Jump to content
LL Medico Diapers and More Bambino Diapers - ABDL Diaper Store

Adult Baby - Escapes Jail (UK)


Guest

Recommended Posts

Yeah why would he look at images of babies in diapers. If I want to see diapers on someone, I am going to be looking for adults in them and typing in adult babies or adult diapers to narrow down the results. Also what do they mean by indecent images of kids in diapers? Just when is it illegal to look at images of babies in diapers? They are all over the internet and in parenting magazines. But then again I get nothing out of it and I would not be saving them to my computer or uploading them to my tumblr page. I can see how someone might get the wrong idea if all you have is kids in diapers. I have known a few ABDLs who liked putting kids in diapers and saving images of kids in diapers to their computer and I didn't see anything wrong with it then because my mind wasn't that sexual then about it. But now I find it creepy because I don't have that innocent mind anymore and I am more aware of the sexual side of ABDL and it's bordering on child porn. Not illegal which is why I call it bordering child porn. Strange the man would get in trouble for it. Plus I don't think I would still want to talk to those ABs who like to keep images of kids in diapers and looking at them for their satisfaction and they have no photos of adults in them. If they have old baby diaper ads, that is fine with me. I am talking about personal photos of kids in diapers, not ads. I can understand if they were trying to find adults in them and videos about it and they accidentally came to the ones with babies in it and just as long as I see videos of adults in them I will know they accidentally clicked on the baby one because I have been there which is why I type in "adult diapers" to filter out the baby ones. Why parents want to post videos of their babies getting a diaper changed or showing them in a used diaper is beyond me. What is their motivation behind it? What vanilla person would want to see that? Now if it was an educational video about how to put a diaper on, that is different. That could be helping new parents out and those who don't know how to put a diaper on a child. Same as for how to clean up a blow out. 

Link to comment
1 hour ago, Spokane Girl said:

Why parents want to post videos of their babies getting a diaper changed or showing them in a used diaper is beyond me. What is their motivation behind it? What vanilla person would want to see that?

I suppose it's for keeping memories, I suppose.  But when the babies grow up, it would probably be embarrasing for them, so I don't understand the motive either.

Link to comment
7 minutes ago, Firefly 35 said:

I suppose it's for keeping memories, I suppose.  But when the babies grow up, it would probably be embarrasing for them, so I don't understand the motive either.

But they are sharing it with the rest of the world. I wonder what random stranger is going to want to see it? I would imagine an AB creep would be watching it and getting turned on by the diaper change which is bordering on pedophilia and child porn even if it's not the baby itself, it's the fantasy of someone doing that to them and they are imaging themselves as that person getting their diaper changed. 

Link to comment
  • 1 month later...

The guy may have had pictures of adults as well the papers aren't going to report that bit if he had over 90 thousand images (which seems very high as surly that would be terabites worth) and only 250 were explicit then why would only the 250 be classed as explicit

 

Link to comment

It's really more about the intent, use, and distribution of children's pics than the number of them. I love seeing smiling children having fun- it is the most pure and powerful joy anyone ever feels in life and is fleeting in scope, for as they grow up so many other things take over and diminishes it :( I have no sexual feelings toward children; indeed I deeply feel that is very wrong to see them in that context. Yet if I have pics of random happy children on my computer I'm going to get screwed by those who simply cannot understand me and who think there must be something else behind it :crybaby:

There is just as much wrong with the oversexed people on a witch-hunt for child molesters as there is with the molesters themselves, though what the molesters do is much more harmful and much more wrong. These are the same people who equate being ABDL to child molestation  :o and they see no wrong in themselves for going on witch-hunts :angry2: They are the people who vote 'guilty' on juries when one or two facts point that way even if a hundred other things point toward innocence. They can't be troubled with the truth, they can only see what they want to see so that is all that they will ever see. They too are our enemy :bash:

We do need to seek out and fight those with any harmful intent toward children, but we must always keep our minds open and clear so that we don't harm any innocent people ourselves ;) And in that we (and the witch-hunters) need to realize that simply having pics of children means very little all by itself- it is the rest of the matter which makes the difference. Until this is universally learned you're well-advised to not have children's pics on your computer or anywhere else as that is asking for more trouble than you can handle.

