Guest aielen Posted March 4, 2011 Share Posted March 4, 2011 Will they allow diaper lovers--men and women wearing diapers? Link to comment
~Skitty~ Posted March 4, 2011 Share Posted March 4, 2011 i dont really relate diaper lovers to homosexuality in that, like. homosexuality was a huge thing relating to relgion etc. people that like to wear diapers are considered weird or freaks, but nothing close to sinners and blasphemers (at least i hope not.) asking if they will or wouldn't allow DL's into the army, is like asking if the army will allow sadists or masochists into the army. it seems like a moot point to me. Link to comment
DailyDi Posted March 4, 2011 Share Posted March 4, 2011 Sure they allow Diaper Lovers... you just can't practice it while in the military. People have fetishes, so its a safe bet all are represented in the armed forces, They just can't fly the freak flag on the battlefield. Link to comment
timmyc Posted March 4, 2011 Share Posted March 4, 2011 I have complete and utter respect for all soldiers. I have never been in battle conditions but pretty sure I would "involuntarily" fly my freak flag if I ever were, if you know what I am saying. Link to comment
diapergirl80 Posted March 4, 2011 Share Posted March 4, 2011 They're already there.... Link to comment
diaperbrownie Posted March 4, 2011 Share Posted March 4, 2011 Lol this is funny. The homosexuality issue is magnitudes more important than a diaper fetish. I can imagine they wouldn't let people who have to wear diapers in service. They are noisy, can get in the way of movement, and what with the changing and all it's more of a hassle than is necessary. "Sarge, we need to take a 5. Officer Morgan needs to change his wet diaper." lol. Link to comment
BlueEyes Posted March 5, 2011 Share Posted March 5, 2011 They're already there.... x2. Key factor: keep your professional life professional, your private life private. Unless you actually need to (long recce, counter-sniper, incontinents), there is absolutely no reason to wear diapers under your uniform. 1 Link to comment
sarah_ab Posted March 5, 2011 Share Posted March 5, 2011 if they allow gays to marry will thy allow diaper lovers to marry? 1 Link to comment
kristikat Posted March 5, 2011 Share Posted March 5, 2011 Hi- just a little food for thought... (no bananas!) Consider why the Air Force pilots who fly long range bombers (not known for lots of room to get up and walk to the bathroom) call their flight suits "poopy suits"? 10-18 hour round trips- in the same seat? I'd bet there are people here who would pay for the chance.... Link to comment
Still In Napies Posted March 5, 2011 Share Posted March 5, 2011 (edited) Id just like to point out the fact that they still don't allow homosexuality in the military... wrong link provided http://www.cnn.com/2011/US/03/05/sailor.sleepover/index.html?eref=rss_topstories&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed:+rss/cnn_topstories+(RSS:+Top+Stories) Edited March 5, 2011 by Still In Napies Link to comment
diaperbrownie Posted March 5, 2011 Share Posted March 5, 2011 There is a higher level of discretion necessary for something like the sexual orientation of a service member. Therefore homosexuality (or the lack of heterosexuality as I call it) is an important issue. Individuals like us who like to wet/soil diapers for fun and fetishtistic purposes shouldn't have any importance attached to us regarding the military. I hate saying this, since I am a ABDL...but it's true. This is a fetish. Can you even imagine the time they would have to spend dealing with acceptance issues if they had separate categories for ALL fetishes? I can't imagine the complications to arise from them accepting and not accepting people who have feet fetishes, let alone people who wear diapers for fun. This really is a non-issue. don't take me the wrong way when I say this everyone, but it's quite a stupid issue. Our government has better and more important lifestyles to tackle besides diaper loving adults. They are only material.... Link to comment
Letluvsrool Posted March 6, 2011 Share Posted March 6, 2011 I'd just like to point out that it's "Let my freak flag fly". From Jimi Hendrix's "If 6 was 9" Link to comment
DL88 Posted March 7, 2011 Share Posted March 7, 2011 Some of you are half on the point, sexual orientation has nothing to do with the military be it gay or straight. The repeal of DADT is meant to do nothing but weaken the U.S. military by causing discourse. There was a news story about troops in forward bases that fight the enemy daily that will be getting "sensitivity training" on the battlefield. This is completely unnecessary and frankly retarded. The military is about uniformity and national defense, not individualism and personal preferences. Who you screw is a private matter that, in the military or even in regular life, you do on your own private time.. not theirs or at your work place. Gays could always serve in the military since the implementaion of DADT, they just couldn't flaunt it infront of everyone. 1 Link to comment
wetatnight Posted March 7, 2011 Share Posted March 7, 2011 I think their have been gays in the military for years but they had to keep their sexual orientation to them sleves and not be open about it or they could be discharged from the service if they were outed. but they can be more open about it now. Link to comment
