If You Love 'Diapers', You'Re Ab

[sunwutian]

Everyone wants their definitions to be the one true definition of labels. And over time, they get diluted to the point of being meaningless when nobody can agree upon them. Just using the term invokes arguments about what the term means. Eventually there ceases to be a single 'right' definition, since no one can agree on it.

Look at atheism. There are people that will argue that everyone is atheist since everyone doesn't believe in at least one god, since believing in some are contradictory to others. On the other end, there are those who say you can't be atheist unless you unequivocally state that you are certain that no gods exist. Most of you are probably thinking right now what an idiot I must be as you know exactly what that word means, right? Yet ask around, and you'll find even the experts disagree with each other. It doesn't even matter if there IS a perfect definition, because not even half of people will agree to that definition.

That's my point. It's ridiculous. Some want to make words ridiculously exclusive, some want to make them inclusive. Here we have a perfect term, "diaper lover", it can't be any more clear. Almost everyone in this community has a very clear understanding of what the term means, so let's leave the definition be.

No one has to perfectly agree with the definition, but just respect its accepted public meaning and don't try and muddle it by blurring the lines. We need labels, or every single post would be a ranting mess like this one in absence of nice succinct terms.

[sarah_ab]

there are those who say you can't be atheist unless you unequivocally state that you are certain that no gods exist.

well thank god i CAN state this... hahaah didn't anyone see what i did there... thank god... in the same sentence as i am stating that there IS no god... hahah man I am witty!!!!

so another example

Therefore, all people who still have a favourite stuffed animal or blanket or toy from their younger years are necessarily an ab.

think about this... all squares are rectangles, but not all rectangles are squares... which actually now that i think about it has nothing to do with this...

or how about.. you can trap a zebra but you can't trap-a-zoid... makes no sense right? sorta like the OP's post... ahhh there i knew i get it right...

this all reminds me of those sat questions... everoyne who has blond hair is a woman and all blonds are short, therefore all woman are short. true or false...

[Little BabyDoll Christine]

Given what I said earlier, there is also the "story" and "subtext" to things. In terms of non-incn, AB fits the diaper "story" and "subtext" best, even to the point that incons are presumed to have some baby in them (prejudicial to be sure) and the subject brings out the tittering et all. There is the phrase in sports when someone screws up or has a really bad game, he "wet himself". Who can forget "pinko commie bedwetter". Given what I said earlier, there is no "story" or "subtext" to diapers without some reference to very early childhood. A non AB, non incon who chooses to wear diapers, in the minds of most persons does not compute at best or is a "perv" at worst, In the common mind an AB at least computes the assessment may run the gamut between "doing one's own thing", a bit bizarre, nutjob to perv

ABDL is run together and they show up together at fora like this so there is a perception of "joined at the hip"pedness and in social matters percetion is reality so that any diaper story will have a tinge of baby just due to the culture

This also reflects on the LG vs Sissy. Hoever, LG is the earlier and more restrictive term (see the DPF roster form) The only thing I have in common with Sissies is that we both wear dresses. LG's probably fit into the Transgender category but that seems to be dominated by adult and transexual "story" and "subtext" and we were a separate sub-category of AB. Aside from the fact that for me and 90% of Real People, "sissy" is an epithet rivalling racial, sexual or ethnic slurs, Not only do sissies not have as thorough a girlishness as I or any LG but I and other LG's have no deisre to be involved with effeminacy/emasculatedness which is different from femininity, small-widdler humiliation, femdom and the rest of that mess. In this case, however, LG being the older of the two, Sissy is trying to hijack us. Also LG can include genetic girls aka GG (a lady friend of mine, to give me the needle used the GG reference to mean "genuine girl")

Until you can get some separation from ABDL, DL will be considered a subset of AB by nature Maybe as with Little Girl, there ought to be a separate forum for DL so that they can be taken out of the infantile "Story" and "Subtext". If you can have a separate mental illness specific forum then why not separate fora for something that is more on topic? Ditto rubber/plastic panties

