Little BabyDoll Christine

That is just done for humiliation/domination. How pathetic must you be to be changed into a diaper that someone else wets in; even if just a little bit? or "we know who wears whose wet". This can be done some previus time and let the diaper start to smell if it is a thick diaper and will be worn for some time. Yet another thing is to change the little one for bed a couple of hours before bedtime so that the diaper will have been wet once and the little one put to bed in a wet diaper. Nothing shows disrespect like being put to bed in a wet diaper since it shows that you have such disrespect as to not change her into a dry diapers. It is usually done to a little one who is overly proud but can be done for any other of the character traits like being babyish, whiney, disobedient, overactive, forward, gossipy or trollopy as well as proud. This last is special. How can you be proud in a baby-short dress, skirt or babydoll, in thick diapers and rubber panties that will show if you move the wrong way and just everyon will want to feel them, and you smell a bit, showing you have no control over you own body?

Looking at what you were intiatied into ABDL in, vs what you are getting rid of. They are not even related. If those were all I could get, I would quit too

This convo, for some strange reason, took place in my Status Update. It appears to be a technical problem https://www.dailydiapers.com/board/index.php?/profile/27920-little-babydoll-christine/&status=38647&type=status

Well, get real diapers and rubber panties and that will cure the enui

He died of bladder cancer. not mesophelioma, which resides in the lungs. He came from Czechoslovakia and lived in Boulder, Co where he was a Professor Emeritus at the univversity there The 1980's was not the Dark Ages unless you think the CAT scanner is a medieval torture device. Statistical procedures were well validated for almost a cetury by the time I took Tests and Meeasurements in 1975 and Stat was one of Beckmann's double specialties. So he knew how to check and validate statistical material The original research that demonstrated a link between some kind of asbestos and meso was done in 1960: If the 1980's was the Dark Ages, This was the time of the pyramids. The type of aspbestos used in the Army base was pretty much a known source of trouble and was shunned as a building material. The Gvernment used it (wrongly) because it was cheap But at any rate, The ovarian cancer link to talcum that generated the furor was debunked by HAMA and I suspect this was a put-up job to salvage the situation created by the shysters who brought the cdlass-action suit, who, as late as 2022/early '23 cited "a media [sic] study" in their ad to attracts participants in the class action suit That is all I am going to say about the matter

At what age? What kind of Cancer? Do you know how many different kinds of cancer there are? Where did you get your medical degree? (BTW I know two of those answers) Cancer is not monolithic and is really a class of cell disorders, with many causes; viral, hereditary chemical and some unknown, more than a single disease His work on the matter was not his own, but based on that of another,, referenced in his newsletter ACCESS TO ENERGY, in the late 1980's That work was based on compiled data

There neither is, nor can there be, such a thing as an adult baby. The reasons are obvious. So what you are doing is cherry-picking or outright trying to re-define "baby" to suit your wants. This means you are using adult characteristics to "edit" "baby". That is basically dishonest by either knowingly, or willfully unknowing, trying to force your falsehood onto the real world. To try to do this full-time means you are living a lie and you either know it or have willfully damaged your mind, which is the faculty by which you maintain contact with the real world; i.e. awareness and sonsiousness, and is your primary tool of survival and of happiness. The closest you could hope to come to being a full-time any baby at your age is a lobotomy, which they do not do anymore, except maybe in China or Russia. Your next best hope is in being constantly heavily stoned or drunk with all your teeth extracted and a big chunk of your colon and your bladder damaged or removed. Then you have a shot at it. Even then, albeit not willfully, a baby tries to improve its life and gain more autonomy unaware that it is doing so

Not if you create a cloud of it. About 33 years ago. Dr. Petr Beckmann, a double specialist in ED and Statistics cited research about perosns living in an area rch in asbestos, wich menat that there was more than normal aspbestos dust in the air. The life expectancy of these persons did not vary from normal The big deal with talc was ovarian cancer. Five will get you ten that, in order to ssalvage their position after their case had collapsed. The persons wanting to outlaw or put talc out of business to maintain their powere. cooked up this asbestos thing. It does not seem to be an issue in Canada or many other places that tend to be more sensitive about such things than the US