Bettypooh

Link to comment
On ‎8‎/‎19‎/‎2017 at 9:49 PM, AbabeBill said:

Wondering about tv, magazine, and internet ads for children's items? It's pictures of children in diapers. If you produce such ads, where does that put you? What about someone who then looks at such ads?

The children portrayed in advertisements get the jobs through a talent agent and their parents are paid--and have given permission--for pictures of their children to be used for advertising purposes. They sign a contract. But it should also be said that any picture you post to the Internet can be viewed by ANYONE and you have no control over who sees it or downloads it. I believe that the responsibility should fall on the person who posts the picture. If the picture isn't posted, then no one can view it or download it because it simply isn't available.

Link to comment
10 minutes ago, BabyJune said:

The children portrayed in advertisements get the jobs through a talent agent and their parents are paid--and have given permission--for pictures of their children to be used for advertising purposes. They sign a contract. But it should also be said that any picture you post to the Internet can be viewed by ANYONE and you have no control over who sees it or downloads it. I believe that the responsibility should fall on the person who posts the picture. If the picture isn't posted, then no one can view it or download it because it simply isn't available.

I totally understand what you say June, and I know how things work. But, those sorts of things, still don't answer up to the moral questions. Of course we can't say in every case, "oh, I have consent, a contract, and have paid money's, we're good!" Otherwise, prostitution would could operate in that respect too. "I paid to have sex with a party, I have a signed contract between us both, and we have consented to the acts." Law still says, (in most places) No, it's not legal.    

Link to comment

Did you guys read the entire article?  Or at least read this ...

"An analysis of the computer kit found a total of 250 images of which 41 were of the two highest categories which show children being abused by adults.

She said: “Large quantities of images of children and babies in nappies were found which were not illegal but showed the defendant’s interest in children of this age.”

Mr Brendon Moorhouse, defending, said Cook had never wanted to download illegal images and had deleted them when he opened them by mistake.

He said they amounted to less than 0.3 per cent of the images of children, with the rest being legal."

 

This part of the story completely contrasts the rest of it (making it sound like he's looking for children).

Wow, this is truly a bad situation to be caught up in.

Link to comment
20 hours ago, FunTime said:

Did you guys read the entire article?  Or at least read this ...

"An analysis of the computer kit found a total of 250 images of which 41 were of the two highest categories which show children being abused by adults.

She said: “Large quantities of images of children and babies in nappies were found which were not illegal but showed the defendant’s interest in children of this age.”

Mr Brendon Moorhouse, defending, said Cook had never wanted to download illegal images and had deleted them when he opened them by mistake.

He said they amounted to less than 0.3 per cent of the images of children, with the rest being legal."

 

This part of the story completely contrasts the rest of it (making it sound like he's looking for children).

Wow, this is truly a bad situation to be caught up in.

This article looks like a case of "alternative facts", since it never said the guy had any sexual interest in the pictures he downloaded.  Media bias at its finest, I guess.

Link to comment

Wow, I don't know what to think.  The fact that he had pictures of children actually being abused by adults is telling.  I don't totally buy the "I just clicked on the wrong link" defense here... Like 41 times? And you didn't delete them?

I was bothered by the fact that they said the baby diapers would not fit him... They are likely stuffers, like many of us use.

From what I see here, most ABDLs look at baby pics to model the look, or behaviour.  ABDLs are VERY picky about getting the diaper to fit just right (like people who want two tapes instead of 4, to give that "baby diaper" look). I have to admit, I am fascinated with my butt when I'm padded, always looking in the mirror to see how babyish it looks.  I would imagine most lonely ABDLs look at babies with a wisp of envy and longing.  

As a parent of two kids, however, I think I might want to punch somebody who was eyeing up my child to see how their diaper fits.  I don't care if it's sexual or not, my kids are NOT part of your thing!

That's just my protective parent side showing. I just wish we could make space for people(especially men) to feel nurtured once in a while.  Part of me hates this guy for making us look bad, for being careless and unconcerned for the kids he is watching.  Another part of me thinks he is a sick person, and part of me just wants to give him a hug and tell him he is not a monster.

 

 

 

Link to comment

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...