[Bettypooh]

<rant>

To add one more thought, the OP shows that many people see things only from one point of view, then conclude that because it is their point of view somehow that makes them correct We are all mistake-prone humans therefore we should all try to look from every perspective before making a determination of what is fact and what is false Not directed to the OP alone, I've found that people who are strongly affected by something are the ones who most do this It's very prevalent when it comes to sexually-motivated lifestyles IMHO it's a sign of not having full self-acceptance, a way of trying to justify to yourself that what you do is right and proper by trying to force your perspective on others as fact

I am DL only so my first impressions and feelings are from that perspective-does that mean that everyone else is like me? Of course not And it sure doesn't automatically make everyone else wrong just because they are different When posting an opinion make it clear that it's just that- opinion and not fact This thread proves that there is a difference between those two things If you think it is fact, take the time to offer adequate proof of your belief, not just a single line of thought that in itself is debatable (such as whether "briefs" are actually diapers or not) Debate is good but making statements like this is more akin to starting an argument than debating. Thanks to those who debated and did not let this thread turn into a bashing contest. And those who simply bashed back shame on you Be nicer-you'll have more fun that way!

</rant>

[carjock]

I will continue to call myself a diaper lover. Or should we be called "Adult bladder & bowel containment device" lovers.

[PeePee]

I guess you may call me whatever you wish. (sticks & stones ect.) However I will wear and use diapers even if I have no Adult Baby inclinations or toys. If that makes me AB, so be it. I still love my diapers wet.

[rusty pins]

WRONG! Just because someone likes wearing diapers does not mean they are AB, even in the slighetest! That would be like saying any adult who wears diapers is not only AB but also likes involving actual babies because they also wear diapers! It's like saying because they wear diapers like a baby and change diapers they also want to involve actual babies because they too wear diapers and get changed! Flawed logic!

[Little BabyDoll Christine]

Then we would have to break up the term ABDL into its two components and add in the "I am a..." entry an additional choice., maybe "Adult Diaper Lover" since the choice of Boy or Girl impliess a child. Diaperspace had a separate DL Room. which makes a bit of difference, unless we use "Just Diapers" strictly for DL, since we do have "Baby Talk".. But as it stands now AB and DL certainly seem joined at the hip in that when I think of one, the other comes to mind in that AB's also love diapers and I bet I speak for most persons who are not "movement" persons.

And before someone tries to lecture us about "labels" let me ask this question: If you found a sealed, unlabelled can, would you open it and eat the contents?

[Toddler Pampers]

Let me again clarify my original post. I am saying that when one uses the term ‘diaper’, the word ‘baby’ naturally comes to mind. All I’m saying is that if you are in no way an AB, and you want to make this clear to others, you should consider calling yourself something other than a DL, which I take to mean an AB who is just into diapers.

Lots of people believe DLs are ABs on some level, even though nobody, myself included, is trying to label anybody. If you don’t want to be clear about yourself, that’s just fine. Don’t care that others might think you’re a little AB as a DL (and you're not)? Again, fine. Don’t like that I say the term diaper lover doesn’t clearly indicate that the person has absolutely no interest in regression? No problem.

I’m not telling anybody who they are or what to do. I am simply saying that the term ‘diaper lover’ is misleading if you have no attraction whatsoever to regression. All I’m saying is that the term is imprecise. Anybody who wants to be absolutely clear that they like wearing diapers but are in no way, shape or form an AB should not call themselves a DL. But, obviously, go do exactly as you please.

I did state originally that all DLs are ABs. That is wrong, but not because it violates social networking protocol. What I meant to say is that if you call yourself a DL, lots of people will consider you an AB as well. That's just because the words 'diaper' and 'baby' have such a close connection. But again, it doesn't mean that you aren't exactly who you are and that others' impressions might be wrong.

