PinkGecko

I'm sorry, "no anti-religion posts" in a specifically religious sub-forum is a "crutch"? You must be one of those anti-maskers, aren't you? My apologies, I though "you came across as a complete ass" seemed to breach into insulting territory, but I guess I was mistaken.To be fair, you come across like an entitled narcissistic cunt. What? I didn't call you a name, so that shouldn't be a problem.

The literal heading of this sub-forum reads "(No anti-religion posts/comments allowed)". You can call me as many names as you'd like, but you're still violating the rules of the website.

I sometimes do, though it would admittedly be much easier with a caregiver to keep track of such a chart.

Wetting your pants is fun! It's an entirely different experience from wetting a diaper, but can be just as relaxing. Whether or not one finds it sexual is up to their own sensibilities, but I find it a lot of fun.

Apparently not far enough, seeing as you took the time to enter a specifically religious sub-forum entitled "Littles of Faith" and start posting in it. Not that that's inherently a problem - several self-identified atheists and agnostics have posted in this thread and sub-forum - I just always find it amusingly ironic whenever people come into a religious sub-forum expressly to say things like "I prefer to keep religion as far away as possible" and "I won't even touch religion within 100 feet" and "I want [religion] to be kept away from me and not want it near me". I mean, that's the entire reason this sub-forum exists, so people of any faith or lack thereof have an isolated sub-community of their own to discuss a divisive topic while others who are so egregiously triggered by the mere concept of religion have the ready option to ignore it altogether, but I guess that's just a little bit beyond the comprehension of the latter, seeing that - as I extensively detailed a few posts above - the only contention which has ever interrupted two years' worth of civil discourse between religious and irreligious folk alike has been people who come in here to loudly announce that they don't want religion anywhere near them, that religious people are stupid or insane, or even argue that a sub-forum which has no effect on them and is completely voluntary to read and post in should be removed entirely from the website. So much for that self-proclaimed "intellectual superiority"...to quote that old meme, "I am feel uncomfortable when we are not about me?". I study theology but I have no religious or spiritual affiliations to speak of - I'm pretty staunchly agnostic - but personally, I've never been so inclined to poke my head into whichever faith-based forum I can find to simply announce "By the way, I just want you guys all to know that I'm better and smarter than you. Like, ALL of you. Everyone got that? Okay, thanks. Bye.", but hey, people have their own insecurities to work out in their own ways, I guess.

ESV was the first Bible I read and I liked it fine, though I primarily use NIV because that's been the standard at nearly all churches I've been to. I have a NKJV in my collection but I honestly haven't read through it to a significant extent. I have a really bad attention span, so it's important for me to find a Bible translation that keeps me attentive and engaged. Why I personally wouldn't consider paraphrases 'real Bibles' is that so much of it is indeed paraphrased, most significantly the words of Christ, which I find to be their biggest detriment. Stuff like 'The Message' are pretty much meant to be an easy-to-follow outline: it's not even numbered like a typical Bible, each paragraph in each chapter is preceded by "1-3", "15-20", etc., so "verses" technically don't exist. Plus, it just lacks the poeticism of more literal translations; I'm really not a big fan of how many of the Psalms are translated. I look at paraphrases the same way I look at CliffsNotes, they get the main points and messages across, but it's only a fraction of the bigger picture and intricate details of the original work.

Well, there's certain limitations and problems on both extremes. Something like The Message and The Living Bible certainly assist in helping readers better comprehend the original text through modern language, but they're too loosely paraphrased to be considered a proper Bible in and of themselves, let alone the word of God. Being TOO modern/paraphrased can present just as much of error in translation and understanding as being "too old" and written in a near-indecipherable old English. However, I don't know anyone who proclaims a superiority of paraphrased Bibles, compared to the many super-fundamentalist "King James Only" movements. The middle ground is best, a literal translation that's still readable, modern English but not paraphrased. That's why NIV is my preferred translation. I would recommend that people have a KJV for its historical significance and I'd recommend that people have a paraphrased Bible as a study aid, but I would never recommend either as a primary Bible.

May I ask what you get out of reading the KJV? I definitely think it's great to own one for its historical significance, but it must be very hard to follow along with without putting extra effort into translating it. The most important aspect of reading the Bible (to me) should be being able to understand it and therefore learn from it.

About two hours ago. I had to go and it was roughly time for a shower anyways, so I made a last-minute impulsive decision to slap on an Abena M4, drop a stinky in it and make BIG smooshies until it was time to clean up. I was a very happy boy. ?

Those are the two for me. It's an essential tool in my little mode and helps me go to sleep quicker.

Just got out of the shower after making the most of my ABU Simple. Made big stinkies in little space but had to finish my coloring and juice before I cleaned up, making squishies the whole time. Usually I clean up right away, but tonight I decided to enjoy it a bit more and play with my stuffies while bouncing and smooshing. It's rare that I go all out in a loaded diaper but I was just in the mood tonight and I had so much fun!

I kept thinking about this so I decided to keep giving it a try, to just "release" after I "released" and...it worked! It took a couple tries but eventually I was able to freely mess while in little space and just have fun instead of worrying about the responsibilities of clean-up. It's such a delightful new level of regression, I'm really glad I'm able to embrace it. I'll be doing it a whole lot more often.

