I mean, I kind of get how some loony ABDL stories presented as fact can be believable and gain such momentum. ABDL isn't physically impossible like some other niche fetishes, though it does disgust most normies. The diapered bride thing is kind of believable considering that just heavy and elaborate costumes and clothing for entertainment and fashion may not be easy to quickly get out of if necessary and may require assistance to do so. There's also that some particularly heavy and bulky costumes (like in some monster movies or just sports or theme park mascots) can require built in ventilation and hydration for the wearer so they don't potentially die from dehydration or heat stroke while wearing it for extended periods. Even in the Middle Ages a warrior wearing heavy armor that required assistance to don or remove might need to in fact piss or shit himself because he could not easily take it off or put it back on. Even some ABDL stories involving diaper discipline or forced regression that would count as abusive if they happened in real life has some real world parallels. There's cases of neglectful parents not toilet training their kids properly and also cases of parents using humiliation to punish their kids. There's "reparenting". It was a fringe form of psychotherapy from the 60s, invented by Jacqui Lee Schiff, that involved a therapist regressing the patient and treating them like a child in an effort to cure them of psychological problems and was even used on juvenile delinquents. It's exactly the plot for various fetish stories. She even wrote a book about it. Even the covers for two editions scream "this is an ABDL fetish" thing, but this is something people actually did try for treating mental illness. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reparenting Related to reparenting there's also "rebirthing" which sounds like a regression and unbirth fetish thing, but was also a fringe psychotherapy that people actually tried to treat children with. The idea behind it was to break a child's will and reduce them to a more infantile state then the caretaker using this to modify behavior and gain the child's trust which may also involve treating them like a baby with things like bottle feeding and cradling the child against the body. A lot of it sounds like deliberately abusing a kid then trying to induce Stockholm Syndrome to get them to behave and attach to their caretaker. Specifically part of it involved a form compression therapy and restraint that resulted in some deaths, people going to prison, and a couple states making this form of therapy illegal. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rebirthing_(attachment_therapy) >>19621 It's nothing new. I know this sounds incredibly cynical, but even if parents don't intend to and try to avoid giving their children baggage, even if they intend "I'll raise my children better than my parents did me and give them the best", they'll still end up doing it. Some kids handle it better and some parents manage not to fuck up their kids enough to cripple them psychologically and may even manage to help with innate anxieties and sorrows, but it still happens regardless. Our parents did the same and any of us with kids will also end up doing it. It's unavoidable. People are flawed and nothing human is perfect. This isn't an excuse or condemnation, it's just a statement of fact. Larkin's This Be the Verse mentioned the concept back in the 70s even.

>>19693 I mean, spend enough time looking at anything in psychotherapy and you can find things that are quasi-ABDL, because psychotherapy is predictably obsessed with anything to do with genitalia. And just to illustrate/offer a counterexample to the coercive attachment therapy, I remember reading an extract from A.S.Neill's book on his "Summerhill" school - based on Homer Lane's theoretical principles of radical self-government and unconditional approval of children's behaviours - and a surprising amount of Neill's anecdotes read like ABDL fiction (or perhaps it's vice versa - Summerhill's been running since the 1920s after all)

>>19693 Ah yes, Jacqui Lee Schiff's diaper cult. The one that scalded a guy to death.

>>19799 As a practicing psychotherapist, I can assure you that no one aside from a few die hard Freudian Psychoanalysis are "obsessed" with genitalia. That shit began in the 20's and mostly died out by the 60's. Nothing in my current modalities (ACT, DBT, CBT and Motivational Interviewing) have anything to do with sex or genitalia. Only if a client presents with issues directly related to sex would I broach that subject. Just fyi.

>>19693 >>20385 Wait, what's this "reparenting" thing? How have I not heard of it before? Is this legit psychology that's sometimes practiced? It sounds incredible. Sometimes you crave certain foods if you're low on certain vitamins, so you have a craving for something that solves a problem you don't know the details of. Could ABDLism be the same way with reparenting?

>>20440 It's pseudoscience at best, most of the reported cases see the people subjected to it traumatised by the experience.

>>20385 Would mentioning ABDL to a therapist be a bad idea? Say that it is indirectly related to a topic I am discussing with them and they notice that a certain word triggers me into reacting a certain way. Is it something that I should bring up, as a way for my therapist to understand me and my mindset better?

>>20452 I think it all depends on how you feel about revealing your ABDL side. If it's something that you have unresolved feelings about, I definitely think you would benefit from processing that with a therapist. The majority of therapists today are kink aware and non-judgmental. Anything you can provide to a therapist that helps them understand you better is a good thing. And don't be afraid to look for a new therapist if you feel that they lack understanding or insight in regards to your ABDL side. Good luck!

