Something I read that annoyed me

Something I read a while ago (can't remember where I read it) that annoyed me. It was a comment on some video about some guy with a diaper fetish and the guy went on the news to talk about it (he must have a LOT of guts). One of the comments said,

"Wow, he said that the sight of women in diapers turns him on. What does he do when he sees little kids in diapers? That's scary."

That bugs me. JUST because diapers turn people on does NOT make them pedophiles. At all. Do most men like women in underwear? Yes. Does that mean they are pedophiles and look at little girls in underwear? NO! It's the same argument! It doesn't make anyone a pedophile! Me, personally, I find women in diapers hot. Who here doesn't? But little kids in diapers? Hell no. I don't care about little kids in diapers. That shit is messed up if anyone talks about little kids in diapers in that way. Wayyyy messed up.

Diapers are my fetish. Am I abnormal? Definitely not. It doesn't change my person and it doesn't change my personality. Nobody would even know if I had a diaper fetish even if they were my best friend in the whole world (and my best friends don't know in any way). How is our fetish any different from others'? Most people have one, but nobody will admit theirs (at least not anonymously). Does that mean people with (insert fetish here) are messed up (as long as children aren't involved)?

What is your take on this?

I agree, but the only thing is most people do not understand our thing. It can sound like we like children because children are the only ones who wear diapers without medical problems. The only problem we have is getting peopleto understand that just because we like diapers does not mean we like children. In fact diaper lovers are probablymore in tune with that stuff then regular people are. If i ever caught a person hurting a kid in some way that was not nesassary i would make them wish they didnt period. Im not talkin about a spanking i think moest parents should spank there children more often then they do, becasue these kids nowadays are punks. A few of my friends have children and they are rude to adults and the parents let them get away with it. if it were my kid a good kick in the ass is all that would be needed. but to hurt a kid or abuse them is wrong and i wont stand for it ever. so top answer your question no im not a pedohile and never will be and if i ever see someone trying that with a kid i will make them wish they were dead !!!! trust me i can acomplish this without a problem

It makes me really mad too... and is the attitude that we have to change in the general public! I would put money on the idea that us AB/DLs are probably more anti-paedophile and against child abuse than non-AB/DLs, with a stronger feeling on the subject in general.

Mammasboy you have raised many issues in your post (as you usually do 😄 ) and I agree with most!! Nowadays not all kids are punks... just some who have not been well dragged up and have been left to their own devices! The parents should be sorted first! Yeah kids need a good smack when they go over the line when small and are unable to reason with you. That's not child abuse, just caring. I've seen lions do it to their cubs when cubs get out of line - a hefty swipe with a paw to send them rolling, and the cubs learn! Once kids know the boundaries and what is acceptable, they behave and are good well-balanced kids. I would even go so far as to say maybe 80% of kids/teens fall into this category.

If I ever saw anyone abusing a child I would also react big time and yes I too could kill for that (and not be sorry). That includes sexual abuse which to my mind is totally unhinged and a castratable offence if the offender survives the beating! Let's follow Singapore's lead and severely cane offenders - it hurts big time and people don't go back for a second caning. That's why Singapore is the safest place to live! 😃

To be honest I would react the same way if girls/women are abused or raped - woe betide anyone I meet doing that or has done it! >😢

The problem is that most people don't understand fetishes. Fetish is an atraction to an object or thing-- like, a purse, shoes, women's clothing, diapers etc. -- it usually centres around the object -- pretending or wanting to be a baby in a diaper, also centres around the diaper but may include other infantile objests-- pacifiers bottles, clothing ,etc.

Pedopholia, is deviant behavior which centres around children-- and is totally unrelated to infantilism. But because children wear diapers, and abuse is such a "hot- button" issue, anything that hints of fetishes and children

evokes a knee-jerk reaction that links diaper lovers to

children.

Diaper lovers are attracted to diapers or objects and some behaviors that involve those objects-- they want nothing

to do with the behavior of abusing children. We are probably more like children ourselves or want to be more like children-- what is needed is more education.

As previously said it is all a misconseption. A fetish in diapers in no way equates to pediophilla. It is sad that people think this way but as we all are they are intielaed to there opinions. Personally I veiw pediphilla to be the worst crime. I veiw that anyone convicted of molestation should at a minimum have life in prision.

I think this is one of those classic arguements about "What does this mean" But you all have valid point saying that if someone like women in diapers they must like kids in diapers is totally, but i will admit i am sure there are a few exceptions, just not true. and one of you brought up the lingerie aspect, which is a perfect counter arguement for it. All i know is you guys are right noone understands us and we need to stick together.

