diaperandy@dd

Rest assured that I do understand the difference, WBDaddy. I was leaving it up to the reader to draw their own conclusions, and take whatever actions they deemed appropriate.

This situation is frustrating, and I think shows some bad judgment at the very least. I first came upon this controversy on RUP. Toddler had taken a very strong stance on the issue, and urged a boycott of ABU because of their advertising stance. He went so far as to post the Federal statues on what constitute wrong doing in this case. People, both pro and con to Toddler’s position, spoke. You may see this conversation at the following link if you are a member of RUP: http://rupadded.com/m/news/view/Boycot-of-ABU In the various discussions on RUP it was alleged that pictures of non-baby, non-toddlers models have never been used in the promotion of incontinence/diaper products for the youth market. I have done some research on the veracity of this, and have found that the answer is yes they have been used, and in nation wide advertising campaigns. Beyond using teen and preteen models for such incontinence items as Pull Ups and the like, there have been older products that have done likewise. Please see this link, thanks to the Daily Diapers archive: http://www.dailydiapers.com/content/staydry.html I remember seeing these advertisements in magazines, and newspapers when I was a kid. It was the first time I understood that I was not alone as a bed wetter. Upon further reading at the Daily Diapers Forums, however I did come across a troubling posting that shed some additional light on the issue, and may provide some further insight into the situation. Among other things in the posting it stated that: “DK Enterprises also owns tigerunderwear, a website that manufactures toddlerlike underwear for boys and men. Amongst the photos on the site are some very sexually suggestive photos of the same boy that is in the BMX diaper photos