Just a ponder: VC people and DLABI

A thought crossed my mind recently, okay a weird thort...okay that happens a lot anyway but here it is. What about DLABI and vertically-challenged people? I mean there must be some because it's an incredibly big world but: Are VC Infantilists thankful of their size? Somehow might a vanilla VC person end up DLABI praps as a coping mechanism? Would a DLABI VC person hav fun with it buy - lets say - dressing babyish openly and sometimes smoking/drinking at the same time? Have any of you out there heard of or seen a VC person who's part of this particular lifestyle-world? Or many even are you a VC person who's into this sort of thing?
Sorry this is a long list of questions but I didnae know how else to word it! bringmesunshine

*mumble* *mumble* where the hell is my acronym dictionary?? ..........

I'm guessing you mean little people. Most people of diminutive size usually over compensate for their short stature, so you might find even fewer AB/DLs in that group of people. That said, I'm only 5', 7 1/2" and I like dressing as a toddler. But I don't fit into the definition of being a little person.

1) If your going to put things into acronyms, at least put the first acronym into a whole word into parenthesis because I don't know what a DLABI or a VC is. Could it be,

Diaper Lover At Butts Incorporated?

Vice Carer?

2) Can you elaborate your post a bit because I was lost on the first sentence. I don't know what those people contribute about? Aren't we all a bit challenged when we face this sort of things? What babyish stuff are we going to dress and why would we drink alcohol in our double diapers? o.o

3) Maybe break your post up to help us follow along and that way, we get a better vision and more clearer on your post.

Doesn't Listen And Burps Incessantly?

I don't know. Most VC people I know are fairly attentive and polite.

Snivy said:

1) If your going to put things into acronyms, at least put the first acronym into a whole word into parenthesis because I don't know what a DLABI or a VC is. Could it be,

Diaper Lover At Butts Incorporated?

Vice Carer?

2) Can you elaborate your post a bit because I was lost on the first sentence. I don't know what those people contribute about? Aren't we all a bit challenged when we face this sort of things? What babyish stuff are we going to dress and why would we drink alcohol in our double diapers? o.o

3) Maybe break your post up to help us follow along and that way, we get a better vision and more clearer on your post.

Click to expand...

Cottontail said:

Doesn't Listen And Burps Incessantly?

I don't know. Most VC people I know are fairly attentive and polite.

Click to expand...

Pretty sure it's just ABDL and I for "incontinents" in a different order than we're used to. VC is vertically challenged, which I haven't seen anyone use without a smirk in...ever?

I know one tiny ABDL. She described it as a mixed blessing, which is not far from what I'd expect.

Wtf. means DLABI and VC ? Incorrectly used (or incorrect) terms are only for get crazy...

bringmesunshine, please explain us. I can't find any sense in your post.

dogboy said:

I'm guessing you mean little people. Most people of diminutive size usually over compensate for their short stature, so you might find even fewer AB/DLs in that group of people. That said, I'm only 5', 7 1/2" and I like dressing as a toddler. But I don't fit into the definition of being a little person.

Click to expand...

Would you care to expand on that, Dogboy? I'm particularly short, but don't feel that I attempt to overcompensate for my size in any way.

Seriously though, I don't think height has any relation to whether someone enjoys ABDL. I've come across Littles who are 6'7" and 4'11". The key facet that makes someone a little is whether they feel small, not whether they are small.

Sanch said:

Would you care to expand on that, Dogboy? I'm particularly short, but don't feel that I attempt to overcompensate for my size in any way.

Seriously though, I don't think height has any relation to whether someone enjoys ABDL. I've come across Littles who are 6'7" and 4'11". The key facet that makes someone a little is whether they feel small, not whether they are small.

Click to expand...

Yes, I don't think size has any bearing on being AB/DL. There seemed to be some confusion on the part of the OP as to what constitutes a person of small stature. The term midget is no longer used, but has been replaced by little person. That becomes confusing when we refer to ourselves as being "little", meaning age rather than height. That's what I was getting at. I didn't want to use the term midget because it's considered offensive.

As for why we may be AB or DL, I subscribe more to the love mapping theory, that we make early developmental associations to objects and that they may get associated with early sexual stimulation.

CrazySmoker said:

Wtf. means DLABI and VC ? Incorrectly used (or incorrect) terms are only for get crazy...

bringmesunshine, please explain us. I can't find any sense in your post.

Click to expand...

ItL be a pleasure my frend...DLABI = DiaperLoverAdultBabyInfantilism, It's my personal choice to put DL first in the acronym because I am a Diaper Lover and I've included Infantilism only because: (where I'm concerned) some therapists have understood sed term - in conclusion regardN me it's so far never been NbarSN to say infantilism or infantilist,...and because in this NtiR lifestIL world I think Infantilism - the word - is important and escapsuL8N enough to deserve spotlight space.