>>20452 Depends on the therapist, but err on the side of it being a bad idea. There are enough people who immediately associate ABDL with pedos that the risk is worth considering, and if your therapist builds up in his mind a rationale for you being a danger to children, regardless of whether you actually are, confidentiality doesn't apply anymore.

>>20644 Agreed. I've never brought up any fetish with a therapist because of this. One has to consider that psychologists are obligated to act if they think a patient might be a danger to themselves or others. Involuntary commitment is the best case scenario if the wrong thing is said even if is true and the suffering involved is legitimate. It's why I'm careful about what I say to my therapist and don't really trust them as I have gone through commitment before over saying the wrong thing and I would prefer that they not think I'm also potentially a sex offender.

>>20644 >>20652 You are out of touch by like half a century if you think trained professionals would confuse ABDL for pedophilia.

>>20663 You are a fucking moron if you think mandatory reporters are not a thing. In most (not all) states, idk about bongland but I'm sure its 10x worse; even if a therapist or pastor or doctor SUSPECT a potential crime they are BY FORCE OF LAW compelled to tell law enforcement.

>>20663 >>20664 It seems like there's some confusion here on how involuntary commitment and doctor-patient confidentiality actually work. Involuntary commitment, while abused in the past, has a lot of restrictions in many countries now specifically because of how it's been abused. Involuntary commitment exists to deal with patients that due to impaired decision making may be at risk of severely harming themselves or others. Doctor-patient confidentiality is there to prevent a a doctor from both revealing potentially harmful information to non-medical professionals regarding a patient's condition and to prevent a doctor from potentially being forced to testify in court against a patient. Doctor-patient confidentiality exists because some level of trust is needed for a doctor to do their job properly. A patient may be unwilling to divulge symptoms it they think it may be a liability or result in criminal charges. An example of this is a person who has a history of illegal drug use or gets an STD in a questionable or illegal manner may need to be able to divulge that information to a doctor for proper treatment and to prevent further spread and development of disease. The second anon being replied to also mentioned pastors, Something similar exists regarding confession in Catholicism and certain Protestant denominations. In Catholic church law Seal of Confession means a priest can be excommunicated for revealing criminal or scandalous information. The extent and specifics on these vary by country and for the latter there is indeed a conflict between church and civil law in some jurisdictions. Involuntary commitment exists to prevent potential self harm or harm to others. It does not apply for actions that have already happened which, even if criminal, will still usually fall under doctor-patient confidentiality. If a therapist has a belief that a patient may harm themselves or someone else due to compromised mental faculties they are obligated to prevent it via involuntary comitmment. Yes this has and still is abused in many countries, but a lot of countries have legal limitations on how it can be used specifically because of past abuse. I do agree with the sentiment of wariness and caution about revealing a fetish to a therapist as it can potentially lead to commitment if presented in a way that makes the therapist think the patient may harm themselves or someone else because of it. Involuntary commitment is also not designed to actually cure a patient, but rather stabilize them enough they aren't any immediate danger to themselves or others. It is not a pleasant experience to have it happen and can be humiliating. There's also to consider how psychiatry currently deals with the sex related issue of gender dysphoria due to how permanent and potentially harmful alterations to the body can be encouraged to someone mentally and emotionally compromised and vulnerable. I would avoid bringing up or mentioning of something like a TGTF fetish because of a therapist focusing to much on it and suggesting possibly harmful treatment.

>>20664 And they're not going to do that just because you say thick crinkly underwear gets your dick hard. Sounds like you have some urges you're not telling us about, what with how insecure you are.

>>20664 Mandatory reporting only applies to certain criminal or potentially criminal behaviour, like making a threat against someone's life. Unorthodox kinks like AB/DL aren't crimes, and any half-competent therapist will know that (especially one with a professional interest in sex and relationships). And for what it's worth, even the ones without a standing interest will have the wherewithal to stick "what is AB/DL?" into a search engine/professional database/library gateway. Again, I emphasize, AB/DL is not a crime.

>>20669 >>20670 >>20672 Post badges!

Forgot to include this.

>>20670 >>20672 If you want to trust a therapist to understand the difference between AB stuff and pedophilia, you can feel free to do that. Advising other people to do that, however, is so irresponsible I have a hard time believing it could be done in good faith (especially on a board that has multiple loli threads--you're really going to tell me you don't understand that normalfags can misunderstand things they see as pedophilia-adjacent?)

