Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 17

Thread: How *Could* we get some positive media coverage about the community?

  1. #1

    Lightbulb How *Could* we get some positive media coverage about the community?

    Starting this thread due to the discussions started in "Television"'s Greetings/Introductions thread about always being displayed in a bad light(Raccoon mentioned not really knowing how to display us in a good light...so here we are)

    In my Opinion, one of the main reasons we always get displayed in a negative light, is the fact that these reporters always target AB/DL, rather than just infantilism(DL=Pretty much 100% Sexually driven) and generally, anything sexual in the media is *never* presented well...

    Perhaps if we had someone like 'Television' have a conversation with some people(Those who either aren't DLs, or can Omit DLish statements from their conversations) we could get some actually semi-positive coverage on infantilism by itself...

    We'd also need them not to present it like "This is a group of strange individuals who are obsessed with _______ and ________ and ________".



    Feel free to post your thoughts/ideas/opinions about how we could get some positive media coverage(If I said not to, you would anyways I'd bet )

  2. #2

    Default

    Time, Eulogy.
    All good and bad things come with time. We can get good coverage by having communities like ours that stamp out the unsavory and show that we are just normal people with different underwear. However, the media's job isn't to report the news, its to sell something. If you want to be seen as "Good" you have to be sell-able, so until pissing yourself becomes trendy.. we are gonna look bad.

  3. #3

    Default

    In a perfect world I'd be content with no media coverage. This is a very private thing and I don't need average joes tolerance or acceptence. I have no desire to flaunt it. Nobody would know I'm an infantilist, so what would be the point?

    Whether infantilism get a positive or negative spin in the media nobody would really care other than ''us''. A program/article covering infantilism will only generate sniggers and then be quickly forgotten.

  4. #4

    Default



    Quote Originally Posted by Eulogy View Post
    Starting this thread due to the discussions started in "Television"'s Greetings/Introductions thread about always being displayed in a bad light(Raccoon mentioned not really knowing how to display us in a good light...so here we are)

    In my Opinion, one of the main reasons we always get displayed in a negative light, is the fact that these reporters always target AB/DL, rather than just infantilism(DL=Pretty much 100% Sexually driven) and generally, anything sexual in the media is *never* presented well...

    Perhaps if we had someone like 'Television' have a conversation with some people(Those who either aren't DLs, or can Omit DLish statements from their conversations) we could get some actually semi-positive coverage on infantilism by itself...

    We'd also need them not to present it like "This is a group of strange individuals who are obsessed with _______ and ________ and ________".



    Feel free to post your thoughts/ideas/opinions about how we could get some positive media coverage(If I said not to, you would anyways I'd bet )
    Well done.

    You've just chosen to introduce a schism in this community. Moreover, you've done so while stumbling all over imprecise language.

    This was not what you were aiming for, but this is unfortunately what you've done.

  5. #5

    Default

    Damn h3g3l, you are in a bit of a mood tonight...

    But he's right. Your statement doesn't make much sense, and is very difficult to follow.

    I think the last thing any "fetish-type" community needs is any kind of publicity. What we do is very difficult for many people to accept as "normal". I'm 97% sure (disclaimer: I've not done any research, nor have I even seen subject episode) that most (again, with no research, I'd estimate about 99.9%) viewers reaction when watching the CSI Episode "King Baby" was "WTF? People do that?" And I think that is about the best reaction we can expect from mainstream people. The worst we can expect is people like good old Rick "Man on Dog" Santorum starting to run their mouths about what we do. While everyone deserves an equal oppertunity to practice whatever bedroom stuff they want, nobody should have the right to shove their brand of sexuality in other peoples faces. I bring this up because I see the end game of what you propose as some sort of massive "diaper lover rights movement". At least, I think thats what you have in mind.

    So, If you had to choose between people thinking "WTF?" or "Man on Dog" which would you rather have? Given the risk of "Man of Dog" type people, I choose neither.

    And as I'm sure I'm going to get flamed about the gay rights point (as that is what I was alluding to), If two people love each other, fine. If same people want to get married, also fine. If those people happen to be of the same gender, whats the big deal? And on the subject of gay pride parades, I see those in the same context of Irish or Puerto Rican parades. If you don't like whats being celebrated, don't attend. If two guys want to make out in the office, that's not appropriate. Neither is it appropriate for a man and a woman. I regard the gay rights movement as analogous to the civil rights movement; Some people don't have the same rights I enjoy, and that's W-R-O-N-G.

  6. #6
    Customizer

    Default

    The reporters go toward the most accessible "targets," a.k.a. novelty news to garner public interest and reaction. What stands out the most in novelty news is the extreme AB-DLs who want spotlight attention.

    Media is plural, so they're more than one outlet. Some of us have seen the Tyra Banks show episode featuring fetishists like "Baby Ella," while some have seen news podcasts of William Windsor, a.k.a. Arizon'a "Baby Man," or "HeidiLynn" (R.I.P.) Still, some of us have seen the Jerry Springer episodes featuring AB-DLs. Even the pedophiles make the news, like that Goodnite cell phone photo-taking creep texting an underage girl. In the end product, we often find a lumping together of topics of children and childhood symbolism in a "negative" light without further explaination.



