WSvenH

@Bettypooh I believe that everyone has more or less exhibitionistic tendencies. It is a natural selection thing, I believe. Totally hiding the own sexuality might be an evolutionary disadvantage as potential mating partners might not be attracted, totally showing the sexual arousal on the other extreme might be socially unattractive and might signal females that a potential partner might not be very loyal. So there is at least some advantage to being somewhat exhibitionistic. Also the social part of showing sexuality in or readiness for intercourse or sexual orientation or the communication of preferred partners is IMHO wastly underestimated in a binary discussion about exhibitionistic tendencies. Of course, we have red lines and taboos dertermining what behaviour is labeled exhibitionistic, but I tried to broaden the view when I used the term exhibitionistic, so that there is a more of a continuum, that spans desired, normal, accepted, tolerated, discouraged and finally unacceptable exhibition of sexuality.

@BettyPoh, thanks for these wise and kind words.

Hey, careful there to not put out a totally unfair, comic version of "modern medicine". Practitioners licensed to do therapy have to have thousands of hours of training as well as years of hard education. Especially modern medicine integrates multi disciplinary approaches, and all propositions must be supported by evidence according to the highest standards that are practically implemented in todays science. Medicine is far from perfect, but there is just no real "alternative medicine", there is no systemic flaw in medicine, especially not in "modern" medicine. It is really wrong and unfair to think that little of it - especially if all alternatives are worse and have far lower standards. All medical practitioners I met really care for their patients more than becoming rich, and there are so many preventative therapies and procedures, especially in "modern" medicine. Also, why should illness be somehow more profitable than selling stuff that prevents illness? This is totally illogical, and if anything it puts a bad rep on those that need permanent medication, e.g. to treat depression. Are you in anyway spreading this super-unfair, patient-blaming anti-mental-illness propaganda? Also the way you use the term "modern" feels to me, like the less informed medicine of the past, which had provably less knowledge and more false pratices than current medicine, was somehow better...

Well... don't be afraid! In 2017 I told my family and most of my friends, and my doctor. It is hard, but: DON'T BE ASHAMED. There's just no need to be... Being an AB/DL is something great, embrace it. Not everybody will be cool about AB/DL, but you dont have to tell them exactly what that is, so pay close attention to peoples reactions to find out how far you can go. And if you are as lucky as I am, you will get reactions like: "This is great, and no big deal. Have fun, there is nothing to be ashamed of!" (My brother even suggested to me to go to http://lab.oratory.de/ when I visit him in Berlin.) My mom also has no problem at all. Only my sister needed a moment to accept the fact, that I wear 24/7 for fun, and is fine with it.

Neither is being an american nor a 7th day adventist a good predictor of an individuals reaction to such a situation. An atheist from sweden could be a conservative asshole, just as easy as an american 7th day evangelist could be the most understanding person... Well, the hospital made my life good and provided good care, I dont know if they know or wonder WHY I wore diapers, so I do not think that anyone was thinking that I was a pervert. But on the other hand, I brought my own gear, so why should they worry about such an unimportant question?(to them) AAAAAAAAaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaah, no please, not you too While I understand you negative expectations about those that run your country, stop making this a top-level-political issue, how well the nurse, doctor or police treats you when they find out about your diapers is not up to who runs the country, really, it depends much more on how respectful you are, and maybe what the other person had for dinner last night. Blaming the system or the others in general is at best a call for action for political activism and a pretty lame excuse for not doing anything, at worst. Blaming people and procedures that one is incapable of changing directly is pretty a convenient excuse to be lazy about it. One might not further an agenda of promoting acceptence by a general public, but one can always make a positive impression in a local community. I am pretty sure, it is just the shit you see on the news People always strongly mirror what one thinks of them. If you approach someone thinking "Wow, what a great person" this person wll likely be a lot nicer to you than if you were thinking the opposite. Also, wearing diapers is no immediatly or obviously a sexual deviation, so that helps, too. You could also say that you have some psychological problem that is like bedwetting, or something. Of course going full out in the brightest of fetish lights, might also work better than expected, because this whole fetish thing is by now a pretty standard label to put on things. Do not underestimate how irrelevant you are to those that work in a hospital. If you say you are incontinent ... they will be, ok, whatever, and if regulations require it, they will add a new diagnosis after asking more questions, or if regulations don't require it, they will not question anything you say and also think "sorry, whatever" and show you stuff. Heck, they might even know, that you wear them for fun and they'll be like ... lol, whatever. If they know it is for sexual reasons, then they might be like...WTF, whatever. BUT, let me tell you from experience, that being really nice and helpful, being a good person to the staff, will mean more to most of them. In my case some sweet treats as a thank-you gift might have helped.