>>20675 >>20676 Not really sure why you replied to >>20669 explaining how involuntary commitment and doctor-patient and priest-penitent privilege actually works, but still agreeing with others that bringing up weird fetishes to a therapist is still probably a bad idea. Also that PDF you posted is about reporting of child abuse and neglect in general and doesn't have to involve indication or evidence sexual abuse specifically. It even goes over repeatedly standards for different states and territories. There has to actually be evidence or reasonable cause to believe child abuse or neglect is going in the US (and a lot of countries for that matter). Seriously there are a lot of abused and neglected children that the government never gets involved with. There's even been major court rulings that government agencies and police have no obligation and are not liable for failing to prevent child abuse or even enforce restraining orders that would could have prevented the murder of children such as Town of Castle Rock v Gonzales and DeShaney v Winnebago County. Honestly the pamphlet just comes off as something created to reassure people that the government is doing something, cares enough, and has the resources to prevent most instances of child abuse when that is very much not the case. Again, it's probably not a great idea to bring up a niche fetish to a therapist and I'm one of the anons here that agrees in not bringing weird sexual things up with a psychiatrist. At the same time though they're not going to send someone to jail or have someone investigated simply over mentioning ABDL or some other weird fetish to a therapist. There has to be evidence or reasonable cause to believe harm is being done or will be done or that a law is actually being broken. Even BDSM people aren't this paranoid and that's explicitly illegal in some jurisdictions (even parts of the US) under the reasoning people can't consent to assault and there actually being court cases and police involved over severe injuries resulting when someone went overboard with it. Anyway... can we back on topic?

Bridal Diapers. I see this one to be fairly possible in today's countries, as a practical thing, or as a kink thing. But i think that it would be extremly rare. (Excluding all who are incontinent and DOES need them). Communion Diapers. I for one hope that this is not a thing for anyone that isn't incontinent for real. As this comes off as extremly cultish and creepy. Diapered Actors. I am sure that at least some actors are diaper dependent and wears diapers at work, but that it is very rare.

I've been hearing stories that people are trying to smuggle drugs by wearing diapers and stashing the drugs in the diapers lately but I see any source that would call trustworthy. Seems that as an idea its so retarded that I would not be surprised if it turns out it was true but also worked?

>>39773 I really doubt that would work. People who successfully smuggle drugs through airports just mix them in with their luggage or other, innocuous stuff. There's already stories out there of the TSA searching people wearing diapers anyway, so if they thought that this was a trend they'd just be even more likely to do it.

>>32317 >Communion Diapers >I for one hope that this is not a thing for anyone that isn't incontinent for real. As this comes off as extremly cultish and creepy. This is not real. There are no Catholic practices that resemble ABDL in any way. This feels like someone reinterpreting the Mormon undergarments to somehome make another ABDL-style scenario

>>40037 I don't think it's even as widespread as a meme or something like it. I think it was in this thread way back or somewhere else where I explained my personal theory on this. Basically all of the communion diaper stories I've run into in the wild have the same basic format and even use the same descriptors and setup. Basically I'm 99% it's the specific fantasy of one, single, lone perverted boomer with a very specific fetish. The lack of variation in the story and context really convinces me that there is absolutely nobody other than this one guy who gets off on that fantasy.

>>19251 >Communion Diapers I just realized something; ive spoken to multiple separate people who've said something to the effect of wanting to re-raise a little as a 'good catholic' There has to be some correlation here right?

>>40043 That boomer might be in this thread

>19340 anyone got a copy? i heard there were 2 parts on youtube years ago but i never saw it

>>40823 The what?

>>40561 that boomer might be YOU

>>19340 Anyone remember the version that uses shiny happy people by REM for music or the script that was posted on the movies myspace page?

>>40892 Calm down, boom boom

>>19428 There was a couple that posted on Daily Diapers back in the day and said they were producers on the movie and were ABDLs but that most of the crew didn't know or wasn't involved in the scene. Unfortunately autists immediately began trying to dox them and alert everyone else from the crredits.

No joke I just went to a wedding over the weekend where the bride's friends were telling me her dress was so elaborate/restrictive that the girls had to help her fully take the dress off a couple times for her to go pee. She had to completely take the dress off and pee in the nude. Should've just worn a diaper.

>>40980 That this isn't unusual is why the bridal diaper thing sounds realistic. That you can find multiple articles and videos of how to use the bathroom while wearing a wedding dress is very telling on how complicated and difficult the less simple ones can be to remove. One of the roles for bridesmaids is to assist with the challenges of wedding dress that may be difficult to remove or get on alone. I find it funny the bridal diapers thing has spread enough you can find serious articles from women's magazine websites bringing this up. If this started as a myth made up by an ABDL fetishist, I'm impressed that it spread to normalfags talking about it. They're more than a decade old, but here's a couple stories primarily focused on diapered brides I know of for those interested. https://web.archive.org/web/20211201035754/http://foxtalestimes.com/Stories/pampered_bride.htm https://www.tapatalk.com/groups/foxtalestimes/viewtopic.php?p=22046699 Only the first one was ever finished though.

>>40982 When women discover that the bridal diaper is a good idea is probably best way to describe the reaction to it.

>>40982 >foxtalestimes Remember when that was a thing? Now it is more or less abandoned. As for the bridal diapers you can even just randomly type it into google and find serious news articles about it. Though most go along the lines of if you need to consider bridal diapers then you need to revaluate your bridal dress.