[sarah_ab]

who are these 'lots of people' everynoe keeps talking about

'lots of people will consider u an ab'

'lots of people will consider you a perv'

lots of people.. lots of people... lots of people...

I'd like to meet these lots of people, because i've yet to meet them.... perhaps some of the posters here can let us in on who these 'lots of people' are they refer too.. is it 2-3 people? 4-5 people? i mean have you guys gone out and just talked to everyone you meet and asked them.. if i say i'm a dl do you then think i'm a ab? which in and of itself is not an objective question...

but at any rate, until you show me this truely scientific data you have collected through a IRB approved study at an accredited institution... then really these 'lots of people' are just as real as unicorns.

[babykeiff]

Why waste time and energy trying to typecast / stereotype / classify what is impossible to do so? We are all unique individuals, with independent choices, feelings and beliefs. We enjoy what we enjoy, which can change as often as we change our mind.

[wishing for diapers]

ABDL is run together

Actually, it used to be written as AB/DL but the / has mostly been dropped in the last decade due to both laziness and intolerant idiots.

Until you can get some separation from ABDL, DL will be considered a subset of AB by nature

From someone that is not part of the community I expect and accept this view point as a lack of knowledge and understanding.

From someone that is a member of the community, there is no excuse for them to not understand the difference.

AB's also love diapers

Again you show your arrogant and limited understanding of the community. There have been plenty of cases over the years of ABs that have ZERO interest in diapers. If they wear them at all it is simply because it is appropriate to the age they regress to.

Yes there are connections and similarities between ABs and DLs which is part of the reason that it is a joint community, but there are also significant differences. Some people cross the line into both groups (e.g. a DL that likes a <insert babyish item here>, an AB that is sexually stimulated by the diaper, etc..), but there is nothing wrong with them selecting the label that they feel best defines them.

The connections between the sub-groups isn't so much the choice of underwear, but of how/when the connection to their chosen sub-group developed. But even that isn't absolute as there are members that developed their interest later in life and have no indication of desires or triggers during their developmental years.

So just get over yourself and accept people for who they are and how they define themselves.

To be perfectly clear, the issue is that it was not asked "Aren't DLs ABs too?" but instead stated "All DLs are ABs.". The first is a question for (hopefully) the desire of knowledge. The later is a statement to attempt to force everyone into the OP's view of the world.

[lambcannon]

um, i don't think so... i was not breast fed and have no happy memories of babyhood, except for my male cousin and i running around together in our plastic pants. i absolutely respect all points of view vis-a-vis adult babyhood, and am guilty of wearing some pretty queer looking flannel pajamas, but find the concept of calling a (i'm sure very pleasant) woman up and talking about my poopy diapers etc. to be somewhat puke-inducing.

can't i just deal with my incontinence in this pleasant way without invoking a lot of psychological drama of tothood that i just plain don't feel, never have felt? having said that, if you want to make silly-assed assumptions about me, i'm your guy, am not sensitive about it a-tall.

[sarah_ab]

i'm an ab, but NOT a dl.. diapers are just a prop used to make a role play scenario more realistic...

[Bettypooh]

... then really these 'lots of people' are just as real as unicorns.

You mean unicorns aren't real? WAAAAAAAAAHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! (JK)

Bettypooh

[Little BabyDoll Christine]

Actually, it used to be written as AB/DL but the / has mostly been dropped in the last decade due to both laziness and intolerant idiots.

From someone that is not part of the community I expect and accept this view point as a lack of knowledge and understanding.

From someone that is a member of the community, there is no excuse for them to not understand the difference.

Again you show your arrogant and limited understanding of the community. There have been plenty of cases over the years of ABs that have ZERO interest in diapers. If they wear them at all it is simply because it is appropriate to the age they regress to.

