BitterGrey

Actually, it wasn't much of a plan. Perhaps an ideal or aspiration. The 'tinfoil hat' speculation hasn't even been tested. Locally, I've been able to find Molicares (ABC Medical), First Quality (not great, but OK), and Attends (not breathable) if you wear large (Haller's Pharmacy). (There is a place that carries medium Attends in Redwood City, but they ask for info.)

Mostly true. There exists the possibility that pervasive electronic records, HSA-style medical expense debit cards, etc., might complicate buying diapers. To eliminate system waste, charging and billing might become automated, and personal data centralized. Well-meaning, non-AB/DL-aware shops might make a streamlining assumption that all diapers are medically necessary, and so covered by insurance. This would force us to do some explaining, or commit insurance fraud. This possible and still unlikely future is still very far away, but the new law makes it one step closer. If there is a retail shop near you where you can pay cash for good diapers, please support it. Today, they are important to AB/DLs living in situations that preclude mail order. Tomorrow, they might be useful in other ways. (If it comes to it, I suppose that if we went shopping with a tinfoil hat, wishing to pay cash and buy diapers anonymously might not draw any other questions. Not wanting our digital souls sucked into some collective corporate/government database to be shared with anyone and everyone is so much easier to explain than paraphilic infantilism.) ~Grey

Could I ask everyone to keep in mind that search engines credit pages for having a lot of links to them? The bots don't care how much we might dislike a website - they only know that we are linking to it. The authors of websites like those probably don't care what we think about their websites. They might not care about us at all, except that we'll link to them. To them, we might be just another minority that will post links to their pages, nothing more. We vent, they get more traffic and more ad revenue. Pagerank flows from AB/DL websites to anti-AB/DL websites. They win, and we loose. If you've posted a link to a website, you are supporting it whether you meant to or not. Please don't support anti-AB/DL websites. To let us know about a website without supporting it, please post the URL without creating a link. We can then copy and paste the URL. If you've posted a link to a website that you don't want to support, please go back and disable the link.

I was pretty sure of that, but didn't want to make any assumptions.

Perhaps this was a reference to the DPF "sizzles", a monthly munch that used to meet at a Los Angeles Sizzler or IHOP and might draw a couple dozen attendees. The maintainer of the SocalAB website used to be involved with those as DPF's regional director, but I could easily be misremembering. Actually, the group (The Bay aRea Diaper Enthusiasts - BRiDgE) has grown, and now talks about much more than computers at our monthly munch. We also have other events going on, which have ranged from Berkeley nearly down to Monterey. Eventually, it would be great to develop multiple munches, such as in the North or East bay in addition to San Jose.

Thought I'd add a note about this interesting projection. So far we've discussed introduction dates between 1987 and 1994. (It is possible that both dates are right: the survey analysis would use the mass-marketing date, as opposed to the introduction of the new technology.) We've also discussed leads of five to eight (30-22) years. If we approximate the start of an AB/DL's market demand at age twenty, then we can do some math and form some expectations: The market demand of AB/DLs into cloth-like disposables would then be expected to start somewhere in the range of 1999 (1987+20-8) to 2009 (1994+20-5). Of course, there are other factors that this extrapolation doesn't consider. Two come to mind: 1) One factor driving the expression of AB/DL demand for plastic-backed disposables was the shift of the mainstream adult diaper market away from the plastic backing. Given the abundance of adult diapers with a cloth-like backing, Bambino might shy away from the market for cloth-like decorated diapers for a while. (Ten years seems a reasonable estimate.) 2) With later potty training and pull-ups, babies are staying in diapers longer. As a result, more of them will be able to remember wearing diapers. This might affect their development and tastes as AB/DLs.

Loopy's point is quite insightful. Many of us desire what we thought we wore. However, we often don't remember our own infancy, so we have to reconstruct it based on the babies around us. This causes a shift in the diaper types. Loupy's estimate of 7-8 years is pretty close to the average survey result of around five years. (This was calculated using data from the second AB/DL survey and presented in "AB/DL diaper preferences".) Would you happen to know which brand? The mainstream market seems to have shifted in 1994, starting with Huggies and Goodnights.

Many 'us'es need a 'them' to marginalize as weird as a way to feel 'normal.' Mundanes have furries. Furries have babyfurs.

What? An introduction from Liljennie that doesn't plug either her website in general (http://www.liljennie.com/) or it's specific resources such as the original stories, the AB/DL code, etc? I'll have to do something about that. Welcome!

Thanks for sharing. Momentary distractions like the lead-lined diaper are great once in a while. I suspect that, while they might absorb alpha, beta, and gamma, they don't work very well for #1 or #2. Of course, no list of odd diapers would be complete without that equine humiliation, the horse diaper. I think I'll stick with wingfolds[def] myself.

