posted on Jun, 26 2011 @ 12:31 AM
Originally posted by Truther9111776
not going into an adult baby
but if a true condition he should get disability
Not sure if "condition" is a proper term, but it does exist (or is true). I am one of the "adult babies" (Or Infantilists), so unless I don't exist
(which is possible) this is a real thing.
Originally posted by nithaiah
Being a leech isn't a disability. Having one of the creepiest fetishes known to man isn't a disability. What a wanker.
While I agree the fellow should not be "rooking the system", insulting his/my lifestyle is just as wankery (In my opinion) Though, I suppose I could
be considered a creep. May I ask how you are certain folks with my lifestyle are creepy? Or is it just because you don't understand the lifestyle?
(Hating on somthing that you don't understand is a result of fear, you know this right?)
Trust me, nothing to fear from an infantilist.
Originally posted by Rockdisjoint
... I'm just curious about what "DL" means.
DL = Diaper Lover
That would be a person that just enjoys wearing the diapers, much like some guys enjoy just wearing womens panties (versus full on transvestite)
I know this is an old one, but I had started a thread as well trying to nip the hateful responses in the bud. Here I am re-hashing this one because I
As we noted in the other thread, and was starting to note here: The guy can build big baby furniture (Which is a lucrative business FYI) And his
woman, well she obviously can take care of children (daycare) and adults (elder care). Needless to say, both of those skills are jobs as well. Not
to mention that a "mommy" can make $100+/hr (That is one-hundered dollars an hour) providing "mommy" care to adult babies. (Again, something we KNOW
she can do.)
One can be an infantilist without sucking at the teets of disability.
Other thread: I win, mine was first!
edit on 6/26/2011 by adigregorio because:
Zelda needed saving, so I added a Link.