Public

Status
Not open for further replies.

whitefox

Est. Contributor
Messages
531
Role
  1. Diaper Lover
  2. Little
  3. Other
But think about it, what if the person REQUIRES to wear diapers for reasons known only to him/her and it accidentally shows? Would he/she then be charged with indecent exposure as well? This argument of yours is not right either.

So what you are saying is, the image that those who wear diapers due to, say incontinence, are projecting themselves to the public as loose pedophiles?

Who's saying what? :confused: I don't think anyone mentioned incontinent people getting charged with indecent exposure, and what Darkfinn said made plenty of sense....

Darkfinn said:
Some people do legitimately need diapers... they have accepted them as part of their life and have moved on to more important things that really matter. Of course the majority of these people are intelligent enough to cover their diapers up in most public situations... but some places less clothing is seen as appropriate.

And no, it probably wouldn't be a problem if someone actually needed diapers and accidently flashed them or something. A person flagrantly showing them off, though, even if they are incontinent, would be a whole other story. I think it depends on your intent. If someone's going to be a jerk about something, they're bound to cause more trouble than a reasonable or at least nonchalant person.
 

inquantum

Est. Contributor
Messages
148
Role
  1. Diaper Lover
Who's saying what? :confused: I don't think anyone mentioned incontinent people getting charged with indecent exposure, and what Darkfinn said made plenty of sense....

And no, it probably wouldn't be a problem if someone actually needed diapers and accidently flashed them or something. A person flagrantly showing them off, though, even if they are incontinent, would be a whole other story. I think it depends on your intent. If someone's going to be a jerk about something, they're bound to cause more trouble than a reasonable or at least nonchalant person.

I was not referring to Darkfinn. What he says holds true and I concur. However, I post the quote from Korey below. Please do review it.

Korey said:
I don't think wearing only diapers in public should be permissable... Its too close to indecent exposure. and 9/10 people would be scared shitless, as they would probably assume theres a loose pedophile in the neighborhood. People aren't interested publicly about your weird fetish.

Of course, blantantly exposing one's diaper in public would definitely constitute a breach in law and sujecting others to an outrage of modesty whether incontinent or not. If it was to be accidental, no one would say anything about it nor complain, because people do commit certain slip ups.

Humans have erroneous streaks of nature within them, so some react differently from others. If one decides to be a jerk about it, in your words, then they should expect to bear the consequences that proceed afterward from the law and the community alike.
 

whitefox

Est. Contributor
Messages
531
Role
  1. Diaper Lover
  2. Little
  3. Other
I did read that post. It doesn't mention anything about incontinent people, but states their opinion in that: "I don't think wearing only diapers in public should be permissable..." I agree with that.
 

inquantum

Est. Contributor
Messages
148
Role
  1. Diaper Lover
And you contradict yourself. If you find yourself in agreement with Darkfinn, then do note that he did say, and I quote, "I personally don't see anything wrong with someone at a pool or on the beach wearing a diaper. Better that than all the pee and poo ending up on the sand or in the water... and believe me, I've walked on enough beaches to notice the piss-trails leading from the blankets where people were either too drunk or too lazy to walk down to the ocean to take a leak."

It states that wearing diapers at CERTAIN public locations is fine. What you are currently stating, is that you agree with Darkfinn in what he says AND you are saying that wearing diapers only in public is not accepted in your view.

So do tell for it is real intriguing, what IS your view?
 

whitefox

Est. Contributor
Messages
531
Role
  1. Diaper Lover
  2. Little
  3. Other
I'm sorry if it isn't clear, but I only quoted that paragraph because I agree with it; I don't exactly see eye-to-eye on the last paragraph in his post, so I didn't quote or even mention it. My view is that yes, most incontinent people are smart enough to cover up their diapers, and yes, if they didn't, while realizing so, that should be considered indecent exposure, or at least very close to it. Like I stated earlier, it would depend on their behaviour.

I don't entirely agree with Darkfinn; I don't have to. However, I share the same view on that one paragraph, the one I quoted above. I do agree with Korey's statement, in that someone wearing diapers in public is a bit of a bother and shouldn't be allowed.
 

inquantum

Est. Contributor
Messages
148
Role
  1. Diaper Lover
I'm sorry if it isn't clear, but I only quoted that paragraph because I agree with it; I don't exactly see eye-to-eye on the last paragraph in his post, so I didn't quote or even mention it. My view is that yes, most incontinent people are smart enough to cover up their diapers, and yes, if they didn't, while realizing so, that should be considered indecent exposure, or at least very close to it. Like I stated earlier, it would depend on their behaviour.

I don't entirely agree with Darkfinn; I don't have to. However, I share the same view on that one paragraph, the one I quoted above. I do agree with Korey's statement, in that someone wearing diapers in public is a bit of a bother and shouldn't be allowed.

With the intelligence required of a 5 year old, yes, covering oneself with clothes is something that comes easily to all of us. It would then be a choice whether we choose to follow our intelligence. Without a doubt, covering up one's diapers is of necessity. Should certain "radicals" choose not to cover up their diapers, then as I have said, they would bear the consequences that come with it from the law and community alike for it destroys the image of the AB/DL community. And they can argue for all they like to mitigate the sentence imposed upon them.