Negative childhood experiences are a factor for some of us, but probably not all of us. Not all AB/DLs are the same, so it doesn't seem likely that the causes are all the same. If we accept that some of these causes or factors might be genetic, than we shouldn't be surprised by AB/DL children who weren't told that their parents were AB/DLs.

Back in college I used to ride diapered frequently. One thing that I wasn't prepared for was the 'triple whammy rash:' razor burn, diaper rash, and chaffing. By the way, bike saddles seem remarkably effective at squeezing the contents out of diapers.

Furs seem to be more numerous than AB/DLs, so finding them might be easer. However, please be aware that many non-babyfur furs view babyfurs (loosely, AB/DL furries) negatively. The babyfurs are more visible and active among the furries than AB/DLs are among the general population.

The survey needs a "maybe" option. For me, it would depend on how long I'd be there, etc. Another factor would be the risk that teddy would get promoted to a "transitional object." This doesn't mean much, except that transitional objects among adults are used as an indication of borderline personality disorder [link]. Sure, having people think I had BPD would be a lot better than actually having it, but still not good. The deciding factor, of course, would be the type of room. If I was in a clean room, would they need to sterilize teddy? My wolf plushies are tucking tail at the very thought.

Back to the original topic: This book has gotten good reviews on other forums. On BBIF, Spacey wrote... "...There is lots to like about this book. First, it doesn't suffer from the "one-true-way-ism" trap that so many books on kink seem to fall into. It's well balanced, giving a brief voice to many different configurations of age play. It acknowledges geriatric age players right along with the more traditional school girls and adult babies. It also hit on a point that seems to shock folks when I give a class on age play, that not all littles are bottoms. It also made clear that they are many more varieties of age play than even the author can name..." I guess it is time to stop procrastinating and order a copy for myself. It is also available at Amazon: http://www.amazon.com/Toybag-Guide-Age-Pla.../dp/1890159735/ Are there other infantilism-related deadtree publications that people have found useful?

Multiple Personality Disorder (MPD, or more recently Dissociative Identity Disorder, DID) and Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) might also be present in that patient. If specific AB/DLs have little or no recollection of what happened when regressed, they might have DID with a child alter. If specific AB/DLs have persistent, disturbing flashbacks of past traumas, they might have PTSD. These conditions are both more serious than paraphilic infantilism. They also have characteristic symptoms that are absent in most AB/DLs. Most AB/DLs do not have these symptoms, but some would, since some AB/DLs have both these more serious disorders and infantilism or diaper fetishism. My point is that these other conditions are neither infantilism nor diaper fetishism. Infantilism shouldn't be redefined to match some other condition. Additionally, I tend to think the doctors were the victims of abuse in this case. Of course, the book wouldn't convey their side of the story. It is said that all fiction is autobiographical, and all autobiography is fiction.

Bella, you might want to mention what makes it unique, what sets it apart from all the other forums.

True. Furthermore, the book might have been just an attempt to win a debate on Wikipedia. The timing is consistent with an attempt to get a published reference for the phrases "ABDL is NOT True Infatilism"[1] and that diapers weren't "costumes and props[2]" which were debated on Wikipedia the year before the book was self-published. The main conflict in the book was settled in 2001, the Wikipedia debate was in 2006, and the book was self-published in 2007. These phrases appear in the four pages on infantilism at the end of the book. (The rest of those four pages are already up on her website.) That debate didn't go her way, because all known, published sources disagreed with her. As for what the rest of the book is about, please note that "5150" is the a code for short-term involuntary psychiatric committal. This is usually reserved for those at risk of doing physical harm to themselves or others. People don't get 5150'ed for diaper rash. To be honest, I was pleased to see this book come out. The problem with websites is that people might read one or two nice articles, and overlook the rest of the website. Overlooking most of a book isn't as easy to do. This book details repeated self-injury, the actions of someone with something much more dangerous than infantilism. It also records her initial diagnosis of Borderline Personality Disorder. Self-injury is a symptom of BPD, but not infantilism. I can understand why someone would want to think that they have infantilism, instead of Borderline Personality Disorder. It is a horrible disorder. Some AB/DLs also have BPD. However, we definitely don't want that someone redefining infantilism around BPD. As for my recommendation about books on infantilism, I'd have to agree with Enfant about Gloria Brame's "Different Loving." Its ageplay section is both larger and better researched. 1) http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...;oldid=41727230 2) http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...;oldid=56649105

At the risk or proposing the use of one forum on another forum, couldn't we skip the setup and just use the ADISC.org wiki? Some form of teamwork would prevent the Dailydiapers community from having to go through the work of developing the content already available over there. No sense reinventing the wheel.