Yes there are connections and similarities between ABs and DLs which is part of the reason that it is a joint community, but there are also significant differences. Some people cross the line into both groups (e.g. a DL that likes a <insert babyish item here>, an AB that is sexually stimulated by the diaper, etc..), but there is nothing wrong with them selecting the label that they feel best defines them.

The connections between the sub-groups isn't so much the choice of underwear, but of how/when the connection to their chosen sub-group developed. But even that isn't absolute as there are members that developed their interest later in life and have no indication of desires or triggers during their developmental years.

So just get over yourself and accept people for who they are and how they define themselves.

To be perfectly clear, the issue is that it was not asked "Aren't DLs ABs too?" but instead stated "All DLs are ABs.". The first is a question for (hopefully) the desire of knowledge. The later is a statement to attempt to force everyone into the OP's view of the world.

Just for your edification. I joined DPF in 83. What were you doing then? For all the time I was there. virtually no issue was made of AB or DL and do NOT quit your day job to be a mind reader or you shall starve. I am very aware that much of that 'AB" community did not wear diapers as they were "grade schoolers" and "pre-schoolers". There may have been one or two "diaper age" AB's who had no interest in diapers except as props but that is the most I can say I ever heard of and that was over the course of almost 20 years. If you want to make the case on the basis of that as opposed to the overwhelming majority of "diaper age" AB's who either liked them or did not say they had no interest; well I'd hate to be you running from the poodle into the mouth of the lion. I can only tell you what I saw and how I understood it to be from that. My roots are in real life, not a "community" so I do not get into the task of trying to separate the flyshit from the pepper. Go read my post about the percentages and answer those questions outside the context of the AB and DL ghetto (The original Ghetto was a self-imposed one for the purpose of cultural development)

Even AB/DL was usually taken to be that DL was a subset of AB , as in AB/LG. Nobody asked questions because it did not occur to anyone. You should have seen some of the antics of the LG's at GirlTalk To to avoid being ID'ed with diapers as Litle Girls, Many of those who were AB/LG would split their AB side off from the LG and have two very disparate age roles, usually 2 and 6-8. I was not one to split my personality so I was just a VLG (Very Little Girl). The person who ran GirlTalk To banned baby talk from that board and set up a separate board, BabyTalk To but let little boys there so I was not having any.

Now, if you want to tell me things have changed, then fine. Then, we did not have Sissies or babyfurs. Look at the DPF entry form

[Diaper_Lover_HI]

I can agree too. I love to wear diapers, have participated in baby play overseas in Japan on numerous occasions which consisted of cribs, baby bottles, changings etc.... Here at home we have a 3 full size adult size cribs, full size adult diaper changing station.... so yeh i first started out wearing diapers, then came the bottle, then the bib, after that came the crib, changing diapers on the bed got old, so was able to put together a adult size diaper changing station... how much further can we go...

[Diaper273]

"what percent of babies are in diapers? What percent of diapers are worn by babies? What percent of the infant care culture is taken up by diapers? Now, what percent of diapers are worn by adults? What percent of non-incon adults wear diapers? What percent of the non-incon adult culture do diapers represent?. Finally what percent of diaper culture is infant/young child oriented? What percent of the diaper culture is non-incon adult oriented?" ~ Christine

You like giving questions I see. Here are some facts you might not know of. Children in Africa in tribes are raised to control their bladders from birth, so I would say the population of Africans combined with the population of people without toilets or proper running water overpowers the population of babies (humans aged 1-3) in diapers.

What percent of diapers are worn by babies? Well, if you include old people, all people who have major spinal injuries, many Chinese people in the Chinese New Year, all of us, and all incontinent or bed-wetting people and place them against the babies who wear diapers, I would say that even though babies wear a lot more diapers others are slowly catching up.

Also, in order to say that every baby wears diapers or adults usually do not wear diapers, then you therefore must know EVERY single baby and adult. You don't. So you can't know.

"just to state MY opinion" ~ OP

Nobody asked for your opinion on this matter. So why say it in the first place?