You know, a lot of people think that's why men like women who shave their vagina... its not because men like underage girls, its because its more visually pleasing and, I imagine, nicer to go down on. Was this person a guy? You should ask if he likes it when a woman shaves.

I do think you like watching women in swimming suit; however, you love watching lillte girls in swimming suit ?

You have to make sure what turn you on, a diaper ? a girl ? a girl in diaper ? a girl and a diaper ? ...

For me, diapers draw my attention, a lovely lady (18+) draws my attention, a lovely lady in diaper draws my attention.

Why lady ?

That's because a lovely lady has a lovely appearence with good body shape and the most important: mature and lovely mind in one girl's head. Therefore, you can discuss with her in daily life and play with her in yours world 😁

http://diaperfan.blogspot.com/

That's one thing I really hate about me being the way I am, liking diapers. I don't have a problem with me, or the way I am so much. But, I hate, that I feel I need to never let anyone around me know what I do. People don't generally want to understand something like this. They just rather put a hard fast label on it, to make themselves feel better about not understanding it. OK, that's what you are, you're one of those, sorry, done, case closed, don't need to hear from you on this! I know what you are! He wears diapers, he likes kids. And other people will believe that person and what they say about you! Oh, he said he's one of those, it must be so. Just as if, people think "if it's down in print, it's got to be true". Like we all know, all to well here. I'm nowhere near this being anything to do with kids. But, I fear that perception by others so much, that I feel I must never let my guard down. I have to make sure this stays my secret.

I'm not homosexual, but understand and Allie with the feeling and fears they have about themselves. And it's more so like it was for homosexuals back years ago, when no one could know what you where or did, 1930's, 40's, 50's. If you didn't almost go to jail over something like that, you were certainly an outcast if it got out.

This is the thing I really hate, the fear I may be perceived as someone who is doing wrong, when I am not. :'(

Something to consider, which was somewhat touched upon a few lines up but I wish to expand upon, is where the attention is directed from the desire. Somewhere in this lies the misconception, and not a completely unfounded one, that many 'outsiders' have. The desire is towards the diaper itself, the object rather than the person who may be wearing it, yet in many cases the person wearing the diaper easily becomes an extension of this desire as well due to the nature of said desire.

Rather than feel I'm simply speaking without any base, I will turn your attention to the message boards themselves. Scour them here, there and elsewhere and it's always the same: baby diapers, the more babyish the better; why can't adult diapers be more like baby diapers?, etc, etc. Not only that, but often times it doesn't seem to matter the model sporting the goods, it doesn't matter if the model has a face at all, as long as that diaper is prominently on display. So, it is most definitely the object itself, the diaper. This is why the underwear on women analogy doesn't hold, because it is the woman you desire, not her underwear; if she were wearing a diaper, it would be the diaper you desire, the woman simply becomes an extension, a close second if you will.

Because of the nature of this fetish, paraphelia, what-have-you, those individuals who understand not what it means to desire an inanimate object in such a fashion have no idea how to distinguish between a person fantasizing about their child's diaper rather than their child. Sadly, there are many who don't give much credit in the favor of the innocent (I use this loosely) in this area by lusting over diaper ads sporting children in them, by placing up pictures of minors in diapers throughout various diaper picture sites, groups, even Myspace. There are those who would discredit the rest by chasing after underage children online or over cellphones, etc.

We are not more removed and against pedophilia than non enthusiasts, we are simply more aware of the implications of our own desires and therein lies a certain spark of doubt and perhaps guilt even. We know and understand the perceived correlation. Unfortunately, due to the precarious nature of this affliction (yes, affliction), it sometimes lends to a line most thin. Those guilty parties mentioned above are more than one person sullying the group's good name, and with such small numbers comparatively, more than one is a big number considering the charge.

Why do people draw these correlations, these stiff conclusions?, simply look at the PR that we represent ourselves with. Look at those who make the news and where those investigations lead. How many times, and under how many threads in this forum alone has that exploitation flick of the young girl (a minor) who wore diapers and shot her mom shown up? How many people constantly inquired about it that it showed up? How many stories, how many pictures, how many comments of a seriously incriminating nature are present? Then, to make it worse you constantly have those who would strut around in public and further rub it in the faces of non-consenting, non-enthusiasts and you ask why?

[quote author=dspsbldpr link=topic=11224.msg157796#msg157796 date=1229755983]

So, it is most definitely the object itself, the diaper. This is why the underwear on women analogy doesn't hold, because it is the woman you desire, not her underwear; if she were wearing a diaper, it would be the diaper you desire, the woman simply becomes an extension, a close second if you will.

[/quote]

For you maybe, but most certainly not for me. So I protest your overly broad generalization.