At the risk of being distastefully practical, perhaps plastic bloomers would work better? Plastic pants have a hem which runs under the hip. This is a hard region to seal. Bloomers protect better by moving this hem down towards the knee. This will keep a fresh wetting from running out behind the hip, and holding it in until it is absorbed. However if it isn't absorbed eventually, it will still run out. For example, if you are wearing bloomers over leaky disposables, the urine will stay in the bloomer, unabsorbed, until you stand up. Then it will try to run down the leg. The drawback to bloomers is that they aren't babylike by any measure. They are practical for use when sitting or laying down, but being babylike is more important for some of us. That was a great post, Babykeiff. As you pointed out, baby fat tends to make things round, and the good curvature makes for a good seal.. The flattened sections of the bottom against the seat might be an exception. Here the plastic pants would have a hem, but the bloomers wouldn't. Physics is unfair in other ways. For example, babies are less prone to leak because they have a lot of surface area for their volume. Because of physics, we need to put up with lots of tapes and consider bloomers to get almost the same leakage protection as a baby. Yet another reason for us to be envious.

It isn't quite an archetype, but one effect of our uncommon childhood is a lack of confidence our ability to gauge what is common. For example, consider the case of an AB/DL in the break room with coworkers. The subject of stuffed animals comes up. The AB/DL might hesitate, not wanting to share too much. The other coworkers would share about their stuffed animals, accepting them as ordinary. In turn, the AB/DL might mention his own stuffed animals as well. Of course, the AB/DL would leave out some details. For example, he might not mention that he is still getting new stuffed animals, and that he snuggles with them regularly. (Of course, the thought of a 'common' childhood might be a matter of convention. Our culture might have collectively agreed on what a common childhood would include, even though nobody really had one.) When do things stop being part of the uncommon AB/DL experience and start being a common part of childhood? This is something we might be less clear on, since many of us had uncommon childhoods. This uncertainty might be a property that we share.

Actually, information is too easy to get these days. Social security numbers might be bought for as little as $50, I'm told. PampersPete's method, unfortunately, seems to be the only certain one. As for "easily," I received this email from her on 5 May 2007: "I will even hired a detective agency that I have used in the past to retain your identity and address. This is a very simple thing to do and it is not that expensive. " This was a few weeks after I started receiving emails from "reporters" who just had to have my real name, address, and profession. Of course, this doesn't seem to have given her the right information. On the other hand, she might have my correct information, but intentionally have the wrong information on her website. You see, she has only one year in which to sue me, no matter what she claims I wrote or said. That is the statute of limitations for tort in California. If she actually sued, any judge would probably agree with the three Wikipedia administrators that got involved in that 2006 debate, and not side with her, So if she sues, her ability to threaten to sue ends. If she had my information, her ability would have ended in 2007. However, if she claims not to have my information, then she might be able to threaten to sue me indefinitely.

It has come to my attention that the website has recently been altered to try to conceal the scope of her attacks. It has been modified to hide the truth. URLs to archives of the unaltered pages are here. The attack page against me went up in 2006 during a debate on Wikipedia.. She attempted to out me to get me to back down. I didn't. I gave the owner of that website two years to cool off and remove those attack pages. Then last month I began discussing it on DailyDiapers. The AB/DL community has a right to know what kind of person she really is.

She has been threatening to do so against me and others. She has recently altered her website to try to hide the extent of her threats. Here are URLs to archives of the unaltered versions. Here's how the attack page against a doctor used to look. Please note that it claims to offer the full name, home address, and full social security number "for use in defense." (If they were really needed, home addresses and social security numbers can be secured through the proper authorities. There is no need for unqualified people to offer them over personal web pages, except to threaten exposure to identity theft.) http:// web.archive.org/web/20070818130829/www.toddlertime.com/helene.htm Now, why is this important to me? Because there is a similar attack page against me to on her site. http:// web.archive.org/web/20080204035759/www.toddlertime.com/bittergrey1.htm The attack page against the doctor went up in 2004, and the one against me in 2006. They are now being altered or removed. This is a recent effort to hide the truth. It is probably a response to my posting to DailyDiapers last month. Please note that the new live version is marked "REVISION 7 - Updated October 2008." Or at least it was a minute ago. The note "SS# Coming Soon" was recently removed from the active page against me. Perhaps this is because enough people emailed her and asked why she thought I should be exposed to identity theft. Perhaps she wanted to hide the extent of her attacks, so that she could pretend to be "mystified," and then renew her attacks later. This wouldn't be the first round of now-you-see-it, now you-don't tricks: http:// web.archive.org/web/20061111052435/www.toddlertime.com/bittergrey1.htm (bittergrey2.htm and bittergrey3.htm were still up, but not linked to the main page. As a result, they weren't archived.) Her attack page against me went up in 2006, during a debate on Wikipedia. She attempted to out me to get me to back down. I didn't, and so she is still trying. P.S: Since character assassination is among the many accusations that she is making against me on her website, I would like to point out that to the best of my recollection, there has NEVER been a link to that website or any reference to her on understanding.infantilism.org.

SeaMonkey (functionally a lot like Mozilla). Copying and pasting.... My Controls · View New Posts · My Assistant · My Friends member['g_use_pm'] AND Object->member['members_disable_pm'] == 0"> · 0 New Messages