I would think the term "Diaper Lover" and "Adult Baby" were quite clear from each other. One whom merely loves diapers and one whom merely wants to act like a baby beyond the age of 18.

If you want to confuse the terms or state that all diaper lovers are adult babies, then that is fine, but there was NO reason to bring this topic up. To say diapers are associated with babies is merely idiotic. Because if they were only associated with babies, that would make us all between the ages of 1 and 3. We are not. Therefore, diapers can be associated also with fetishism and adults. Therefore, diapers are not excusive to adult babies. And if you really want to get technical I could say that since you CANNOT be a baby and an adult at the same time, then adult babies are impossible, and you can only be a diaper lover. Of course, you are an example of an adult baby. So that would contradict the original statement. In the end all you do is create circular arguments.

"I am saying that when one uses the term ‘diaper’, the word ‘baby’ naturally comes to mind." ~ OP

By saying this you also say that you know what every person is thinking. When I think of diapers, I think of some hot female in a diaper, or the picture of me putting one on. I am not around babies at all, so I don't think of diapers being associated with babies.

"even though nobody, myself included, is trying to label anybody" ~ OP

"all DLs are ABs" ~ OP

Funny.

"lots of people will consider you an AB as well" ~ OP

I have yet to see another person with the exception of MABE one or two people I have seen to also think of it this way. It just goes back again to why would you post something like this when nobody asked for your opinion?

"Just for your edification. I joined DPF in 83." ~ Christine

Age does not justify understanding. For example, Robert Mugabe, responsible for the suffering of millions of white and black farmers, rigged elections, and killed those who opposed him. When you were joining the DPF community he was 50s-60s. Does that mean he knows more about life and government than you do, merely because he is older? I think not. Yes, there is a possibility that previously DL was a subset of AB, but we are thirty years in the future. Terms evolve over time, just as the separation of AB and DL did. AB is different than DL nowadays. For example, the word nigger comes from the word nigerum. In old Latin, this means a "person who is black". Now it's a racial slur. Words and phrases evolve over time to mean different things.

In the end, I am a Diaper Lover. I HATE rattles, and soothers, and blankies, etc. I LOVE diapers. I am a diaper lover. I am NOT an adult baby. I am absolutely sure that I know myself better than you do, and I am 99% positive that every other DL here agrees that they are only DLs.

[Missy Q]

In the end, I am a Diaper Lover.  I HATE rattles, and soothers, and blankies, etc.  I LOVE diapers.  I am a diaper lover.  I am NOT an adult baby.  I am absolutely sure that I know myself better than you do, and I am 99% positive that every other DL here agrees that they are only DLs.

Exactly. If they were also adult-babies, they would be AB/DL's instead of just DL's.

I agree with basically everything Satanic is saying.

[erevu]

RE: OP

Thanks for your input. If you have any more of your own definitions you'd like to share with us, please don't hesitate. We can't wait to share your world view.

[rusty pins]

Let me again clarify my original post. I am saying that when one uses the term ‘diaper’, the word ‘baby’ naturally comes to mind. All I’m saying is that if you are in no way an AB, and you want to make this clear to others, you should consider calling yourself something other than a DL, which I take to mean an AB who is just into diapers.

Not quite true! Sure, when people think of the word "diaper" they think of toddlers and babies, however incontinent people also wear adult diapers. That's what they are called by many people. It's only the manufacturers that call them "disposable undergarments" or "disposable briefs". What else would you call adult cloth diapers other than diapers?

Lots of people believe DLs are ABs on some level, even though nobody, myself included, is trying to label anybody. If you don’t want to be clear about yourself, that’s just fine. Don’t care that others might think you’re a little AB as a DL (and you're not)? Again, fine. Don’t like that I say the term diaper lover doesn’t clearly indicate that the person has absolutely no interest in regression? No problem.