This is thanks to the shysterocracy. There are different types of asbestos. Some are harmful if breathed and some are not. I have used talc for 78 years and not a bit of a problem. This kind of crap caused David Brudnoy; a leading libertarian commentator of the late 20th century to say that lawyers should be paid by the State as officers of the court and forbidden to advertise to keep justice off the auction block (If he suggested an increase in government activity, you KNOW the situation was reallybad) Whe have the same problem with getting talc here in the Land of the Free. The shysters, who should be executed for massibve Abuse of Process, threaten bank-breaking lawsuits that nobody wants to run the risk of losing and the people get screwed again. The talc fiasco was so blatant that the ad to join the class action suit, instead of saying "a recent medical study" said "a recent media study..." a couple of years back

Google up "jama ovarian cancer baby powder". That claim was debunked long ago in JAMA but the story was drowned out by the Trump impeachment story. I did hear it in the news

This goes on all the time and has been going on all the time since the days of DPF. I have had it happen repeatedly. It is not that they did not know what I was/am. On the DPF roster you could and did provide all that was needed or could be wanted. But, invariably, someone would start corresponding then vanish. Nothing has changed in 40 years, has it? Been there; done that; got the three and done

What it all means is that SOME thngs were better and SOME things were worse. I've beaten cancer TWICE. In the 1960's you were lucky if you beat it ONCE. The quak bypass I had in '19 was impossible in 1956. It is a trad-off and is up to you to know what is better and what is not

That is true. But how many of those buying Pampers would even see Pampys? and the font for the latter could be made in a childish fashion Besides which the main battle is not being fought in the court of law, but in the court of public opinion. If P&G keeps throwing legal obstacles then there is the garge of Abuse of Process. Also P&G would be required to detail monetary damages from Pampys, which is not even in the same market. Any attempt to say that Pampy's is trying to cash in on Pampers will be declawed by a line of people out the door who say that their toddlers used to call their diapers "pampies" and also "pampers" has almost assumed the status of "coke" and "kleenex", becoming a generic term, in the early and mid '70's it was even a generic term for adult disposable diapers, as in "adult pampers" or just "pampers". Sometimes it is better to let sleeping dogs lie

Actually it was not a "simpler time". You would have to know how to use an oil lamp, tend a fire and make the embers last all night, or re-lighti it. treat even the slightest cut very seriously, store food so ibugs and pests did not get at it, maybe roast and grind your own coffee Things got a bit better in the second third of the 20th century but you would not have throw-away diapers. Even so, your electric needs were not that much, mostly lights and lamps, one or two radios and usually one TV, washing machine and an iron. Until the late '50's your batteries were for flashlights and maybe one portable radio if you were better off. In the late '40's early '50's you would have an electric record player or even a "recordio" which was a kind of console with a radio, rocord player with the ability to make records, blanks of which you could buy and these were pretty good. Did my first reconrd when I was 6. It was nothing like the number of outlets you need today, but then too, everything ate tones mor current but the price was about $5/month for a "light bill" and about the same for water and maybe $10 for heating. Rent was collected weekly and about $8/wk in 1950. Times were by no means simpler. Most of what you do today is optional and not a matter of survival. Ask your grandparents what they heard from their elders (my grandfather fought in the Spanish-American War)

There is a kind of dance done where one side tries to intimidate the other. The mega-corp will threaten a suit so loarge that it wought be unaffordable if they win. P&G and Kimberly-Clark are vulnerable to a different kind of attack. First, what I suggested as names could NOT be mistaken for the originals by anyone with a minimum of usable eyesight, yet still be useful because of being "toddler cute". so there is no real threat. That being so, they would be liable for Abuse of Process if they take it to court and be in serious doo-doo since the courts do not like their time being wasted "There are serial murderers waiting their turn and you are wasting our time with this nonsense". Also there is another court in which they would not stand a chance. The court of public opinion. Being a mega-corporation, they are at a disadvantage in that court and would be seen as picking on a much less able target. That could cost them market share as a backlash. Also one could spread a story through the media that they are planning to enter the fetish market and don't want their customer base to know that, learning from the Bud Lite/Dylan Mulvaney fiasco. The story does not have to be true, just plausible. And this kind of threat would show they are not honorable and when are mega-corps honorable anyway and who would not like them taken down a peg or two? ABu going after asimilar compnay would not be vulnerable to a public campaign like this since they are already in the fetish market and they are on a par with other such companies