    Why? Time is money and quick stories sell the most and fastest by attracting viewers. This can widen the potential viewing audience per block for commercial advertisers.

    What is explored is the fascination with an unknown topic. What isn't explored is the academic side of the lifestyle: the psychology and sociology. If this approach could be taken in a long, in-depth news story, it would be a better story. The story can be done in an academic, human behavior and social science context. The results may be more satisfying because presenting both sides would potentially increase support.

    Users like yourself might see another opportunity in media coverage and say, "Hey, let's create a positive package, a better image to clean up past perceptions." That is a good way to begin if you can keep a positive attitude.

    What can counter this new growth is the initial negative attitude shared among some story readers like yourself. This attitude is often fueled by negative reactions.

    We have the power to speak and write, fact-check and publish. So why not get together an area where members can chip in to create a "positive package"? I'm sure adisc and a few other Web sites have talented and knowledgeable members. Just remember to include "the other sides," the academic and social sides.

    I'm willing to help. Are you?

  7. #7

    Default

    I'd rather not have us cast in any light. I'm perfectly happy with ABDLism being a small, unknown subculture. That said, I disagree that we are always painted in a negative picture... With the exception of news stories regarding perverts doing nasty crap, many of the the shows that have been associated with our interest have been quite positive.

  8. #8

    Default



    Quote Originally Posted by dcviper View Post
    Damn h3g3l, you are in a bit of a mood tonight...

    But he's right. Your statement doesn't make much sense, and is very difficult to follow.

    I think the last thing any "fetish-type" community needs is any kind of publicity. What we do is very difficult for many people to accept as "normal". I'm 97% sure (disclaimer: I've not done any research, nor have I even seen subject episode) that most (again, with no research, I'd estimate about 99.9%) viewers reaction when watching the CSI Episode "King Baby" was "WTF? People do that?" And I think that is about the best reaction we can expect from mainstream people. The worst we can expect is people like good old Rick "Man on Dog" Santorum starting to run their mouths about what we do. While everyone deserves an equal oppertunity to practice whatever bedroom stuff they want, nobody should have the right to shove their brand of sexuality in other peoples faces. I bring this up because I see the end game of what you propose as some sort of massive "diaper lover rights movement". At least, I think thats what you have in mind.
    No, this is not what I have in mind.

    What I have in mind is a few observations:
    • Specific language is being used without regard for its connotation or implication;
    • Along these lines, the infantilism mentioned in the original post I was responding to would--in line with assertions made there--have to include mentions of public humiliation;
    • It is too easy to diminish a group and distinguish it to the point of uselessness.


    I think it incorrect that AB/DLs are the bane of the community. Indeed: the more public of the two groups would, by definition, be the infantilist camp. I also have to vehemently push back against the "or could perhaps omit DL behavior" thinking here: it is a part of the larger community (see below).

    For the third point: homosexuals as a whole have different insights and etiologies for this common outcome, and this is where the interesting story lies. Frankly, it does us no good to hear from a gay woman in her twenties who works in a meat-packing plant and wears a red hat on Tuesdays; the interesting bit is where and how she fits into--and integrates with--a larger whole.

  9. #9

    Default

    I remember seeing an episode of CSI Special Victims Unit that featured a young teen-age boy who was transgendered. It was a beautiful though heartbreaking story. I think it brought more understanding to those who feel caught in the wrong gendered body than any talk show could. It was affective because the boy was intelligent, sensitive and quite frankly, beautiful.

    If we were portrayed in such a light, I think the public might be a little more accepting. What happens, though, is that we are portrayed like the obese old man in the CSI episode King Baby. It is for that very reason that I agree with others, the less said about the subject the better. There just isn't gong to be a very acceptable spin that is going to make the general public say...aahhhh..when they see someone like myself in a diaper saying, "goo goo!" And like I said in another thread, I and the rest of us are so much more. This is just something I do in the privacy of my own home. It's no one else's business, and I wouldn't expect anyone to understand. My guess is that they would think I belong in a mental institution, so I'd just as soon keep the public in the dark.

  10. #10

    Default

    I would greatly appreciate NO media coverage! I do not think that we would be cast in a positive or even natural light by the eyes of the public and in the eyes of the media. Even if there was a very fair documentary that didn't make us seem like sick perverts, the news media and critics would certainly tear us apart.

    NO LIGHT IS GOOD LIGHT

Similar Threads

  1. Positive AB portrayl in the media
    By CuriousKid in forum Adult Babies & Littles
    Replies: 30
    Last Post: 25-Aug-2009, 20:55
  2. VLC Media Player vs Windows Media Player
    By WildThing121675 in forum Computers & Gaming
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: 16-Jul-2009, 18:04
  3. Insurance coverage for diapers
    By drmmrr in forum Incontinence
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 08-Apr-2009, 07:44
  4. serious stuff - he's positive :(
    By unbeliever in forum Mature Topics
    Replies: 28
    Last Post: 21-Nov-2008, 12:03

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
ADISC.org - the Adult Baby / Diaper Lover / Incontinence Support Community.
ADISC.org is designed to be viewed in Firefox, with a resolution of at least 1280 x 1024.