Well said Bettypooh. Also if someone wants to fire you, they will find a way, but I doubt it will be because of diapers, there are safer ways to fire people. Also if someone wants to fire you, being outed as wearing diapers is the least of your concerncs Generally people on your side will stay there, and make you as comfortable as possible wearing diapers, others that are in conflict with you might not - which, again, has nothing to do with diapers.

Hi Folks, TL,DR: Wear at the hospital, do not invent bullshit medical reasons, people are generally lovely and helpful if they find out about the diapers. The place where I live (europe) is pretty conservative. I was for one week in a hospital, and I wore 24/7. I said I needed them, no questions were asked they showed me the hospital diapers and told me to use them, I refused and brought my own. Before the surgery I had to fill out forms and answer questions about my general health, I write down "incontinence" and waited for the doctor to pick up on that, and I prepared a lengthy statement to explain how I had a strong emotional attachment to diapers, etc, etc... but luckily he did not ask questions about it. I asked if it was ok to wear protection during the operation, and he affirmed that. I went to the surgery with diapers and after the surgery I woke up in pain and realized I had been given a bladder catheter. I was only half awake and asked the nurse to remove it, and explained that I have had an injury in the uretha which still hurts. They removed it some time later, which was very painful. then they placed a bottle between my legs such that my penis was inside. After a while I asked them to give me a diaper, I don't rember what exactly I said (half asleep), but it was something along the lines of: "I assume, you don't understand this, but please replace the bottle with a diaper, this bottle irritates me, it just calms me down when I know I have that diaper, sorry". This was no problem the nurse gave me a diaper which I put on. I did not have clear vision at that time and everything was fuzzy to me, I don;t know how much time passed and who was there, but I did not care. Later at my room I had to get assistance when getting up for the first time after waking up. I had to call a nurse and I told her I wanted to change something and hinted at the bag beneath my bed with my diaper supply. She helped me get a diaper out (I could not bend down) and walked me to the toilet. Tthey told me where to dispose of the diapers and made it super easy for me, and not at all embarrassing. No one, not even any doctores asked any questions. Only a few days after being home I had an incident that required me to go to the hospital again (for the same medical issue) to the emergency doctor, and she had to put a finger into my butt. I had to open the diaper, she saw it, checked my behind and asked me if I had problems hodling stool, I said "no", then she aksed if I had problems holding urine, I replied: "This is closer to my problem". But she must have misunderstood me and said: "Okay, so it is something else, you wear for other reasons." And she was sweet and friendly and did not ask any more questions about the diapers. No where in the documents they send to my primary care physican(/doctor?) was something about incontinence or the diapers. Heck, why did I stress my self weeks ahead about the reactions to me wearing diapers without any medical diagnosis? I am in conflict with me, since I know that I also like to wear diapers for sexual reasons, but I don't know what they put into to the tap water in that hospital but I did not once think of sex at all in that whole week, and I still "needed" to wear. I at least try to make the impact on others psyche and budget as low as possible, so I am somewhat ok with me wearing at the hospital with only the minimal impact (resources, help and awareness) on the staff and hospital. thanks for reading till here.

This is the most lastest last post of the Last Thread Game, ever, no competition. And there were no other last posts before it. Yeah!

Its all fake last posts, so sad, covefe

Well, if this post tells the truth, then this post is the true last post and all following posts are fake-last-posts.

