1. ## The ABDL Vital Statistics Thread

It doesn't seem that there has been a thread on this in some time, and there was a discussion in another thread, so I shall post one here.

The discussion, as it was, was on the percentage of an entire population that is ABDL, so I'll provide my opinions here.

First, however, I'd like to make some requests:

First, please use proper statistics and math where appropriate. If you don't wish to do this, or are going to react poorly at your math being picked apart then this may not be the thread for you, as I intend to have a sensible discussion.

Lastly, please try to post intent on content. Posts just to say that you agree with such and such don't really have a point in mature discussion.

So here's my opinion. Please realize that this is based in anecdote, but I'm also not a math slouch and will try to keep it grounded in fact as well.

The percentage of ABDLs, henceforth defined for the purpose of this thread as people who actively pursue acting like toddlers or infants for that sake and, as necessary, wearing diapers for recreational purposes whether or not the former is true, is VERY VERY VERY small.

My rationalizations are many:

Firstly, I look at the total number I have found in my current area, which is very low. For a four-million person metropolitan area there are slightly less than 20 that I've been able to find in any context. I look at this as a low extreme, however...

And then I look at the place I used to live which, within a metropolitan area of maybe ten million people, probably has a few hundred. This is a lot. I look at this as a high extreme, as that place is actually well known for its high ABDL population within other ABDL communities.

So, I will assume, for the sake of having looked at these two, that place A is two standard deviations off, at .000005 percent. That is, 1/200,000, and place B is one standard deviation in the opposite direction at, let's say, 500/10,000,000 or 1/20,000 (really being quite generous).

Now, the other part of this is that judging this in small towns is practically useless. No matter which way they are, be it another town that I lived in which had 600 people, 3-6 of whom were ABDLs at the time that I lived there, and ANOTHER area that I lived in, which had 10,000 and one, that being myself, and 0 when I left, they are not useful results. Without larger statistics, in other words, an estimate is meaningless.

So let's talk it out. Please remember that we need to follow good math rules and, in all algebra, you do the same to one side of an equation that you would do to the other if you want useful results. If you don't follow these rules, expect to be called on it.

2. The percentage of ABDLs, henceforth defined for the purpose of this thread as people who actively pursue acting like toddlers or infants for that sake and, as necessary, wearing diapers for recreational purposes whether or not the former is true, is VERY VERY VERY small.
An interesting idea, but I'd observe that you're measuring the number of outgoing AB/DLs-- i.e., those that are sufficiently extraverted and motivated to open an account at a site focusing on diapers. We are a marginalized and misunderstood group, so I suggest there is a large AB/DL population that isn't part of the visible community.

What reasons wouldn't someone be countable?
* They're repressing their interest in the name of social or relationship pressure
* It's just a fetish someone does without motivation to share
* Someone likes diapers but has higher-priority interests
* They're an introvert
* Those that simply don't know about community

I'm suggesting the same thing as with gay/lesbian population-- the percentage hasn't really changed since the 50's when Kinsey did research, but with social acceptance the number of known, identified GLB people you run into on the street has gone from near 0% to approaching the 10% of Kinsey's studies. I think there's a similar effect going on here.

But as far as crunching numbers... DiaperSpace has roughly 38,600 accounts (Diapers Space -> Browse -> Last page yields 4288 pages @ 9 users per page). It's a site in English only, and the December 2009 estimate of English-speaking Internet users yields 495,843,462 possible candidates for the site based on language.

This yields 1/12,848 on a pretty darn large sample size. This is higher than your highest estimates in part, I suspect, because the (possibly illusory) anonymity of the 'net means people are more willing to join a web site than risk an in-person meeting.

My question is that if that's the tip of the iceberg, as I suspect, what's the invisible portion of our population? How do we measure or estimate it?

@Linkitty: Was there something peculiar about that town of 600 you mentioned with 3-6 AB/DLs that made them feel welcome to come out instead of staying hidden? And maybe more importantly, can we replicate this?

3. Originally Posted by Peri
An interesting idea, but I'd observe that you're measuring the number of outgoing AB/DLs-- i.e., those that are sufficiently extraverted and motivated to open an account at a site focusing on diapers. We are a marginalized and misunderstood group, so I suggest there is a large AB/DL population that isn't part of the visible community.