Outside of the times I've tried occasional apps for daily Bible readings, I never thought to use an electronic one. Call me a traditionalist of sorts, but there's something a lot more intimate about using an actual book for, well, The Good Book. I also prefer to just keep myself away from all electronic distractions when I'm reading the Bible 'cuz I'm ADHD as heck. My preferred translation is NIV. When I was first studying the Bible, I would double up on a literal translation (for me, NIV) and a paraphrased/modern translation (for me, The Message), typically reading the same book concurrently with both. Though I would never quote a paraphrased Bible (some passages in The Message are downright goofy), I feel they're very useful in helping newer readers better comprehend the more hard-to-follow books. That's why I look at the King James Version as only of historical interest, it's near-impenetrable to modern readers if you're actually looking to follow along and learn from it.

Are there any other recommendations for ABDL toddler clothes stores? I'm good on shortalls for now.

Hate to bump this thread back from the dead, but I was wondering if anyone had any more precise clarifications on sizing. I was kind of stopped dead on a Rearz order because I have a 36" waist; the large stops at 38" and the XL starts at 34", but the product description warns to consider a different size if you're one inch from the end of the size range and two inches still seems iffy to me. I've seen tons of completely different sizing measurements all over the internet and I've alternately heard people say to size up and size down, so I'm at a loss. Any suggestions?

I love pull-ups! As my ageplay age is more around toddler/preschool, I feel most comfortable playing and running around in pull-ups, and as many people have said, going potty in them feels a lot more..."significant", I guess is the word. I definitely don't get the same "uh oh, I had an accident" feel from diapers as I do pull-ups. They may not hold as much, but honestly, I don't spend too long in a used diaper, anyways. I do love diapers, I have tons of 'em, but if there was a bigger market for ABDL pull-ups, they would easily take up the majority of my collection.

I have an intense emotional attachment to a pillow-sized stuffed piggy I've had my entire life; I attempted to start a collection of whatever caught my eye (mostly piggies) but I just couldn't really get into it. I felt more like I was just buying for decoration than its intended use, and that's pretty much what purpose they're serving now. I guess I'm strictly monogamous when it comes to stuffies, just one for me for all purposes.

I just made a rather large deposit into my Dotty Super Boompa and now I'm just browsing the web, chilling on top of it. I'm perfectly normal. ?

A Super Boompa from Dotty Diaper. I got them super cheap, but honestly, I'm impressed with their quality. The design is bright and vibrant and cute but I don't quite like it as much as more muted baby-ish designs.

I forgot to update. I opted for the XL and I'm very glad I did because I'm sure the large would have been too small. It's still a little snug, especially around the hip area, but it's by no means uncomfortable and there's plenty of room for a diaper. I've also since gotten another Rearz onesie in XL which is a slightly better fit than the large. I guess I have better luck with going up two sizes than one.

I'll outright state that I think it's distasteful to intentionally soil yourself in a public place specifically for personal thrill, especially with the intent of having complete strangers notice or have to smell it. Even as an occasional diaper messer myself, I just find that to be gross. However...I will admit that I have done it in public before, though with similar precautions to those that Moochie stated. It wasn't anything sexual, I...just wanted to see what it was like. There are a lot of parks around where I live, including one huge regional park, and that's where I decided to go and "go". I would never do it in an indoor environment, or if it was too crowded. Honestly, I don't find too much thrill in it at all. It's not an entirely pleasant feeling being in a public place away from home with poop in your pants; my overwhelming instinct was just to go home as soon as possible. I don't regret doing it, it was certainly an experience, but I don't plan to do it again.

I've been doing research on bottles and I noticed something I felt I had to ask about. Pretty much every single thread I've seen regarding bottles foremost recommends baby bottles, modifying baby bottles or occasionally Rearz bottles. It seems tons of ABDL-specific retailers sell their own adult baby bottles (e.g. Baby-Pants, ABDL Company, Lil Kink, Etsy stores, various little and DDLG sites, etc.), and for the most part, they look like the same type of bottle. I have to assume that because of their cheap price (usually around $8-$10), they're probably not the best quality, but I haven't seen anyone talk about them. Are there merit to cheap-o ABDL bottles or should I just invest in the real deal? I mostly ask because I've been trying to wrap my head around all the different types of baby bottles, nipple variations, etc.; I like going to a website and just seeing simply "a bottle" for sale. That being said, I welcome any recommendations. Bonus points if it comes with handles!