Secondly VC = Vertically Challenged...and I only called people of a short statue VC because I didn't want 2 cause offence, the go to thing that we are in conversation if you will is DLABIs, we are not DiaperLoverAdultBabyInfantilists because it's too long to say and for some carries NbarSN heft - unless i've got the wrong end of the stick it was my guess that maybe people of a short statue call themselves and their group VCs. I'm sorry if I'm a confusing old fish but I hav a way about me which'd be too difficult 2 shift...so I've never bothered tryN and never will! bringmesunshine

NbarSN? NtiR? ("Embarrassing" and "entire", I presume?)

Bringmesunshine, are you trying to have a conversation about code words and acronyms? I didn't think so at first, but now I'm wondering. If you're not, then probably best to spell things out, 'cause the topic is drowning in obfuscation.

OK... using personalized terms means for me out of range. No more discus: It seems like "I dislike red traffic light, so I'll put pink light in all the world."

Returnig to original question: Without questioning wtf really means VC (continue without exact understanding) I se no sense in your post. Be AB, DL or infantilist isn't related to "body size." I know the littlest AB friend - she's only 1,55 m, but know people higher than myself in the same (I'm 1,73m)

And finally USE NORMAL TERMINOLGOY. Puting "some personal names" into something ordinary called in some way is usseles: I call a car as a car, not as a selfmoving machine.

dogboy said:

Yes, I don't think size has any bearing on being AB/DL. There seemed to be some confusion on the part of the OP as to what constitutes a person of small stature. The term midget is no longer used, but has been replaced by little person. That becomes confusing when we refer to ourselves as being "little", meaning age rather than height. That's what I was getting at. I didn't want to use the term midget because it's considered offensive.

As for why we may be AB or DL, I subscribe more to the love mapping theory, that we make early developmental associations to objects and that they may get associated with early sexual stimulation.

Click to expand...

Fair enough. Seems to have be a misinterpretation on my part, so apologies. I agree to some extent with the idea of altered or misfiring love maps in general, though there are cases of people whose first conscious ABDL desires appear at a fairly late developmental stage, or even through interaction with someone who is already ABDL. It would be interesting to know whether ABDL is an ever-present from infancy or young childhood onwards (albeit sometimes a deeply repressed characteristic), or whether it can develop suddenly at a significantly older age.

bringmesunshine said:

ItL be a pleasure my frend...DLABI = DiaperLoverAdultBabyInfantilism, It's my personal choice to put DL first in the acronym because I am a Diaper Lover and I've included Infantilism only because: (where I'm concerned) some therapists have understood sed term - in conclusion regardN me it's so far never been NbarSN to say infantilism or infantilist,...and because in this NtiR lifestIL world I think Infantilism - the word - is important and escapsuL8N enough to deserve spotlight space.

Secondly VC = Vertically Challenged...and I only called people of a short statue VC because I didn't want 2 cause offence, the go to thing that we are in conversation if you will is DLABIs, we are not DiaperLoverAdultBabyInfantilists because it's too long to say and for some carries NbarSN heft - unless i've got the wrong end of the stick it was my guess that maybe people of a short statue call themselves and their group VCs. I'm sorry if I'm a confusing old fish but I hav a way about me which'd be too difficult 2 shift...so I've never bothered tryN and never will! bringmesunshine

Click to expand...

Doing things your own way defeats the purpose of language and communication with other people. The whole point of language is to communicate and understand one another. If you use words, acronym, and abbreviation that only you understand, how on earth do you expect others to understand it?

Trying to decode your post is ridiculous.

This isn't your cell phone nor a conversation with your buds through texting, this is a forum. Please try to type things out instead of shortening everything. It would help greatly.

dogboy said:

The term midget is no longer used....

Click to expand...

oh, yes, it is!....you lanky bar-steward! :biggrin:

'midget' is usually preferable, although it does open a can of worms as to what constitues a midget within the realms of dwarfism [the technical catch-all term, that is] for, as with most things related to growth and development, medical science is mostly at a loss.
going from memory (just cos i can't be arsed checking since i'm on my mum's PC), the 'official' dwarf pigeon-holing ('e' or not?) is for those under 4' 11'', but due to the nature of nature, there's actually a significant grey area in which dwell people who have childlike characteristics (as with stunted growth) but are taller than the 'official' limit.

of course, woe betide you, if you confuse dwarfs with midgets.

