caused them to figure it out without my intending them to do so. More commonly it's because something came up: either something that made me feel I had to tell them, or a situation where I couldn't do some other necessary thing without either telling them or lying, and I prefer not to lie. In my first year or so back in diapers as an adult I definitely got clocked a few times. Partly it was because I wasn't yet used to wearing and using diapers full-time again, or, eventually, to having to use them, so I got more stuff like crescent leaks on the back of the leg. Partly it was because I was trying to get away with normal clothes and settling for wearing long T-shirts or button-ups to cover my beltline. Ultimately I ended up taking measures to address both of those and it's much more rare these days for me to be in circumstances where e.g. "diaper poking over my waistband" is a realistic possibility. The only really unavoidable issues I have with diaper visibility are basically changes in what diapers I use and how I use them over time. Short version is that, apart from slightly shaky bladder control, I was mostly continent when I went back into diapers, but, for various reasons and over a couple of years, that ceased to be the case. I had to make changes in what diapering I was using to accommodate changes in my continence needs and lifestyle. Bluntly, the changes usually involve getting, or having to get, less discreet. Actual diapers are thicker than pull-ups, and high-performance disposable diapers are thicker than lower-performance ones, although with disposables that difference isn't usually enough to matter. But then there's: a wet diaper swells and is less compressible compared to a dry one. A diaper that might get messy needs more space around the butt than one that doesn't. Waterproof pants hold in smells and can diminish the likelihood of leaks, but are usually noisier than the alternative. The same is true of plastic backing as opposed to cloth backing, but more so on average (i.e., most plastic-backed diapers represent a larger relative noise increase than most waterproof pants, in my experience). I'm thinking about it because over the last couple of years I have had to switch back to cloth diapers for financial reasons. Cloth diapers aren't indiscreet by definition and I know at least one person who feels she isn't noticeably less discreet in cloth diapers. However, my experience has been different. I am having to confront being more obvious in a way I haven't been in years. I still don't know if anyone is noticing — people are famously unobservant, thankfully — but I also feel like I'm just blatantly obvious at this point and am just relying on other people to actively pretend not to notice. It's not a terribly comfortable feeling. I think I'm more at home with it than I would be if I'd had to confront this earlier in my journey in diapers (after all, I no longer have the internalised assumption that people knowing I'm in diapers is going to lead to bad consequences) but it still kind of sucks.

There was a time I would have said yes. I think part of what changed that for me is I've come to the view that I was always going to have continence issues, so the fact that I am also AB/DL means that I can enjoy at least some elements of what I do to manage that.

According to that quiz, 4.

So, I'm trans. I've considered the "AB/DL = trans" analogy myself. I think cis people, and for that matter trans people, should be very careful with it, but there are also more parallels than I'd like to admit. (This does not mean that being an AB/DL is a "transness-like thing", for the record; there are also many parallels between gender transition and, for example, the conversion process required by the religious law of my faith of choice, but, quite rightly, people don't claim that's a "transness-like thing".) You're right to say that the medical consensus process for helping someone who's trans doesn't include rushing them to the operating room. Counseling and therapy are a part of that process as it exists. However, this is not an outcome of the process evolving from a carefree and heedless starting point to an attitude of judicious caution. Quite the reverse: the first modern (1) formal processes for gender transition were tremendously hyper-restrictive, preventing many from being able to access medical transition who needed it, and causing much harm as a result. In the last few years, certain political elements have mounted a campaign to use the legal authority of the state to forcibly restrict, regress, and limit the provision of trans healthcare. However, those political elements are consistently clearly and verifiably not doing so out of compassion and care for transgender people, but, rather, out of a boiling animus which motivates those who experience it to ban care because doing so will cause harm. In the main, the progression of the standards of trans healthcare has been toward greater liberalisation and fewer barriers. For instance, for the last few decades, more and more medical providers have been exploring what is known as the informed consent model, where hormone replacement therapy, most people's primary transition measure (sex reassignment surgery is optional, comes a lot later, and is often placed beyond trans people's reach even if they desire it), is provided simply on the person's own recognisance. Perhaps from an outside point of view this seems dangerously laissez faire, but the reality is that, in general, people will not seek trans healthcare who do not want it, and higher barriers are not an effective way of preventing people from realising they don't want it after the fact. I'm pretty sure I can infer which subforum you're talking about, but I didn't see the thread in question. However, based on what I can infer, my attitude must remain the same: where the matter relates to an individual and the relevant decisions will be made by that individual, counselling caution, or self-censoring in an attempt to foster greater caution, are unlikely to be productive courses of action. It is significantly preferable simply to ensure that the person is as informed as you can help them to be, and to generally do whatever we can to help them pursue their desired action safely and, if it turns out they don't actually want it, to help them reverse it.