If I recall rightly, Snuggies was the name of an actual baby product going back to the early '60's Anybody can sue anybody else for anything they like. Nobody could mistiake "Pampys" for "Pampers". What you mean is they will get, not sued, but intimidated. The best thing to do is to reply to "go right ahead. After we show you have no case, we will then file an Abuse of Process suit". you might have a First Amendment case since these companies will be trying to use the government to restrict your fredom as nobody with useable vision could mistake 'Pampys' for 'Pampers'. And 'Luvvies' has nearly twice as many letters as 'Lives' and both derive from the pre-existing 6i0's British 'luv' and there was even a vehicled called 'Luv'". you could even make 'Hugzies' 'Hugzeze' or 'Hug-zies'. And say you get the name(s) from what toddlers call them so it has completely different origins. They would be in the same boat as Rearz was when they tried to trademark ABDL. Also, do these compnaies REALLY want to get stuck together with the fetish market. One could start the rumor that thyey are trying to get these names so that can get into that market. This is best done by insinuation and inuendo. Make it better for them to let sleeping dogs lie, Psychology trumps law since it influences those who wield the law

They sell, or used to sell, for baby diapers and may adult ones. disposable liners for that so you could just flush the crap down the toilet. They liners may have also been flusable too. This was to keep the cloth clean

Where does anyone get the idea that anyone 4 or older is a toddler? At that age, one is in the "Pre-operational stage", not the "sensorimotor stage"

Why not have a compnay use similar but different names like pampys, Hugzies and Luvvies? It is probably what a toddler calls them anyway and one could not visually confuse these names with the baby items

This is one of those terms that has been used to the point of being meaningless. By that I mean it has been used to name things from the choice to think or know or not to think or know to they idea that you could wish away an oncoming 18-wheeler travelling straight at you at 87 miles an hour I support the first meaning as does anoyone who tries to argue in favor of determinism. They are depending on your ability to change your mind if persuaded to. If they were correct they would not bother since they would know it was impossible since your actions would be pre-determined. This is called "affirmation by denial". It is like the claim of "there are no absolutes". The claim itself is made as an absolute. So if it were true, then it wouled be an absolute, and therefore, false

Why would I do that.? It would be unnatural and "trying too hard" and make me self-conscious and totally destroy immersion

Then would said adults care if the diapers were called Pampers or any of the other baby diaper names. They might even want them not to be so named, whereas AB's would want the baby diaper names and baby diaper look

Dollies are better. They are exclusively girl and have a personality and are people-shaped. I adore Andrea Lynne Rache Christine and Lisa Michelle Denise Christine, and Bride Dolly Cassandra Lynette Estelle Christine

On your first two counts: Correctamundo! But why have adult thems on diapers named for baby diapers? If I was AB I would want my Pampers to have baby prints in keeping with the items for which they are named They BabyDoll diaper is a scaled-up version of what I was in on occasion as shown in another album. Like all cloth diapers, authenticity of quite possible although I do not know of you could use the same name although Gerber did as far as I know. Having the same name as the baby version may engender trust due to brand recognition. "Remember how reliable your baby Pampers were? That same reliability is to be found in the bigger version. 'Pampers'; the name you can trust because you've been there"

The names "Pampers", "Livs" and "Huggies" would appeal to only some persons based on infantilism. Theise companies already have brand names like "Depends" that are established so why mess with a winner? And for what? I mentioned a backlash. If these companies came in and 1. saw what a small portion of the membership is active here 2. Sow things lik "Stinky, Squishy and Proud" and trheads about public exposure and Incontinent - Desires They would conclude "what a bunch of creepy weirdos are here". Do you recall what happened to Bud Lite with the Dylan Mulvaney busienss? Do you think P&G and Kimberly Clarke want to run the risk of even a tiny chance of that happening to them? After one look around at ABDL sites, they'd run like hell. It has probably already happened The reward to risk ratio is just to small, Besides there are already companies serving this market The best you could hope for is that they might license the names to other companies and hope they did not get caught