as for being 'challenged', as far as i'm concerned, i'm normal: you lot are the freaks.
:neener_neener:

pros and cons: it seems to vary with age and other people's perceptions and expectations of you; and how you cope and adapt to such.
physically, for me, with having a childlike musculoskeleton, i'm more prone to RSIs, strains and overuse within a 'grown-ups' environment, mainly because everything is designed and sized for them/you. even being stronger and fitter than the 'average Joe' didn't overcome this issue for me (you probably don't realize how much you rely on your height and weight, and even the length of your fingers).
and with that come all the job rejections; some will tell you to your face, but when i was younger and presented my[photoless] driving licence (yes, i'm that old) for inspection, i would often be met with a double-take or skeptical look.

as for the AB/DL gig, it's sort of been good, but as mixed a bag as anything. i mean, if i can make an outfit or garment look cute, then why not? i spent a good part of my life hating myself for what others saw, so why not exploit it now that i'm a bit less irked? at least, to find some good in it?

ade said:

oh, yes, it is!....you lanky bar-steward! :biggrin:

Click to expand...

Haha...I love it!

My biggest concern in my answer was that I would be offensive. I was always the second shortest kid in my class all through grade school, and oddly enough, I really liked that. The kid who was the shortest was a one of my best friends. I think even way back then, when I had no concept of be AB or "Little", in terms of age identification, I wanted to be a little kid who would never grow up. I suppose I had the Peter Pan syndrome. Take that to the shrink and let the fun begin!

dogboy said:

...when I had no concept of be AB or "Little", in terms of age identification, I wanted to be a little kid who would never grow up. I suppose I had the Peter Pan syndrome. Take that to the shrink and let the fun begin!

Click to expand...

the Peter Pan thing is interesting and, away from the Disneyfication of it, the topsy-turviness of it and the contraditions of the psychological-versus-biological nature of childhood seem to tell a greater and darker story.
Peter Pan is generally considered to be a 'little psycho', but that's largely in line with you'd expect of a child, especially when you look beyond the beguiling cuteness (which itself is taken to be a form of self-preservation; let's face it, who hasn't met a child brat whom you'd happily throw down a disused well?).

Oskar Matzerath and Owen Meany are similar characters, but obviously, i'm the nicest of the bunch; and if anybody tells you different, i'll chop them up for firewood. :biggrin:
if you wish to chase up those two characters, i'd suggest the film for the former (the book is a bit too chewy), but the book for the latter (DO NOT watch the film adaptation).
alas, as far as insightfulness goes, through such looking-glass, it's not a pretty picture that stares back. but it does help in pondering the nature of man and his madness-masquerading-as-sanity (both as a boy and a man). both characters and their stories induced a dismay and a sickenedness in me, at myself; but i only see that as a good thing, in terms of coming to terms with myself and of what others see in me.
(it's not for no reason that i've been known as 'the poison dwarf').

ade said:

the Peter Pan thing is interesting and, away from the Disneyfication of it, the topsy-turviness of it and the contraditions of the psychological-versus-biological nature of childhood seem to tell a greater and darker story.
Peter Pan is generally considered to be a 'little psycho', but that's largely in line with you'd expect of a child, especially when you look beyond the beguiling cuteness (which itself is taken to be a form of self-preservation; let's face it, who hasn't met a child brat whom you'd happily throw down a disused well?).

Oskar Matzerath and Owen Meany are similar characters, but obviously, i'm the nicest of the bunch; and if anybody tells you different, i'll chop them up for firewood. :biggrin:
if you wish to chase up those two characters, i'd suggest the film for the former (the book is a bit too chewy), but the book for the latter (DO NOT watch the film adaptation).
alas, as far as insightfulness goes, through such looking-glass, it's not a pretty picture that stares back. but it does help in pondering the nature of man and his madness-masquerading-as-sanity (both as a boy and a man). both characters and their stories induced a dismay and a sickenedness in me, at myself; but i only see that as a good thing, in terms of coming to terms with myself and of what others see in me.
(it's not for no reason that i've been known as 'the poison dwarf').

Click to expand...

Aha...the poison dwarf! I see a B movie in the making. As for children, I remember W. C. Fields comment. "I love children, but only if they're properly cooked."

As for Peter Pan, one could do a lot of study on that one. Everything seems innocent enough until sex and sexual attraction is mixed in for good measure. There's Peter's obvious attraction to Wendy, and more disturbing, Tinker Bell's attraction to Peter. She must be under age, yes? And then there's the Lost Boys. I'll say no more as the cops are already breaking down the door.

I've not heard of Oskar Matzerath and Owen Meany so I'll have to explore that. Sounds interesting.

Well, I'm about average height, but very skinny. I can fit pretty comfortably into actual childrens' clothing and Goodnites, so I like that! (Still too big for the really adorable clothes though, sigh...) But honestly, I don't think that being short would have much of an impact. I'd have to be the height of a four-year-old to really get into that mindset, and I can do it just fine anyway at my current height. It's more about being able to view the world differently, in my opinion. Baby clothes and things like that help a lot,as does having an active imagination. Just gotta find what will help you slip into that mindset!