I have been arguing for years with those who insist this is a fetish (displacement of sexual attraction to inanimate object) for all those interested. For me/us it is a kink, a fun thing to do on the way to great male/female sex, not a fetish.

I like woman in diapers, and am married to a woman who really enjoys/is turned on by DL play. I am turned on by her in wet diapers, but I'm turned on by her in most any situation, really. What I am interested in is her, not her diaper. Her diaper is just exotic gift wrap, with a wonderful kinky edge, that makes her smell wonderful and also makes her pussy very wet.

It is not about fetish/displacement for all of us. AS you might expect from a bunch of humans, the stimulus and response pattern is highly variable. So please do not try to homogenize DL play into one easily classifiable pattern.

Seeing a kid (age 3 or older) in diapers makes me smile inside, but that's where it stops; some people get 'turned on' at such a site, which I still dont see any problem with. It is the diaper, or the fact that the kid is way past the age of potty-training and is wearing a diaper. in either case its the diaper, not the kid. There is a HUGE difference between wanting to be the child and wanting to be with the child. One is perverted and is pedophilia, the other is not. There is nothing wrong with wishing that you were 4 or 5 years old again and still wearing diapers (even though you're too old). Wishing that you could have your way with a child is just plain sick. Unfortunately, most people don't understand the difference.

I will admit that perhaps I was a bit hasty in a sweeping generalization there, and I will admit fault for that. Who am I to assume position of knowing over any particular individual's tastes or desires.

However, not as an excuse for this, but as an explanation perhaps, I felt a bit put off by the wildly assumptive and naive statement preceding it that suggested that this community is one of purity towards children as a whole because of our position and interests. That's ludicrous, absolutely and completely. I would say there are probably a solid number within that have some soiled hands and some that will eventually become so.

My basic point, which I understand became very wrapped up inside the tangent, was that many people here or there, under any interest and for any reason, lie to themselves to avoid the stark reality of certain situations. As I peruse these forums it becomes overwhelmingly obvious that there is little truth to be had in a den permeated almost entirely with fantasy.

I'm not surprised by this, just often frustrated at what appears to be more than just forgivable naivete.

One must know themself - If you find underage material invigorating, then you have no place here (or anywhere) other than a place of appropriate confinement.

Amongst 18 year olds and up, he principle of consent and acceptance overrules all stigmata, morality and "rules", IMHO.

I care not what others think as long as I am confident and assured that I follow the laws of my society/culture. I accept those of age who choose to slightly or grossly defy customs and moralities, and if their interest is shared (or my curiosity is aroused) then I feel free to pursue my interest with their consent.

Wouldn't it be great if the world was like that? 😃

Confusing infantilism with pedophilia is probably the most common misconception in this community. We all know it's wrong on so may levels, but this culture of fear we live in paints anyone who strays from the norm to be outcasts and deviants. The easiest way to explain it is this:

Pedophilia, in its most basic sense, is sexual attraction to children.

Infantilism is an attraction to the simplicity and carefree joys of being young. It's not always sexual for people, at times it's emotional and psychological. There's an appeal to being carefree, totally absolved of all adult responsibility, and does not infringe on the morality of children. It's all about the feeling of being a kid again, and that's completely separate from finding sexual and physical attraction in children.

I think most people outside of the AB/DL community would buy that explanation, don't you? But then again, the sad truth is some people simply cannot be convinced. Some people are set in their ways, and believe what they choose to believe, regardless of what they've been told.

Perhaps the public establishes this notion that infantilism is toeing the line of pedophilia due to things such as that blatantly exploitative 'Redemption' video, or the number of newsworthy candidates who have been arrested for soliciting minors to wear diapers and perform other sexual acts upon/with them.

Could be the borderline individuals skulking in forums about diaper wearing that solicit stories about youths, descriptions of sightings of youths, links to places where teen diaper wearers congregate on the net. Maybe, and this could be a shot in the dark, it's exploitative picture havens such as 'Yoir' that was shut down and the creator arrested for pandering to pedophiles. Maybe it's the other accounts of individuals who have created teen diaper wearer sites to draw in minors or have played a minor themselves to infiltrate such websites.

Could be some place like Deekers ever popular page that is blatant, undeniable and unapologetic about its content being geared in good ol' pedophile fashion. But all of these don't work to incriminate the whole do they?

When your 'whole' is a minority, then these above mentioned events, people, exploitations can definitely color the whole in the minds of the populace-and perhaps rightly so. After all, if you want to be open and accepted then you have to defend your platform from these predators that would strip away public opinion. You can't simply stick your heads in the sand and hope for the best while crying about your losses. That's reactive (and a flimsy reactive at that) over proactive.

Stop bemoaning that viewpoints are sullied in the minds of the masses to your plight if you do nothing but sit on your damn hands.