The Reason of Daiper fetish?

[Sharpie159]

Originally Posted by GamerGirl

Well for me I had my diapers taken from me after I turned 1 1/2 really because my parents thought I was a fast learner when it came to potty training. But when I was around 7 I wanted to wear diapers all the time and I begged my parents to put me back in diapers and they always said no. So one day when I was 9 I asked my parents if I can wear diapers again, and they said no, so I sat there and I peed and pooped my pants to show them that I needed diapers. They didn't believe me after that so for the next 2 years I would keep going in my pants on purpose, at home, outside, school, stores (especially if we would pass the diapers) so finally when I turned 11 my parents finally broke down because they were tired of buying new underwear, changing me so they finally put me in diapers and I've been wearing them since. I don't even remember the last time I ever used a toilet.

all I have to say is cool!!! I wouldn't have the guts to pee and poo myself in public...but that just shows determination!! good for you girl!!

[Neoprometheus]

Sexual fetishism can, in all likelihood, be the result of psychological imprinting. At least we have strong evidence for this. For the unenlightened: imprints fuction as reflex systems that the nevrous system create after experiencing something during a imprint-sensitive moment.

For a little bit more about it, check out http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imprint...8psychology%29
Also... such books as Quantum Psychology deal more or less with such topics.

[trxdltree]

Sexual fetishism can, in all likelihood, be the result of psychological imprinting. At least we have strong evidence for this. For the unenlightened: imprints fuction as reflex systems that the nevrous system create after experiencing something during a imprint-sensitive moment.

could you say that again in english please?

[Neoprometheus]

Originally Posted by trxdltree

could you say that again in english please?

I'd most certainly think it resembles English... but if you want me to put it in a less intellectually pretentious way, yes I most certainly can.

*cough* Okay children. Sexual fetishism (in this case diaper fetishism) = psychological imprint. Psychological imprints = somewhat similar to instincts and reflexes... only we don't have them from the start. You develope them as you experience events and suchwise during moments in your life when the body "is" vulnerable to them.

Check out the links in my former post if you want more info or better explaination.

[little_pink]

Imprinting, fixation, S.L.T. et cetera are all nice theories but far too prescriptive.

Any fetish is the product of the masculine protest sublimating the fetish in a manner agreeable to the style of life.

Thus 1N=no. aetiologies. Where N=number of fetishists.

There is no single or simple cause.

[Neoprometheus]

Originally Posted by little_pink

Imprinting, fixation, S.L.T. et cetera are all nice theories but far too prescriptive.

Any fetish is the product of the masculine protest sublimating the fetish in a manner agreeable to the style of life.

Thus 1N=no. aetiologies. Where N=number of fetishists.

There is no single or simple cause.

At least it amounts to a theory with scientific proof/ basis which tells the story about fundamental aspects of human (and otherwise) psychology. In this context, I don't really care if you hold some kind of prejudice towards explainations which seem to encompass a rather huge field of "reality" (say, for example, how the theory of evolution explains all kinds of known life on Earth in a neat way), but if you feel this explaination doesn't do the trick, it might be a good idea to come up with an alternative. And you could throw in some good reasons for not believing it; not merely stating an opinion in a fancy, mathematical way.

And as far as I'm concerned, there seems to be little controversy within the worldwide scientific community regarding psychological imprints. You may call me a blue-eyed, lazy cunt with little imagination or scepticism left for accepted truths for saying such a thing, but science happen to be the only process, thus far, which seem to produce results in the way of expaining stuff about the world around us, and ourselves... and I tend to listen to what the experts say first.

[Jet Prower]

Well, from what the first post said, I think that is a possibility, because that's what I thought was the reason I have this diaper fetish now and love them and love roleplaying about them and such like that. I often think it was also because they were just suddenly taken away one day and you are forced out of them and never suppose to have them back. Where you are forced onto a toilet and made to stay there until you learn. That's how it was for me. That's what I think triggered it, because this feeling has never gone away, since I was a little kid.

Plus I do agree that they are just very convenient as well like someone else said.

[trxdltree]

oh now i get what your saying its all based on experences

[little_pink]

Originally Posted by Neoprometheus

At least it amounts to a theory with scientific proof/ basis which tells the story about fundamental aspects of human (and otherwise) psychology. In this context, I don't really care if you hold some kind of prejudice towards explainations which seem to encompass a rather huge field of "reality" (say, for example, how the theory of evolution explains all kinds of known life on Earth in a neat way), but if you feel this explaination doesn't do the trick, it might be a good idea to come up with an alternative. And you could throw in some good reasons for not believing it; not merely stating an opinion in a fancy, mathematical way.

And as far as I'm concerned, there seems to be little controversy within the worldwide scientific community regarding psychological imprints. You may call me a blue-eyed, lazy cunt with little imagination or scepticism left for accepted truths for saying such a thing, but science happen to be the only process, thus far, which seem to produce results in the way of expaining stuff about the world around us, and ourselves... and I tend to listen to what the experts say first.

The trouble with most psychological "facts" is that they are only half-truths.
Evolution doesn't explain all life on earth, Darwinian evolution being particularly unsuitable.
I have already proposed individual psychology to hold the answer.

There is very little consensus in psychology, imprinting is an agreeable but not immaculate theory.
Helenophilia is intellectually very taxing.
Psychology often cripples itself to adhere by the scientific paradigm, empiricism is not a terribly useful philosophy when concerned with people; no one philosophy, including science, is perfect.

[MutsuMutsu]

How would Freud or Jung explain this?