I think stating we are DL is being very clear about ourselves! It states that we are diaper lovers! We love diapers! no need to go into what it is about diapers that we love, such as wearing wet diapers in public under our jeans. Then we would have a lable like, "DLWWDIPUOJ". If we actually were a little AB as a DL we would lable ourselves as AB/DL or DL with some AB tendencies. I've seen people state that many times. If anyone wants a clearer explination, they can ask in a message.

I’m not telling anybody who they are or what to do. I am simply saying that the term ‘diaper lover’ is misleading if you have no attraction whatsoever to regression. All I’m saying is that the term is imprecise. Anybody who wants to be absolutely clear that they like wearing diapers but are in no way, shape or form an AB should not call themselves a DL. But, obviously, go do exactly as you please.

I don't see how the term DL could be misleading to anyone who has been in the AB/DL community even for a short time. People in this lifestyle know that AB is baby related and DL means the person likes diapers and not necessarily baby things. I can't see how anyone can think that everyone or even most people who like diapers, (DL) would also be into regression! I just don't get any connection there at all! I am a DL and I'm repulsed by regression and baby play! For those who like it, that's fine for them! All power to them! It's just not my cup of tea and something I don't like at all, even though I like wearing diapers.

I did state originally that all DLs are ABs. That is wrong, but not because it violates social networking protocol. What I meant to say is that if you call yourself a DL, lots of people will consider you an AB as well. That's just because the words 'diaper' and 'baby' have such a close connection. But again, it doesn't mean that you aren't exactly who you are and that others' impressions might be wrong.

Again, I don't think many people other than yourself will consider a DL as also being AB just because DL contains the word "Diaper". If someone has baby or regression tendencies, they will state that in there likes and profile. After all, if they like that part of the lifestyle, why wouldn't the state they are AB instead of just stating DL? It may just be wishful thinking on your part to hope that everyone out here with this lifestyle likes to regress and play baby games like you may do yourself. That is just not the case. There are many many people who like to wear and use diapers for personal enjoyment with absolutly no thought at all to regressing and acting like a baby. That is the simple truth. Bottom line! Having said "bottom line" per your logic would that make me want to regress because baby's butts are often called their "bottoms"? DL is a term for people in our lifestyle who like diapers but not the baby stuff. I don't know who origionally coined that term, maybe Tommy at DPF, but I know it's been around a long long time. Long enough for people in this lifestyle to know what is ment by the term "DL". After all, how many people refer to facial tissues as "Kleenex" even though they may be "Puffs" brand. At this point and after all this time with the handle "DL", I don't think anyone is interested in changing the handle to ADBL (Adult Disposable Brief Lover) because DL contains the word Diaper. Even though many people associate the word diaper with babies and toddlers, such is not always the case, especially with the ABDL lifestyle and people on sites like this.

[Little BabyDoll Christine]

"what percent of babies are in diapers? What percent of diapers are worn by babies? What percent of the infant care culture is taken up by diapers? Now, what percent of diapers are worn by adults? What percent of non-incon adults wear diapers? What percent of the non-incon adult culture do diapers represent?. Finally what percent of diaper culture is infant/young child oriented? What percent of the diaper culture is non-incon adult oriented?" ~ Christine

You like giving questions I see. Here are some facts you might not know of. Children in Africa in tribes are raised to control their bladders from birth, so I would say the population of Africans combined with the population of people without toilets or proper running water overpowers the population of babies (humans aged 1-3) in diapers.

What percent of diapers are worn by babies? Well, if you include old people, all people who have major spinal injuries, many Chinese people in the Chinese New Year, all of us, and all incontinent or bed-wetting people and place them against the babies who wear diapers, I would say that even though babies wear a lot more diapers others are slowly catching up.

Also, in order to say that every baby wears diapers or adults usually do not wear diapers, then you therefore must know EVERY single baby and adult. You don't. So you can't know.

"just to state MY opinion" ~ OP

Nobody asked for your opinion on this matter. So why say it in the first place?