This forum is ostensibly open to everyone, but just like every other sub-forum, there are limitations of acceptance when you refuse to act civilly. Clearly you have some opinions on matters of theology and that's fine...your specific viewpoints aren't the problem, it's that you express them argumentatively and condescendingly on top of outright insulting the very people this sub-forum is designed for. This sub-forum is called "Littles of Faith: A Place for Religious ABDL's and littles". Obviously that's not too strict a rule, because atheists and agnostics have freely posted and contributed civilly and productively. And by "civil" and "productive", I mean that they're not the ones who literally just generalized littles of faith - the very demographic this sub-forum is named for - as "two-faced" and "missing something up top" (among other things) and then fight for their right to still be included in a community they just expressed contempt for. I mean, it's kind of a rough equivalent to a straight person going into "Rainbow Diapers" and openly proclaiming they hate gay people but insist to still have every right to post in an LGBTQ sub-forum because otherwise it's exclusionary "gatekeeping". I could dwell on your sudden shift from "I was never a fan of having this forum" to "[this forum] must be open to all", but basically, it seems your primary issue with this religious sub is indeed that it's religious and therefore builds a "theistic bias". Even though that's arguably the point of a sub dedicated to religion and for religious members, you proposed moving it to a sub-section of "The Rest of Your Life", rebranded as "Philosophy & Spirituality". Well, disregarding the fact that opening up a formerly religious sub-forum to ALL members would disenfranchise every religious member of this sub, and disregarding the fact that opening up such a sub to ALL members would *drastically* increase the chances of inflammatory anti-religion comments against said religious members, and disregarding the fact you have no real evidence or even a second opinion that such a sub would benefit this forum outside of "I think the ABDLs would be more inclined to philosophy", and disregarding the fact that the entire basis of your desire to see such a sub is based on your own personal bias against religion...the idea of an all-encompassing "Philosophy & Spirituality" sub - or even a "Politics, Philosophy & Spirituality" sub - really isn't that bad. So...are you gonna talk to a mod about it? I mean, if that's really what you want to see, then are you going to take it up with the people who actually have the power to make it? Because, at this moment, that's not what this sub is, this sub is still explicitly religion-oriented and those are the rules by which it abides and which we follow. Outright insulting people who follow religious belief systems is still wholly unacceptable, and that would be true even if this was a general "Philosophy & Spirituality" sub. With the exception of one day in 2019, literally the most uncivil people in this entire sub-forum are users who directly violated sub rules by coming here to make anti-religious comments and/or insult people, so most of the arguments you've made in regards to this sub and the people in it aren't backed up by any kind of empirical evidence outside of your own biases and assumptions. Huh, maybe you ARE religious after all...

Then...maybe just don't post here? I honestly don't understand the amount of energy you're choosing to put into a sub which you outright admit is not for you, especially since at one point you said you "have more useful and fun things to do" than argue here, a claim which I'm beginning to think is a lie. I'm speaking objectively as someone with no religious affiliation who's only looking at the facts as they're presented in each of this sub-forum's 28 threads: 1. You stated bluntly "I was never a fan of having this forum", listing two reasons, one of which being "everyone is shouting at each other". 2. I countered that such a sub-forum is useful for the clearly significant number of faith-based AB/DLs who seek support and socialization, and that with the exception of people who only come here to troll, "Littles of Faith" seems to be running just fine. 3. Instead of addressing any the points I raised, you went off on a tangent about how it's "impossible to have a 'civil' debate" with religious people, who you proceed to call irrational, manipulative, vicious and "missing something up top". 4. I read all 28 threads in this sub-forum and presented - in a very long and comprehensive post - evidence that not only is nobody "shouting at each other", this forum has operated remarkably smoothly and civilly over the last two years with users of all faiths, with only two documented arguments between the same two Christian users on matters of theology, both of which ended quickly and were hardly "vicious". The biggest disruptions in this sub come only from people who post here with the explicit intention of bashing religion, but even they're either ignored or reach an agreement to "agree to disagree". 5. Instead of addressing any of the points I raised, you went off on a tangent about how the Bible's not supported by archaeological or historical evidence, which not only has literally nothing to do with what I was trying to communicate to you, but kind of throws into question whether or not I can effectively communicate with you. I mean, if you don't recognize that *you* are the person causing literally the biggest commotion in this sub-forum since July 16, 2019, and that *you* are the one coming in here to irrationally belittle other people rather than engage in civil debate, and that if *you* hadn't posted in this thread to sarcastically berate another user nobody would even be having an argument right now, if you don't recognize that *you* are currently being the problem in this thread, then I don't know what to tell you. If you wanna contribute productively, that's great, there's several threads in this sub-forum demonstrating how both people of faith and atheists/agnostics can engage in civil discourse, but it seems to me that your only intention is to aggressively disprove the beliefs of others, and while a user like DiapersOfTheStorm does the same thing, they're at least engaging in proper debate and - most importantly - not outright insulting other people and then saying they don't even want this sub to exist. If your primary position is that you consider all religious people to be insane and that a religious sub-forum doesn't belong here, then...hmm, I dunno, maybe don't read and post in a religious sub-forum? I mean...that doesn't seem too hard to ME - I may not be religious, but I'm at least interested in what people have to say about it, and I'd like to think I have an unbiased enough viewpoint to objectively determine who is and who isn't being a bully. It just doesn't make sense why someone would habitually visit a religious sub-forum to complain about there being a religious sub-forum because a religious sub-forum isn't significant to themselves. That's like a vegetarian going to a butcher shop every day to complain to customers that they don't like meat...they're not really doing anything but making themselves look like an idiot.

Then...why are you reading and posting in a religious forum...?