diaperbrownie Posted March 7, 2011 Share Posted March 7, 2011 Don't Ask Don't Tell is the most unethical and embarrasing regulation our government has come up with. It's such a childish rule to force those who serve out country to follow, and was merely a result of the "homophobia" phenomenon of the 80s and 90s. Quite simply, they were propagandizing that all gay people have sexual urges they cannot control, and if you are serving alongside a gay man, that gay man will proceed to anally rape every other service member before going to Macy's and buying all the stilleto shoes. It's a regulation that resulted from people being extremely hateful and phobic of homesexuality, and the recent years have almost completely done away with the rule because SERIOUSLY PEOPLE IN CHARGE, how does that look on OUR COUNTRY when our biggest concern in the military isn't fighting and surviving, but "keeping the gays out"? It makes us look bad when our NUMBER ONE PRIORITY is kicking out the gay people. It's so childish and immature, and just shows that adults in government are STILL children. Look up comedian Lewis Black's "gay bandidos" bit in youtube. Referring to the Bush administration's theory that homesexuality "ruins the american family". I love Bush and all, but his entire government's priorities were in the WRONG PLACE. Link to comment
DL88 Posted March 8, 2011 Share Posted March 8, 2011 Funny thing, people who are for "acceptance" and "understanding" are always the first to call someone a "hateful" name and attempt to ostracise them when presented with opposing views. So what is someone is uncomfortable being around someone who is gay? It shouldn't matter, that is that person's view and aren't we supposed to be more understanding and accepting to that? It shouldn't matter because that isn't something that should be flaunted especially in an organization that has absolutely nothing to do with sexuality GAY OR STRAIGHT. That is the fact of the matter Want to know how someone who is socially liberal is uncomfortable and losing an arguement? They call you names in an attempt to bring you down to an emotional level instead of having to perform on a basis of facts in which emotions have no ground. 1 Link to comment
Leilin Posted March 8, 2011 Share Posted March 8, 2011 Funny thing, people who are for "acceptance" and "understanding" are always the first to call someone a "hateful" name and attempt to ostracise them when presented with opposing views. I'm not calling you names, but you should cite sources when you make claims like your previous post. Your "facts" are dubious, to say the least. So what is someone is uncomfortable being around someone who is gay? It shouldn't matter, that is that person's view and aren't we supposed to be more understanding and accepting to that? It shouldn't matter because that isn't something that should be flaunted especially in an organization that has absolutely nothing to do with sexuality GAY OR STRAIGHT. That is the fact of the matter Do you even know what DADT does? If anybody was outed for any reason, on duty or not, they were discharged with AT LEAST LTH, if not DD. Do you understand the gravity of that? That is not saying "sexuality does not matter." That is saying "sexuality does not matter, as long as you are straight." Surely someone as enlightened as you can recognize the difference? Want to know how someone who is socially liberal is uncomfortable and losing an arguement? They call you names in an attempt to bring you down to an emotional level instead of having to perform on a basis of facts in which emotions have no ground. So were you planning on providing some facts, or just flinging insults? I'm sure Fox has forums if you'd like to be intellectually unchallenged. Link to comment
Leilin Posted March 8, 2011 Share Posted March 8, 2011 if they allow gays to marry will thy allow diaper lovers to marry? I'm going in reverse here, but this perfectly illustrates that the OP is a bit silly (in good fun, I imagine!). Diapers aren't disallowed in the military right now. Admitting you like diapers will not get you discharged or court martialed. Similarly, of course, as the many of those of us on this forum who are married can tell you, those of us who wear diapers for whatever reason are still able to marry without issue. 1 Link to comment
BabyJune Posted March 9, 2011 Share Posted March 9, 2011 If someone is defending our country, they can be whatever they want to be in my opinion--and they'll have my highest respect. As for gay marriage, I say that if gays want marriage that is like heterosexual marriage, then they should have to suffer the consequences. One person needs to be the "woman" and one needs to claim the title of "man." That way, when they go to file for gay divorce, the "man" gets a royal screwing and loses everything he has or ever will have and the "woman" takes it all away from "him." For that reason, gay marriage will probably never equal man/woman marriage. Gay divorces wouldn't be as unfair as regular divorce; things would be divided equally. Sign me "Single for life and proud of it." 1 Link to comment
sarah_ab Posted March 9, 2011 Share Posted March 9, 2011 ok i'm sorry its off topic but DL88 Oh my god if you see nessie can you PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE say hello from me!!!! i tried for three days straight to find nessie to say hello, but s/he's just to shy!!!!!!! Link to comment
DL88 Posted March 9, 2011 Share Posted March 9, 2011 Lol June that's funny. ok i'm sorry its off topic but DL88 Oh my god if you see nessie can you PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE say hello from me!!!! i tried for three days straight to find nessie to say hello, but s/he's just to shy!!!!!!! I'm on it!!! Link to comment
sarah_ab Posted March 10, 2011 Share Posted March 10, 2011 this is why i get all my news from the national enquirer.... such a reputable news source it can never be questioned... i really prefer weekly world news.. but alas it is no more... Link to comment
![[DD] Boards & Chat](https://www.dailydiapers.com/board/uploads/monthly_2021_11/DDweb-02.png.0c06f38ea7c6e581d61ce22dffdea106.png)
Recommended Posts