Posted by A. on March 26, 2005 at 01:59 [12.210.221.132]
In Reply to: Re: AB misconceptions posted by symbiosis on March 25, 2005 at 20:27
symbiosis,
Yes, I think the rejection of the term is nothing short of funny, and I agree with you that "bad apples" seem to have largely soured the idea to posters here. At the same time, I think there may be other things at work beyond just the gender issues we've each raised and these aforementioned bad examples of ABism. In thinking about the things that have been said as to why these self-ID'd LGs don't consider themselves AB, I'm struck with the notion of the aesthetic. Most of these LG identified persons are interested in a much different mode of dress than any AB who does not ID as a "sissybaby." It occurs to me that the hang-up may simply be on things like onesies and other such exclusively infantile garments, as well as some exclusively infantile props that some LGs find distasteful (though given the diversity of use of items that you and I might consider AB among LGs, such as diapers and pacifiers, it gets a little messy).
Regardless, I really don't begrudge these LGs to call themselves whatever they want up to such a point as they decide that it should be a basis for restricting the topics of discussion to specific modes of diaper play, age play, or discipline that they endorse. I think someone mentioned that they are forgetting that the board is titled "Daddy's Girl", and that no specific age is imparted on the "Girl". As such, it makes just as much sense to me that it be a "babygirl" as it does a "little girl" or even teenage girl ageroles, and find it frustrating that so many of the active female posters continue to post (however apologetically) in support of relegating discussions between Daddies and adult baby girls to the Diaper Lover/Adult Baby forum hosted elsewhere on Wetset.
with the best, again,
A.
Email: austinitorno-spam@no-spamgmail.com