ABDL's and Pics of Older Kids in Diapers

[Crinklebutt1]

Why do so many ABDL's like pictures and videos of older kids in diapers?

[Little BabyDoll Christine]

Projection. such inages are the "iconography" of Adult Babies/Kids in the same way that many pictures of knights and other things are the iconography of the European Middle Ages. They represent an ideal

This  is not a DL thing if they are to be taken at their word and is one of the reasons I say that there really  is no ABdDL. Although most DL's do start to get a little AB is what I read here is true. That is because there is a strong connection between baby/little and diapers in the culture and it rubs off. But that is acquired

One of the things that LG's try to communicalte is this quote "When a pedo sees a little girl in a cute dress, he says 'how can I get her out of that dress?'. When an LG sees a little girl in a cute dress, she says 'Where can I get a dress like that for myself'"

[spark]

17 hours ago, Crinklebutt1 said:

Why do so many ABDL's like pictures and videos of older kids in diapers?

I hear stories about kids wearing diapers and wish that I could have been that kid.

[Little BabyDoll Christine]

In the old days of the '70's and '80's there were plenty of them. But then pedo became a big concern and everyone IQ fell into the low two digits. Nobody seemed to get that the kid characters were stand-ins for the autor and the reader. Of course, or is that "of coarse?" there are those, politicians or religious zealtos, just wating to cash in on that lack of understanding to gain power. All it did was drive this practice underground. Now, understand, I am talking about FICTIONAL, MADE-UP characters, not real children who should NEVERT be involved in AB/AK anything

[babykeiff]

On 8/25/2023 at 6:15 AM, babykeiff said:

From a pschycological perspective...

We, as humans have animalistic instincts always checking out others in how they look, how they dress, and how they act. It is part of a concept of group / part of a team. Humans are not solitary creatures and need the company of others even strangers. We seek to be accepted for us, and for us AB/DLs seeking if another is wearing a diaper, it is not sexual or amorous, but more of confirmation of ourselves that others also wear.

Possibile Problems

This same animalistic instincts get us into trouble sometime where we attempt to become the leader of the pack by identifying anothers weakness etc because us doing same is attempting to hide / disquise our very own weakness.

It is natural to compare your clothes / acting / behaviour to another. Due to the fact that you wear diapers, you also compare your diaper to others where you notice the subtle signs of the other wearing diapers. This can extend to comparing your diaper to that of a child / baby - and growing envious of the care / attention that the child / baby is getting from its career - and for some, it makes them stronger in their goal to find a 'maternal / paternal' figure. For others, it reminds them of how lonely they are. The difference is in your choice. You can either be an optimist and gain strength, or a pesimist and throw your strength away.

The Elephant in the Room

This behaviour of admiring others that wear diapers be it adults or children, and maybe getting aroused, does not make us peodofiles as we have the free choice to admire and not touch / interfere. Peodofilia is all about crossing bounderies not specifically about the people involved. The terms rape and peodofillia is interchangable but the difference is about age of consent with the victim. Admiring from afar and/or wishing one to be in the position of the baby / child / diaper wearer is natural and NOT crossing any boundaries.  

Epilogue

Simply, the OPs behaviour is natural, and not to be shunned, and I respect the OP for having the courage to post here about this.

[Little BabyDoll Christine]

I have a problem with that. You cannot have both "instincts", which theryies in psychology were discared back in the Twentieth, and concepts. If you have concepts, instincts do not matter, If yo have instincts, conepts do not matter because you cannot act on them because you are driven by instincts; innate, deterministic behavior generators.. Nor would you have the abiliity to form concepts. If we are driven by instincts than ethics and its product, morality, are pointless since they cannot be acted on. The history of technological advancement, or even a dynamic language, dictates otherwise. It is either instincts OR concepts; the two cannot co-exist

[RaiOfTheFlame]

While I think many good-hearted ABDLs do definitely have a perspective of such things as a way of projecting and wishing it were them, there are definitely a lot of sickos in our midst making comments on media with children that are clearly of an ABDL nature as well. One only has to look at some of the messed up questions on Quora (or Yahoo answers for the dinosaurs) to find the answer to why videos of children typically have comments turned off. Sad but true.

[Little BabyDoll Christine]

Agreed. This presents a quandary. There exists a group called ABDL's Some are "sick-o's, using pictures of children to get their jollies while others are not, using such pictures as avatars and decorations of their littlespace. However the world consists of individuals. As a metaphysical fact; i.e. the way the world works, The individuals exists apart from, and prior to, any group to which he , she or it, since this is true of anything, may belong. Therefore, the presumption of innocence until proved guilt is in force in most civilized places. This rests on the principle of logic that the burden of proof is on the one making the proposition, in this case of guilt. meaning if "yes" cannot be demonstrated or proved, then "no". Any other course would, at best, muddle the situation. Now, it is most likely that the portion of ABDLS who fall into the "messed up" is very small. I refer you to the quote in my first post differentiating LG's from Pedos and I would judge that it applies to the overwhelming bulk of LG's?ABDL's.

Now, most of us who were here in the 2011 to 2019 timeframe well remember the "Tiger" underwear incident that gave us the term "[that site]" and this was not eve ABDL. So, this is not confined to ABDL territory and it is probably society wide. It has been a rule that at no time or place are real, identifiable children to be used in ABDL activities. My solution is to use fictional characters, in the case of Icon, avatar or decoration, and it should be understood that a real child's room would have pictures of children doing things the child would either be doing or enjoy, drawn or created by graphic arts; i.e. fictional images. That is less of a problem with LG's since part of the iconography includes a skirted garment of some kind, that being a feminine-defining aspect; usually covering any panties. Any upskirt or underwear image should be of the poster herself

Further, in order to safeguard the privacy of adult babie/kids, some way to replace identifiable features of anyone who might be willing to use their own pictures but for privacy concerns with a reasobly human, maybe even childish if so desired, alternatives instead of leaving agaping hole in the image