Bravo that! Yeah I agree, though I would add that if the intent is the only thing that would push something over a red line, I would give the benefit of the doubt, if the situation is not totally of the limit. I generally enjoy happy people, so I would not mind someone shitting their pants next to me, as long as the smell is not too heavy, and I would not mind if they get a kick out of me watching them. I mean, this is the easiest way to give someone a bit of joy. As long as I don't feel used or abused, that is.

A woman being pinched in the butt, is not a good example to lead a counter argument to what I said because I explicitly excluded indiviual confrontation. Look, nothing's black or white. Everything is on a continuum, a hetero couple passionately kissing in the park - is by your definition non-consentually involving others who see that. Also a transvestite, i.e. a person cross-dressing, is involving others non-consentually when going out in public; let's draw the line where others are actively blocked or individually targeted or touched, The point to me is whether the public or an individual person or group is the target of the action, that might or might not be involving. If an ABDL or trans or leather-guy walks donw the street or park in an outfit, minding their own business, this can be purely an expression of their personality, to which they are absolutely entitled to; of course this could be of exhibitionistic nature, and this might or might not make others uncomfortable, there are gray areas where it is not clear if it is exhibitionistic in nature. And we must give the benefit of the doubt here. The fundamental right to self express in certain ways must be carefully balanced against indecency in those gray areas. But one can expect some level of tolerance from the public, even if they don't like what they see (or the think about what they see), as long as some red lines are not crossed, the right to self-express overweights the concerns, and people must accept being remotely and accidently "non-consentuall involveld (to use your words)" in the kinks of others to a very small degree.

Ok, I beleive this is self deception out of fear of rejection and shame, it is quite natural (and proposed to be a fundamental human right) to express ones sexuality. Again equate is not the point, compare is what we can and should do.

Well it mattered at least the last 1 million years what others thought... the concept of self just is derived from living in a social context, hence the matter of acceptance is never only a matter of self acceptance, it's always acceptance from the (virtual) court of public oppinion. Let me try to explain my thoughts: Every social being somehow is required to model the society in their heads, in order to fit in and support each others interest in survival. Self-acceptance is the minds construction of an assumed public, that judges one's position in society in a favorable way. This model consists of many layers: Members of the same fetisch, Inner family, best friends, signaficant others, spouses, friends, neighbours, college, the city, country, sports club, and it is assumed that this modelling happens on multiple layers, and I assume, that some of these layers are more relevant for survival than others (co-workers, boss, customers, police, significant others, parents if your a minor). For me self-acceptance translates to the congruent construction of an accepting subset of this assumed/implicit public, comprised of those layers, that are vital to well being or even survival. And this leads me to critisizing the emphasis on self-acceptance: Because it can easily lead to self-deception by faking the results of this acceptance-simulation. Thas is not to say that there's no value to that in and of itself, it definitely lowers the blodd-pressure and cortisol levels, but does it really help in reaching actual acceptance - which is vital, especially in societies where sexual devation is sanctioned by law? When self-acceptance is self-deception, one tends overly paint the actual society darker than it really is. Self-acceptace should not hinder someone from going out, meeting actual society and try real people - they might be much more accepting than the simulation predicts. This is due to the inherent negativity bias of the brain. when I came out to many about wearing diapers for non-medical reasons, I had the worst of all scenarios in mind, but it turned out always much better than what I head simulated in my mind.

I wonder how much the fact the we humans are social beings plays into that. It is often stated that acceptance and self-love must come from within, but as a matter of fact, humans evolved for thousands of years in a closely tied social context, where being accepted and liked was the fundamental condition of survival. From an evolutionary point of view, the concepts self hate and interal stigmatization don't make sense, unless they are causally linked with hat and stigmatization by the group/the society. So for me at least, there is no problem with self-acceptance if enough others accept me, so that my existance is not threatended, it's mostly about what others think, I am a social animal. Why would I for my self care to judge or shame myself!? Shame and hate come from the outside, for me at least

Well OBVIOUSLY ABDL and LGBT are separate and independent categories. but so are L and G and B and T. Just saying... Also I am Bisexual, and I am really mad at LGTQ for comparing with me. (no not really, I am Bi, but, it was just a joke that I am mad at anyone (who is open, accepting and loving to other beings))