I would think the term "Diaper Lover" and "Adult Baby" were quite clear from each other. One whom merely loves diapers and one whom merely wants to act like a baby beyond the age of 18.

If you want to confuse the terms or state that all diaper lovers are adult babies, then that is fine, but there was NO reason to bring this topic up. To say diapers are associated with babies is merely idiotic. Because if they were only associated with babies, that would make us all between the ages of 1 and 3. We are not. Therefore, diapers can be associated also with fetishism and adults. Therefore, diapers are not excusive to adult babies. And if you really want to get technical I could say that since you CANNOT be a baby and an adult at the same time, then adult babies are impossible, and you can only be a diaper lover. Of course, you are an example of an adult baby. So that would contradict the original statement. In the end all you do is create circular arguments.

"I am saying that when one uses the term ‘diaper’, the word ‘baby’ naturally comes to mind." ~ OP

By saying this you also say that you know what every person is thinking. When I think of diapers, I think of some hot female in a diaper, or the picture of me putting one on. I am not around babies at all, so I don't think of diapers being associated with babies.

"even though nobody, myself included, is trying to label anybody" ~ OP

"all DLs are ABs" ~ OP

Funny.

"lots of people will consider you an AB as well" ~ OP

I have yet to see another person with the exception of MABE one or two people I have seen to also think of it this way. It just goes back again to why would you post something like this when nobody asked for your opinion?

"Just for your edification. I joined DPF in 83." ~ Christine

Age does not justify understanding. For example, Robert Mugabe, responsible for the suffering of millions of white and black farmers, rigged elections, and killed those who opposed him. When you were joining the DPF community he was 50s-60s. Does that mean he knows more about life and government than you do, merely because he is older? I think not. Yes, there is a possibility that previously DL was a subset of AB, but we are thirty years in the future. Terms evolve over time, just as the separation of AB and DL did. AB is different than DL nowadays. For example, the word nigger comes from the word nigerum. In old Latin, this means a "person who is black". Now it's a racial slur. Words and phrases evolve over time to mean different things.

In the end, I am a Diaper Lover. I HATE rattles, and soothers, and blankies, etc. I LOVE diapers. I am a diaper lover. I am NOT an adult baby. I am absolutely sure that I know myself better than you do, and I am 99% positive that every other DL here agrees that they are only DLs.

That is why I asked for a percent, I knew someone would come up with some unusual place. Againe we are speaking of pretty much Western culture because it is where we are

I have never heard the story about African babies being abile to hold it at birth which is strange since I am well educated and well read. For one thing, it would have come up in the DPF newsletter over the course of 20 years and the Human Development course at Rhode Island College is very thorough. The Africans must have a rather bizarre developmental pattern.. If you study human development, you would know that the nerves that control excretion are not developed for some time after birth. Need I tell you what that means? I, or anyone with an eductation, would find that hard to believe. That one I have to see because it is so far off the road that it sounds like one of Clff Claven's "little known facts", like Humphrey Bogart said "Play it again same" and Jimmy Cagney said "You dirty rat!"

Again, I do not need to examine EVERY baby, I only need to know the overwhelming preponderance of the area that is the context of which we are speaking. When you learn logic, you learn not only rules and syntax, you learn semantics which includes context so that the very unusual is not weighted the same as the everyday and the limits of the realm of discussion are grapsed as a matter of course

In fact, I do not know how Hindi babies are dealt with in this realm or Arabic, but we are speaking in the context of Western and now Asian culture or wherever diapers are relevent. The Armican indians used to use milkweed according to the history of diapers that I read. Europeans used cloth diapers as far back as the Middle Ages and "swaddling clothes" are well known.

I framed it in percentages so that we would not get caught in the bizarre or irrelevant.