Do not mistake my words for assuming you, with all heart and soul, agree to all that Darkfinn says. I did not also imply that you had to agree to what others say. It is on your own prerogative to decide who and what you choose to believe in.
 

whitefox

Est. Contributor
Messages
531
Role
  1. Diaper Lover
  2. Little
  3. Other
OK then, you asked for my view, and I provided it. You said I contradicted myself, and I wanted to show that I didn't. Is it safe to assume we're finished arguing now?
 

inquantum

Est. Contributor
Messages
148
Role
  1. Diaper Lover
Provided we were arguing in the first place. I merely treated it as a discussion to know your stand for it is quite ambiguious.

It SEEMED quite confounding, to say the very least, that you could agree with A and B at the same time and thus call the product C.

EDIT: BTW, if I backtracked correctly, no one here imposed their ideas upon you and forcefed them to you as far as I know. So there was no need to point out that you did not have to agree entirely with Darkfinn.
 

Korey

Banned
Messages
171
Role
  1. Diaper Lover
gogg3r, if I had it my way, there would be a lot more girls wearing nothing but diapers in public. Unfortunately, thats not the case. Walking around in just diapers in public is a nice dream, but thats not the society we live in today.
 

whitefox

Est. Contributor
Messages
531
Role
  1. Diaper Lover
  2. Little
  3. Other
It states that wearing diapers at CERTAIN public locations is fine. What you are currently stating, is that you agree with Darkfinn in what he says AND you are saying that wearing diapers only in public is not accepted in your view.

So do tell for it is real intriguing, what IS your view?

I pointed out that I didn't entirely agree with Darkfinn, because in this post it sounded as though you assumed I did. What I was saying earlier, in the below statement, is that I can agree with part of what Darkfinn says, and still agree with Korey.

I don't entirely agree with Darkfinn; I don't have to. However, I share the same view on that one paragraph, the one I quoted above. I do agree with Korey's statement, in that someone wearing diapers in public is a bit of a bother and shouldn't be allowed.

I agreed with 1/3rd of A (Darkfinn's post), and 7/8th's of B (Korey's post), which resulted in the product C, or my perspective on the subject, which I already posted.
 

Trevor

Est. Contributor
Messages
9,560
Role
  1. Adult Baby
  2. Diaper Lover
  3. Babyfur
I agreed with 1/3rd of A (Darkfinn's post), and 7/8th's of B (Korey's post), which resulted in the product C, or my perspective on the subject, which I already posted.

I was told there'd be no math.
 

dogboy

Est. Contributor
Messages
22,522
Role
  1. Adult Baby
  2. Diaper Lover
I love it Trevor! I think the only way we are going to solve the debate is to all walk to the park in just our diapers. (Go to the window and throw your televisions set out and shout "I'm not going to take it anymore!") I can imagine what's going to happen in conservative Virginia. Will you all come and bail Dogboy out?

Once while vacationing in Florida with my young family, we saw two middle age men (like I'm not) walking hand in hand wearing nothing but the smallest speedoes and their bellies hanging over. Not a pretty site, but legal. This was in Clearwater, Florida where my in-laws live in a glorified trailer park. At about the same time, there was a hot dog stand situated at the outside of the park, and these two very young, hot gals were selling weiners (hehehe) in just the smallest bikini thongs. The old women of the park became enraged, because all of their husbands were walking down to buy hot dogs, and spoiling their appetite, I'm guessing (also hehe) Well, the old ladies had them shut down and moved! It all depends on who's perspective.
 

Jcub

Est. Contributor
Messages
99
Role
  1. Diaper Lover
  2. Babyfur
From a purely legal perspective, in the UK, it's not considered indecent exposure.
Wikipedia said:
In England and Wales the offence of 'Indecent Exposure' and various archaic Victorian offences were repealed by the Sexual Offences Act 2003. There is now no explicit prohibition of nudity. The replacement was carefully worded so that it did not apply to skinny dipping, nude sunbathing and similar activities. It only applies to aggressive exposure such as flashing. section 66 's.66 Exposure' states that 'A person commits an offence if— (a) he intentionally exposes his genitals, and (b) he intends that someone will see them and be caused alarm or distress.'
... and in the US ...
Wikipedia said:
In the fifty states of the United States indecent exposure is defined by state law as exposure of the genitals and/or the female breast in a public place and may in some states require evidence of intent to shock, arouse or offend other persons. Public place is any place where the conduct may reasonably be expected to be viewed by others.

The offense is variously titled "indecent exposure", "sexual misconduct", "public lewdness", or "public indecency". It is a criminal offense in all fifty states and is punishable by fines and/or imprisonment, and in some states a conviction results in having to register as a sex offender.

So a male wearing only a diaper in public would not count as indecent exposure. A female wearing only a diaper may raise issues.

However, in both cases, it may fall under a different, similar offence.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top