It seems strange that it seldom gets mentioned…
N-No??? I haven’t heard that at all
Hmmm maybe for some? For myself, being little isnt really sexual and just being in a diaper doesnt cause any arousal either, not saying that I havent had a few steamy diaper changes or anything, but by itself, it doesnt really get my gears going so to speak.
1 Like
I’d argue there’s a stronger case between brats and masochism.
When you’re part of the good girl club, you don’t need masochism 
3 Likes
yeah there are connections for some. Some people like the humiliation aspect of this type of thing, and that can be a form of masochism.
Don’t see any connection. Maybe on some of the weird, kinky forums.
Think of the folks that like diaper humiliation or showing off their diapers in public, that can be a form of self mistreatment
There is a connection, however I think it is mostly an individual case. For ABs, the big deal seems to come with having the dynamic of baby and caretaker. This dynamic can then be individualized depending on the couple. For couples that do make it sexual, the allure of having an AB under control may lead to more dom-sub like relations. How masochism would fit in there is more than apparent, I’m assuming.
I don’t think of being an AB as sexual concept at all, for example. The most it would be to me is self therapy. I also think it’s a strange sexual mechanism to have, but that’s beside the point.
1 Like
I do like the idea of being forced to wear diapers and treated like a baby for discipline or what not as a fantasy. It goes to the embarrassment/humiliation aspect of what I think masochism contains.
I’d say about 75% of my time is spent here and 25% is spent as just being a cute toddler.
I wouldn’t call it sexual, but that’s because I discovered that side way before I knew what sex was. Unfortunate how that part came to be:
I was in the 5th grade, and somehow I thought a wiener sticking up when naked was a sign of embarrassment. So I thought having your pants pulled down to be put into diapers would lead to a double embarrassment of being naked, hence the wiener sticking up, and being put into diapers.
So what did I do? In my 10 year old mind, to get closer to my desires, I tried to make it stick up as a form of embarrassment. I knew that touching it could make it happen, so I started rubbing it against my leg, and we all know where that went.
I had my first orgasm in the 6th grade, and combined with the diaper stories I had been reading on the internet, the 2 became inseparable. But mind you, this was before I had any sex-ed whatsoever, so I practically had no idea what I was doing.
For 25 years from 1987 to 2013 the diagnostic ‘bible’ of the mental health professions, the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders defined infantilism (ie. ABDL) as a form of sexual masochism. The DSM IIIR published in 1987 was the first edition to mention the term ‘infantilism’. The one sentence reference, under the category of Sexual Masochism stated –
“The term infantilism is sometimes used to describe a desire to be treated as a helpless infant and clothed in diapers”.
That followed sexologist John Money’s characterization of ABDL in his 1986 book, Lovemaps.
“Autonepiophilia is a syndrome of paraphilic infantilism. It involves being the baby oneself, babified by one’s partner. The ritual typically begins with being bathed, powdered, diapered and put to bed with a baby bottle. For some autonepiophiles, the next phase is to be pampered, as by a parent, because the diapers are wet and need changing. For others it is to be scolded, smacked, or humiliated for wetting or soiling, in which case the erotic turn-on is masochistic.” [Money. Lovemaps, kindle location 1803]
Another leading sexologist Ray Blanchard also viewed ABDL as a form of sexual masochism -
“This power differential, expressed in such fantasies by the imagined woman spanking or scolding the subject, is central to the masochistic arousal. … With masochistic gynaephiles [infantilists/ABDLs], the [diaper] fetish derives its power from association with the (fantasised) subject; it is an accoutrement to the role of the shamed, defenceless, punished little boy.” [Freund & Blanchard. ‘*Erotic target location errors in male gender dysphorics, paedophiles, and fetishists’ *p561]
That reference was essentially repeated in the subsequent versions of the DSM. That is it! For twenty five years from 1987 to 2013 an entire, complex identity was reduced to one sentence. That was all the guidance the DSM provided to mental health professionals about ABDL. But I suspect it has caused a lot of harm. For a rare, little understood and stigmatized identity it cemented the view the appropriate diagnosis for the complex psychological condition underlying ABDL was exclusively or primarily as a sexual disorder – a form of sexual masochism.
The DSM-V published in 2013 removed any reference to infantilism, or anything directly related to ABDL. Arguably this is an advance which recognized the previous cursory references failed to provide adequate guidance in diagnosis, and may have diverted mental health professionals from consideration of diagnoses other than sexual paraphilias. It better prompts mental health professionals to make their own diagnoses. However, they often default to the previous erroneous diagnosis of paraphilia (sexual disorder), or are left with no guidance on a complex but little known condition.
ABDLs’ sexual fantasies do commonly contain masochistic components. That characterisation ignores other elements of being ABDL ie. seeking emotional comfort from diapers, and the often unconscious re-enactment of childhood attachment issues. By focusing exclusively on the masochism this diagnosis ignores the attachment issues and context that allow a comprehensive and valid understanding of ABDL. It also contributes to pathologizing ABDL by ignoring the other more positive and redemptive elements. On this basis, defining ABDL as sexual masochism, is an incomplete characterisation of one symptom, not a valid diagnosis.
Regards. Dylan
1 Like
Some of members here have a bunch of BDSM interests, so some “relation” can exist.
2 Likes
I guess I never thought of it in that light since I wear diapers for incontinence and am not into BDSM or anything else like masochism.
Well I wasn’t referring to folks with genuine need, I do try to not generalize, the diapered community is a pretty large spectrum of “needs” from medical to emotional
1 Like