That is why I say, given the percentage of overlap between diapers and babies outside the context of the AB and DL cognicentyi and even for a time, within it, and the "Story" and "Subtext" of diapers in the culture of the areas of which we are talking. there is a very strong link by close association between diapers and babies. YOu do not neeed a "scientific" study sanctioned by some alphabet soup club to tell you that. All you need to do is put the calculator down and use the method that has been the standard for real people: Ask around

[Toddler Pampers]

Okay, I get it. People hate the term ‘adult briefs’. You might describe yourself better and not create a false impression by not using the word (baby) ‘diaper’, but it’s not worth it. I understand.

Further thoughts: I would have thought that AB/DL was redundant. Don’t all adult babies wear diapers? According to at least one poster, no. It’s a big world out there so I guess there could be one or two.

If the term AB/DL refers to a community of people who all enjoy wearing diapers, but only some of whom wear them for their babyish connection, then that I get.

Thank you everybody for your posts. I apologize to anyone I offended with my OP. I’ve rethought the matter, and learned from your posts, and see how what I wrote initially could have caused offense. I’m sorry.

This will be the last word on the subject from me, because I think it’s clear that the term DL now stands for a person who enjoys diapers, a generic term that implies no interest whatsoever in regression.

[Little BabyDoll Christine]

There is coming to be a "story" and "subtext" about adult diapers. The normal condition of the prostate after the age of about 52 and age-related sleeping difficulty. This last is that once you get up (to go to the toilet) you have difficulty going back to sleep or find it impossible to do so. Both of these are physiologically normal, The former already brings out the titterers and it is still linked to baby, but as more boomers hit that age range this will be more common so that you will have a high percentage of the US population in that age range and there will be less laughing about it. For such persons, as the situation develops, diapers, while not absolutely necessary would be a good choice. and for all you DL's, you will still be young enough to enjoy it. Do not forget, 60 is the new 40.

I did not think of this since I am AB/LG that choice has been made already. I am thinking of telling my doctor that I am considering the diaper option. Would that be making a virtue of necessity or making a necessity of virtue?

Outside this kind of group, and to a certain part of it (AB), "diaper" is a subfunction of "baby". Even Incon gets kind of put in there. One might say that "baby" is a subfunction of "diapered", especially after the boomers start hitting 55 in large numbers.

However DL may still have to deal with the issue of "fetish". Now, here that does not matter and if most persons were honest, they would admit that they have things that would be considered "fetish". That has been a subject of psychology for ever. The best explanation comes from Behaviorims and behavior modification. "Fetish" is still considered "perv" which is why most folks do not want to own up to it. Let us consider rubber/pvc. It is a material like satin which is prized yet rubber/pvc is considered a "fetish" whild sili and satin are not. From my understanding the enjoyment of wearing something was not considered fetish until recently. "Festish" was used mostly to define an unusual attraction for objects, like boots and things.

When a community or any group, does not consider its relationship to the rest of the wrold, it becomes a ghetto or cult and isolated so to say the rest of the world does not matteris courting disaster.

It does appear that diaper without baby is getting ready for prime time

[Missy Q]

 

Further thoughts:  I would have thought that AB/DL was redundant.  Don’t all adult babies wear diapers?  

Absolutely not. I hope you're not basing your "real world examples" off of [DD], since this is a DIAPER forum, and the extreme majority of the users are diaper wearers. AB's out there do go without the diapers.

There is coming to be a "story" and "subtext" about adult diapers. The  normal condition of the prostate after the age of about 52 and  age-related sleeping difficulty. This last is that once you get up (to  go to the toilet) you have difficulty going back to sleep or find it  impossible to do so. Both of these are physiologically normal, The  former already brings out the titterers and it is still linked to baby,  but as more boomers hit that age range this will be more common so that  you will have a high percentage of the US population in that age range  and there will be less laughing about it. For such persons, as the  situation develops, diapers, while not absolutely nece...blahblahblahblahblah

Are you done speaking your "opinion" that no one asked for in the first place yet? I hope you've noticed that with both the responses, and your rep, that we think you're full of rubbish.