What reasons wouldn't someone be countable?
* They're repressing their interest in the name of social or relationship pressure
* It's just a fetish someone does without motivation to share
* Someone likes diapers but has higher-priority interests
* They're an introvert
* Those that simply don't know about community

I'm suggesting the same thing as with gay/lesbian population-- the percentage hasn't really changed since the 50's when Kinsey did research, but with social acceptance the number of known, identified GLB people you run into on the street has gone from near 0% to approaching the 10% of Kinsey's studies. I think there's a similar effect going on here.

But as far as crunching numbers... DiaperSpace has roughly 38,600 accounts (Diapers Space -> Browse -> Last page yields 4288 pages @ 9 users per page). It's a site in English only, and the December 2009 estimate of English-speaking Internet users yields 495,843,462 possible candidates for the site based on language.

This yields 1/12,848 on a pretty darn large sample size. This is higher than your highest estimates in part, I suspect, because the (possibly illusory) anonymity of the 'net means people are more willing to join a web site than risk an in-person meeting.

My question is that if that's the tip of the iceberg, as I suspect, what's the invisible portion of our population? How do we measure or estimate it?

@Linkitty: Was there something peculiar about that town of 600 you mentioned with 3-6 AB/DLs that made them feel welcome to come out instead of staying hidden? And maybe more importantly, can we replicate this?
It's a fair point that I only have outgoing abdls measured for the simple reason that it is impossible to measure or predict the percentage of those who are otherwise.

The town of 600where I was at was contained in a county of about 50,000 with a famous abdl shop, a fetish-conscious college, and significantly higher rent. :p

Two things are going to majorly skew diaperspace. There are a LOT. A BIG LOT of people with duplicate accounts. Also, the site is not remotely purely English speaking. There are hundreds of Swiss, Spanish, Dutch, and other-language accounts.

4. Any way of measuring this requires AB/DLs to be "on the grid" in one way or another. The anonymity problem always exists.

In my view, we're best off determining what subset of the entire population that could be AB/DL (i.e. people ~13 and above) is most likely to be on the grid (something like 18-25 year-olds in the US, Canada, Australia, and the UK for English-speaking websites) and limit our search to that subset. Extrapolate on the assumption that different age groups have equal likelihoods of being AB/DL (we don't have evidence supporting this assumption, but we don't have any reason to believe it's false). With numbers from ADISC, we could start by setting a reasonable lower bound to the probability in this manner.

5. I am curious,

Can we consider AB/DL to me a main stream "fetish/lifestyle". Main stream like gay lifestyle or BDSM fetish?

Perhaps the models used to calculate that population could be applied here.

I am not a math guy, But I am thinking that the cantor method will come into play too because you have sets and subsets that have complimentary sets.

IE the SET is {DL, AB, Sadists (s) Masochist (M) }

The subsets [Dl] [AB], [S], [M]

Than you have compliments like [dl, s] or [AB, M]

The only reason I bring it up is I belong other online groups who use diapers in their activities but don't think they are DL or AB.

Like I said I am no math guy, This is just the first thing that popped into my head when I was reading the whole thread.

6. That's just a few people that you actually know, then you'd be surprised about how many people still never accessed the internet. Some of those people definitely have AB or DL in them. Some people that do have internet still don't know anything about websites containing AB/DL content. A lot of people that access AB/DL websites tend to just lurk around without accounts to these websites. There's no real way to put a ratio on this when we can't really estimate how many ab/dls they have out there.

7. Originally Posted by MeTaLMaNN1983
That's just a few people that you actually know, then you'd be surprised about how many people still never accessed the internet. Some of those people definitely have AB or DL in them. Some people that do have internet still don't know anything about websites containing AB/DL content. A lot of people that access AB/DL websites tend to just lurk around without accounts to these websites. There's no real way to put a ratio on this when we can't really estimate how many ab/dls they have out there.
I think it's a fair statement that the ABDLs who have not discovered the internet, similarly to the general population that has not discovered the internet, are a very, VERY small minority.